If they extend E pass the 'copter' area by the fence, than leaving it at that big block of concrete in the middle of the map, that would bring a better challenge to overcome. There would be enough of an area for the defending team being pushed back, to potentially recapture point without feeling as if their back is constantly against the wall. Especially considering you're already in said area (where E is...), if your team manages to lose C.
Take calculated risks. That's quite different from being rash.- Gen. Patton
Good F2P games don't prioritize monetization above all else.
the only major problem with C on chertanovo is the nade spams.... maybe after the fix snipers they can include under the bridge with a small box or half wall on each side as part of the capture area.... this would make for more areas and more tactical capture because you have to watch multiple areas instead of simply throwing grenades across the bridge
Totally aside from all the ideas, you should be aware that Chertanovo was our first map, built before we had evolved into a modular design and construction process for our levels. It is one single mesh, a single giant 3D object, and therefore takes extensive effort to be edited.
By comparison Markov is built out of modular pieces, so we can make minor changes quickly. For example there are two annoying camping spots on Markov that players coming from D side can exploit. One is at the end of the train on the D point, they can shoot at people's feet under the train. So we knocked the window out of the train, so the B-side can counter that spot. Another is at the closest point to the stairs on the tracks, using that position to block any push down the stairs. The train is a modular piece so we can just pull it down th tracks a ways. Both of these were made without seriously impacting our new map development resources, and will be included in the 0.10.0 build. (Oh and one more, not a level change per se: we pushed the B-side spawn back a few meters to remove their unfair advantage in getting to the point first; should make for some epic battles over point C)
Which is not to say we will never change Chertanovo, but for the next 6 months minimum our modelling/texturing/lighting people are mostly working on new maps.
THAT would defenately eat- up more nades.
I think C point on this map needs more space....the cap point is just too small and forces everyone to practically sit on top of each other throwing nades all over the point. Yes there needs to be more cover on or around C...preferably cover on C so you can be in cover while capping and force each other to come get the other team off the point....like on shearwater. However, I still think expanding the area around C would help.
For instance, extend the length (north/south ends) of the bridge and expand the width (east/west) a bit....then you can place more cover on or around the point and expand the capture area to a larger size....maybe as large as C point on Markov station. OVerall the goal would be to make it so you can attempt to cap without being forced to lay pron on the edge of the point....too many players fear the nades and won't even get on the point anymore....everyone just tries to flank....last few teams I was on, the whole team just flanked both sides and never touched the bridge at all because of the nade spam on it....I don't know, maybe if you got points for dying on point, people might not mind going 0-8 because they are laying on the point trying to cap only to keep getting naded.
Also, I have another issue with LZ map....when your team is attacking from the bus area, when you go up the stairs, the huge cover in the middle of the area needs to be more useful...currently the corners of that cover are slanted and don't allow you to use it as cover to shoot back at snipers and such on the other side without exposing most of your body...meanwhile on the other side you can hide behind or in the booth or from behind the pillars and get easy sniping lanes without exposing your body much at all....from the bus side, you simply have to expose yourself far too much just to get a snipe....you have the window or the two spots from the sides...anywhere else and a sniper takes you out before you can even aim....So yeah this map is a bit unbalanced for one side and makes it far easier to cap....you can easily snipe players laying on C from the booth side, but you can't from the bus side.
Points E and D also need more distance between them....as someone said they are too close together. Extend the length of the map on that side could help give more room...right now as soon as you cap D, an aggressive team can just make a mad push for E and be on it before your team respawns....12 - 15 second respawn is long time as they can get from D to E in less time than that...then you have it too easy for them to get under spawn and kill people as they drop off.
Last edited by Davynelord; 12-05-2012 at 05:42 AM.
I think the center of the bridge should be raised a little,in order to keep people from sniping guys laying down from way back.Or at the least add some boxes or crates in the middle of the bridge.
Point "e" is also a pain if you get pushed back that far,a bit to easy to basically get spawn camped
Yes, Chertanovo has one really easy side, but it's fine imo. This side give a chance to the weak team to win a round. (And even Tomsk-9 has an easy side...)
i honestly never noticed a difference on tomsk as all....its pretty much a mirror image coming from both sides so there really is no easier side.. but on chartanono the B side spawn is much closer to the point and allows for everyone to get in and set up to slow down the other teams advancement much quicker
Some difference is kind of refreshing.. though i agree it's unbalanced, I don't think it's a big problem. It's still fun playing both rounds and having a bit of difference.