Both shipping and water treatment were designed as cross map access for marines, without forcing them to go through a possibly taken hive location. I saw from initial testing that these would not be used very much except to get across the map. There were tests with adding Resource nodes to try and make it more used, but 11 resource nodes was really not good for ns2 gameplay. The alternate of removing those just makes the map nearly the same as summit, which is not what I want. At least for now I am satisfied with those areas just not being used as much.
I find it amusing that most of the negative criticisms of this map are that "its a bad map" without any actual critique. If you want changes, make actual suggestions, because impudence will just make me ignore you. The fact that competitive games are still regularly played on descent, and that both teams have an equal chance at winning tells a different story about balance or playability, and so until some actually engaging critique can be made by these people, don't expect anything.
As of now the map is being partially reworked to fix some of the issues regarding fabrication and energy flow.
Why would you not want to make a map that plays the same way summit plays? That map is fucking amazing.
Also: I think you could fit all of ns_tram inside the hole that would be left if you removed water treatment if you knew it was just going to be used as a hallway, why not just make it a hallway and condense the map down instead of having giant dead zones in the middle of it?
Why would you not want to make a map that plays the same way summit plays? That map is **** amazing.
We don't need 2 summit's, what is the point of having 2 maps where the strategies will be the same? Even if the room layouts are different it will only slightly vary the gameplay, and there also has been some request for having bigger maps.
Also: I think you could fit all of ns_tram inside the hole that would be left if you removed water treatment if you knew it was just going to be used as a hallway, why not just make it a hallway and condense the map down instead of having giant dead zones in the middle of it?
Considering trams total size is 6593x6593 inches, and descent is 8588x7465 your hypothesis is incorrect.
Why are you so afraid of different maps? competitive players play on it, pubbers play on it, the balance is mostly good, with some issues that I am working on resolving, and both teams have an equal shot at winning. I don't get where you think this is a bad map. It's different, diversity is good, the difference is that you have to use different tactics to win. If the balance is fine, and both teams can win, then the only difference here is opinion. But seeing as there are plenty of people who like the map, you don't make good arguments to support change.
Why would you not want to make a map that plays the same way summit plays? That map is fucking amazing.
because summit is droll and repetitive.
It is the most "balanced" map in a game where imbalance and asymmetry is key.
it does not suit ns2. not. one. bit.
You tell him jona!
Anyway, in my HUMBLE opinion, descent is one of the 2 maps i enjoy most thus far (That are official, gtfo jambi)
Mineshaft and descent are the 2 most enjoyable maps, and most STRATEGIC maps, ns2 has to date. everything else is do this one thing and win, descent and mineshaft are so huge, so DIFFERENT in every single room, that you have to change your plans dependant on where you are.
Whoa now, where's all the negativity coming from? All I said was summit is an amazing example of how to design an NS2 map and to specifically want to be different from it makes very little sense to me. The comment I made about all of tram fitting in the gap is quite obviously not serious, there's even a fucking smiley face after it. The question still stands: If you knew it was just going to be used as a hallway, why not just make it a hallway and be done with it? If it's not adding anything, then why is it there?
Come to think of it, that actually kind of sums up my whole point of view on descent. It's just not a very elegant map. IMO, elegance is something that you should strive towards when you're designing/creating something. Summit, Tram, and Veil are all for the most part very elegant, with very little in the way of unnecessary hallways and rooms. Veil maybe a little less than the other two. Descent has rooms that are, admittedly, there for no real reason other than to be "different."
I hate Descent and agree mostly with the angry wall o' text on the previous page. Sorry but aesthetics are pretty much rock bottom on my list of desires when it comes to mapping and there's so so many staircases, low ceilings and random bits of scenery that break up the flow of the map and make fighting on it a pain in the ass. I don't think it needs to be 'fixed' because hell people used to play Siege maps in NS1 and that was basically like being tortured but I'm still going to find a new server every time it pops up
I find it amusing that most of the negative criticisms of this map are that "its a bad map" without any actual critique. If you want changes, make actual suggestions, because impudence will just make me ignore you. The fact that competitive games are still regularly played on descent, and that both teams have an equal chance at winning tells a different story about balance or playability, and so until some actually engaging critique can be made by these people, don't expect anything.
Why are you so afraid of different maps? competitive players play on it, pubbers play on it, the balance is mostly good, with some issues that I am working on resolving, and both teams have an equal shot at winning. I don't get where you think this is a bad map. It's different, diversity is good, the difference is that you have to use different tactics to win. If the balance is fine, and both teams can win, then the only difference here is opinion. But seeing as there are plenty of people who like the map, you don't make good arguments to support change.
Classic nonsense defense. "It's just different" or "you have to adjust to it".
Here's the thing. The map needs to be adjusted, not the players or tactics. Every NS2 map has different tactical nuances. Your map simply plays badly and it's really as simple as that. With any tactics. And I don't say that to be hateful. I have never had an even decent game on it. In fact, the vast majority of games on it are excruciatingly bad and most players on the server I frequent will agree with this statement. Lots of people moan when it comes on or leave the server and a bunch of times we did a series of silly rushes just so the map would change quicker. Do you want to write this off as "impudence" and ignore it as well? Your call.
Feedback for a complex map that's an overall failure needs to be complex as well, so people don't even bother. The reason you don't get specific arguments about what needs changing is because essentially everything needs changing and a lot of the feedback would have to be as complex as the map itself while probably achieving nothing.
That said, here's why your map doesn't work in as few words as possible:
- The layout makes all the starting tech points unviable. Monorail and Fabric in particular only have 1 "safe" RT each with Energy being impossible to hold unless you have Hydro. This can go down to ZERO safe RTs if it's close spawns and the other team is holding Hydro.
- Close spawns don't work because whoever holds Hydro is pretty much guaranteed to hold 5+ RTs, while the other team will struggle to hold a maximum of 3.
- The only "tactic" is racing to Hydro. Whoever holds it wins. You can fairly easily access every non tech point RT from Hydro, except maybe Gravity. You could say the same about Crossroads on Summit, but unlike Crossroads, Hydro is a fairly small closed space that is almost impossible to attack as marine without ARCs with its 2 tiny access points, one of which for some reason being a corner piece (and I'm not counting the entrance from Water Treatment because it's a staircase...). If you make the whole map about one place, make that place fun and fair for both sides to fight in and fight for.
- In general, basically all the acess points to tech points don't work and offendability as well as defendability of tech points isn't balanced. They're either impossible (Mono, Launch, Hydro) or too easy (Fabric, Drone) to get into due to the design of the rooms or hallways leading to them. Every TP apart from Fabric also has no space to move or fight in as well as needless artificial obstacles. Wouldn't you say the first thing marines get rid off in a room they set up their base in would be giant mechs with no function standing in the middle of the room? Also, tech points either have no siege spots, or ridiculously easy ones, e.g. the landing pad south of Launch and everything to the left of Hydro.
- The geometry of the map doesn't work, gameplay wise or aesthetically. The whole thing doesn't feel like a space station or building. It's a bunch of interchangable rooms randomly connected to each other. There's no architectural logic. Nobody would have giant obstacles that fill entire rooms as seen in Observation or Energy without good reason or purpose and nobody would build a tiny and cramped club that openly leads into a plaza. Nobody would have a giant silo and a huge room for water treatment next to a train station. The monorail that people apparently access this space station with is literally on the opposite side of the space station that has Crew Quarters, Club and Plaza, and in between that are a whole bunch of "engineering" type of rooms. As for gameplay, apart from the already established and for some reason largely ignored issue that large areas of the map don't ever have to be used; the whole map consists of cramped spaces with tons of obstacles and non-optional staircases (!), making me wonder how I'm ever supposed to move around as Fade in places like Club, Monorail, Gravity, Observation, Crew Quarters, Plaza, Energy, Silo... yup, pretty much anywhere. Now, you could of course argue that humans didn't build this with alien movement accessability in mind, but my whole point is believability can be sacrificed for good gameplay if need be. Right now, the map has neither.
To sum up, my feedback basically is "rework the entire map" so you can see why people are reluctant to give you any "actual suggestions". You're obviously a very talented mapper, but this one is a pretty much unsalvagable failure in the eyes of many people. I realise having your hard work be talked down on is not the greatest thing, but people don't have to like it just because it was hard work and just because they can't do better themselves. If we stick to someone's analogy that I don't have to be a filmmaker to criticise someone's film, Descent is not a bad edit of good material, it's simply bad material with really nice production value. The re-shooting it would need to salvage the project would be so severe that I would simply tell you to ditch it if it was a test screening.
It's a shame that's not really an option though as it's already an official map. I guess it's hard to resist eye candy.
Most of your points are arguing that the map is UNBALANCED, however it's mostly balanced...
According to the official stats for this patch (for all the maps combined) the balance is 56% alien wins and 44% marine wins.
Descent? 58% Alien and 42% Marine.
Is it perfect? No. But you realize the map has been out for not even two months, right? Docking has been out for many many months and is only just now getting to be more balanced. Most maps are a work in progress and are constantly being worked around to fix them. Docking has changed immensely in the last couple of months in particular. Tram just had Platform worked around. It's all constantly being changed. It isn't an instant thing, you know.
Nobody would have a giant silo and a huge room for water treatment next to a train station.
.... seriously? That's the most retarded argument I've ever heard. God forbid a mapper actually made rooms interesting instead of doing the same generic shit. What a tragedy.
- The geometry of the map doesn't work, gameplay wise or aesthetically. The whole thing doesn't feel like a space station or building. It's a bunch of interchangable rooms randomly connected to each other. There's no architectural logic. Nobody would have giant obstacles that fill entire rooms as seen in Observation or Energy without good reason or purpose and nobody would build a tiny and cramped club that openly leads into a plaza. Nobody would have a giant silo and a huge room for water treatment next to a train station. The monorail that people apparently access this space station with is literally on the opposite side of the space station that has Crew Quarters, Club and Plaza, and in between that are a whole bunch of "engineering" type of rooms.
This argument is really a moot point, since no map currently in existence follows a logical architectural layout. Not in NS2 as they did not in NS1. Take Summit, for example, which is elegant in its simplicity, but none of the rooms actually make any sense at all from a realistic point of view. I've always thought that Descent is one of the few maps that at least TRY to pull this off, with Plaza having a feel of a real shopping mall and Club looking way more enjoyable than, for instance, the Onos bar in Docking.
That being said, the monorail is most likely used both by the visitors and the staff of the space station, and as such, why shouldn't one line lead to the maintenance section (i.e. the current Monorail-room)? Don't assume that all we see in Descent is all that the space station is made of, more than likely there is an even bigger monorail station next to Plaza, behind one of the doors. And isn't the most logical place for the club just where it is now? In a big shopping mall with flashing lights and music seeping onto the streets?
Nothing to do with gameplay-balance, though. I just wanted to nitpick. Many of the things you said I agree with, though I still enjoy Descent more than Docking, Refinery or Mineshaft combined.
Are you guys seriously getting hung up on my architectural logic complaints when 95% of my post was on why it doesn't play well? I guess you missed the point where I said none of this would be an issue if the gameplay was okay.
And win percentages say nothing about how a map plays or how balanced it is across teams, at least not as long as spawns are random. The fact that you even bring it up and say my post was mainly about imbalance when I never even mentioned team balance pretty much proves that you either didn't bother to read anything I wrote or have no valid counter arguments to anything I criticised. I said the map plays badly, focusses on Hydro too much, has a bad layout and bad design. I never had fun on it as either side, and I've won and lost plenty. Win percentages could be 50% in total, that doesn't mean any team that spawns in Fabrication or any team that fails to secure Hydro isn't completely screwed.
And since you guys like to compare it to Summit so much: think about how many times a team that's holding Crossroads as well as their main base all game still has inferior map control and loses the round regardless. It happens all the time. Now think about how often the same is true for Descent and Hydro. That's right. Never ever happens.
There is exactly one tactic on this map. If you don't hold Hydro, you lose. And the mapper wants to make us believe you need "different tactics" to win...
It was really only me that got fixated on your architectural arguments since they really stung my eye there. And that's because I mostly agree with you on the other points.
Don't get too into hyperbolia though. I've seen plenty of hives killed in Hydro with the marine team rolling into victory, and I've also seen a lot of late game phase gates in Hydro with the aliens holding three hive rooms. It's all anecdotal, though it is true that the map is too concentrated on holding Hydro.
Oh I just love getting carried away and exaggerating points. That doesn't make them less valid though and also makes for a more heated (read: better) discussion.
Problems with Descent: map is a bit too large, a bit too overcrowded with junk, and to win, the team must capture Hydro (unless the other team is very unskilled). Rubbish map - needs a lot of fixing.
Aside from the fabrication hive issues which are known, I think it's a bit of a shame to have water treatment in a bit of a wasted area. By this I mean that I'd love to see genuine uses for more multilevel play in an area that is more important in the map. The main issue is of course the top down comm views, so I accept that it's just not going to happen.
Not enough people seem to appreciate how easy it is to arc hives on descent. You've got the obs side of monorail, security, receiving and shuttle bay making 4 out of the 5 hives potentially quite vulnerable....
Overall, i like the map, and I'm excited to see what improvements are in store.
descent is fun, its my 2nd preference map right after docking because both are similar to hera which was my fav map back in ns1, any maps with clubs in are bound to be fun, and that's the primary reason for playing.
I appreciate the scale and what atmosphere they have, colours/sounds they have and that they don't feel constricted compared to maps like tram and mineshaft which I dunno maybe better layout wise but are so achingly dull to play in and look at.
Are you guys seriously getting hung up on my architectural logic complaints when 95% of my post was on why it doesn't play well?
Because that point formed the wordiest part of your post and made up 26% of your complaint, not 5%. In other words, when you make such a deeply subjective analysis the cornerstone of your post, you make it clear that this is just a personal, subjective opinion that you are nonetheless deeply invested in having accepted as gospel truth. Jona has told you that the map is being worked on, but that's not good enough for you: you would rather have it thrown out entirely if it meant that everyone agreed with you. Well... not going to happen.
@ Jonacrab
I thank you for this map, I really like the feel of it and the more somewhat disjointed design works well.
I think the whole wagon wheel design a lot of maps have ended up with is rather boring.
My only criticism is that a few of the vents dont offer any real shortcuts for early game aliens....or late game for JP marines.
I really like the way your forced to decide which way to expand, was how I always remembered NS1 maps..one direction always seemed to offer faster access to res nodes...symmetrical maps are boring..
I think this map, more than any other, forces you to be more co-ordinated in your planning and a disjinted expansion is often game deciding (as it should be).
I think a high vent from mono to hydro would help a little as it can be a tough starting hive.
The somewhat empty rooms I think work well and offer potential nooks and crannies to set up PG's or gorge tunnels.
Personally I wish that water pumps was used more, for aliens it's one of the more interesting places to move around but it's left alone like a leper at a swingers party.
Because that point formed the wordiest part of your post and made up 26% of your complaint, not 5%. In other words, when you make such a deeply subjective analysis the cornerstone of your post, you make it clear that this is just a personal, subjective opinion that you are nonetheless deeply invested in having accepted as gospel truth. Jona has told you that the map is being worked on, but that's not good enough for you: you would rather have it thrown out entirely if it meant that everyone agreed with you. Well... not going to happen.
Because, as we all know, amount of words is clearly directly related to relevance. Thanks for being so thorough as to actually do the math though, gave me a good laugh. Have you ever written an analysis or even a job application? You start with the strongest point and work your way down. Guess what came last in my post?
Also, I thought we were among grown ups where I don't have to specify everything I type and say is my opinion. Jona asked for "engaging critique" and I delivered. So far, I see none of you disagreeing with, let alone trying to invalidate any of the gameplay problems I brought up, and I know for a fact that tons of people agree with me. You may not like my tone and the way I express my dislike, but that's no reason to try to make me look like an asshole and accuse me of ill-intention.
Look, if everything I criticised is being worked on, that's fantastic and I look forward to playing the new version. However in my opinion (see what I did there?), the map would have to be changed so drastically that it's not even the same map anymore, which I simply highly doubt will happen post-release to the extent it needs to. Refinery and Docking are two prime examples of that.
Personal opinion: I like unused spaces. Best positions for gorge tunnels and perfect in water treatment and plaza. Like most guys said already, hydro ist too important. But i dont care too much about what room is on what position. Besides, its not like the rooms are totally random placed, they make some sort of sense. And the ingamehumans can have a different architecture. So why not like this?
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited April 2013
Since we're speaking of Summit, it also has a dead zone behind the door which is barely used. Perfect spot for Tunnels or PG's to assault Crossroads or Data, heck even Sub can feel the wrath of a base there. This is super effective when the enemy team is lacking on the scouting bit.
All of the routes on summit are main routes leading into main rooms (techpoints), apart from that little hallway behind the door :P I don't mind those "dead zones" one bit, as long as they are kept to a minimum and are viable for those little outposts or outflanking manoeuvres.
Now descent basically has two main dead zones, Water Treatment and Receiving/Shipping. Both are mostly used as hallways, but Water Treatment has at the very least a viable option to function as a forward base to assault Hydro (crag or armory station). Receiving is a bit of an oddball, it can be observed by a single obs in Hydro, but still is a nice outflanking hallway... The issue is though, there are better spots on the map to function as such (ie: Energy Flow)
The downside to the Descent dead zones is that they don't lead directly into Hydro on even ground, both are an uphill battle in tight corridors, creating a bottleneck. And the team on higher ground usually has the upper hand, where Bile Bomb arcing and general lines of sight are concerned, especially with these tight bottlenecks. Making Hydro a good location to hold of an assault. This is unlike Summit's Crossroads, which has wider entrances with cover. And the little hallway on Summit on the other hand does lead directly into Crossroads and has direct access to Pipe Junction/Maintenance Access (Ventilation).
As such the Descent dead zones are less deadly/effective as forward bases, so to speak. But they still function perfectly as outflanking hallways. Also, people really need to explore the ventilation systems more on Descent, they are awesome as aliens (or jetty marines :P)
Since we're speaking of Summit, it also has a dead zone behind the door which is barely used. Perfect spot for Tunnels or PG's to assault Crossroads or Data, heck even Sub can feel the wrath of a base there. This is super effective when the enemy team is lacking on the scouting bit.
All of the routes on summit are main routes leading into main rooms (techpoints), apart from that little hallway behind the door :P I don't mind those "dead zones" one bit, as long as they are kept to a minimum and are viable for those little outposts or outflanking manoeuvres.
Now descent basically has two main dead zones, Water Treatment and Receiving/Shipping. Both are mostly used as hallways, but Water Treatment has at the very least a viable option to function as a forward base to assault Hydro (crag or armory station). Receiving is a bit of an oddball, it can be observed by a single obs in Hydro, but still is a nice outflanking hallway... The issue is though, there are better spots on the map to function as such (ie: Energy Flow)
The downside to the Descent dead zones is that they don't lead directly into Hydro on even ground, both are an uphill battle in tight corridors, creating a bottleneck. And the team on higher ground usually has the upper hand, where Bile Bomb arcing and general lines of sight are concerned, especially with these tight bottlenecks. Making Hydro a good location to hold of an assault. This is unlike Summit's Crossroads, which has wider entrances with cover. And the little hallway on Summit on the other hand does lead directly into Crossroads and has direct access to Pipe Junction/Maintenance Access (Ventilation).
As such the Descent dead zones are less deadly/effective as forward bases, so to speak. But they still function perfectly as outflanking hallways. Also, people really need to explore the ventilation systems more on Descent, they are awesome as aliens (or jetty marines :P)
I hate the vents in descent. too narrow to lerk down effectively. overly complex for complexities sake... which kind of sums up the map itself. why staircases? they make it harder to navigate, club is long enough without also being circuitous. energy flow is a joke. I don't really know why I don't like it... it just feels like crap to play.
Apr 11 19:11:00 <+snb> descent is killing ns2
Apr 11 19:12:05 <+snb> new people want to play it because it's pretty and they end up thinking the game is bad or imbalanced because the map plays like shit
Apr 11 19:12:47 <+Nade> its a like of summit :DDD must be good
Apr 11 19:12:50 <+snb> and 'vets' leave when it comes on
LOL, that part was my fravorite. So basicly your proff of why people dont like it is text of you bitching about it on diffrent days and diffrent people? Okay, So tell me, How does that work then?
Just because you don't like it doesn't make it a bad map, they you seem to be trying to preach to people to think like you and think it's a bad map. If people like it let them like it, stop being all whiney and let people get on with is. Wow you're such a negative nora!
Comments
I find it amusing that most of the negative criticisms of this map are that "its a bad map" without any actual critique. If you want changes, make actual suggestions, because impudence will just make me ignore you. The fact that competitive games are still regularly played on descent, and that both teams have an equal chance at winning tells a different story about balance or playability, and so until some actually engaging critique can be made by these people, don't expect anything.
As of now the map is being partially reworked to fix some of the issues regarding fabrication and energy flow.
Also: I think you could fit all of ns_tram inside the hole that would be left if you removed water treatment
We don't need 2 summit's, what is the point of having 2 maps where the strategies will be the same? Even if the room layouts are different it will only slightly vary the gameplay, and there also has been some request for having bigger maps.
Considering trams total size is 6593x6593 inches, and descent is 8588x7465 your hypothesis is incorrect.
Why are you so afraid of different maps? competitive players play on it, pubbers play on it, the balance is mostly good, with some issues that I am working on resolving, and both teams have an equal shot at winning. I don't get where you think this is a bad map. It's different, diversity is good, the difference is that you have to use different tactics to win. If the balance is fine, and both teams can win, then the only difference here is opinion. But seeing as there are plenty of people who like the map, you don't make good arguments to support change.
It is the most "balanced" map in a game where imbalance and asymmetry is key.
it does not suit ns2. not. one. bit.
You tell him jona!
Anyway, in my HUMBLE opinion, descent is one of the 2 maps i enjoy most thus far (That are official, gtfo jambi)
Mineshaft and descent are the 2 most enjoyable maps, and most STRATEGIC maps, ns2 has to date. everything else is do this one thing and win, descent and mineshaft are so huge, so DIFFERENT in every single room, that you have to change your plans dependant on where you are.
Summit is just oh-so-repetitve.
Come to think of it, that actually kind of sums up my whole point of view on descent. It's just not a very elegant map. IMO, elegance is something that you should strive towards when you're designing/creating something. Summit, Tram, and Veil are all for the most part very elegant, with very little in the way of unnecessary hallways and rooms. Veil maybe a little less than the other two. Descent has rooms that are, admittedly, there for no real reason other than to be "different."
Here's the thing. The map needs to be adjusted, not the players or tactics. Every NS2 map has different tactical nuances. Your map simply plays badly and it's really as simple as that. With any tactics. And I don't say that to be hateful. I have never had an even decent game on it. In fact, the vast majority of games on it are excruciatingly bad and most players on the server I frequent will agree with this statement. Lots of people moan when it comes on or leave the server and a bunch of times we did a series of silly rushes just so the map would change quicker. Do you want to write this off as "impudence" and ignore it as well? Your call.
Feedback for a complex map that's an overall failure needs to be complex as well, so people don't even bother. The reason you don't get specific arguments about what needs changing is because essentially everything needs changing and a lot of the feedback would have to be as complex as the map itself while probably achieving nothing.
That said, here's why your map doesn't work in as few words as possible:
- The layout makes all the starting tech points unviable. Monorail and Fabric in particular only have 1 "safe" RT each with Energy being impossible to hold unless you have Hydro. This can go down to ZERO safe RTs if it's close spawns and the other team is holding Hydro.
- Close spawns don't work because whoever holds Hydro is pretty much guaranteed to hold 5+ RTs, while the other team will struggle to hold a maximum of 3.
- The only "tactic" is racing to Hydro. Whoever holds it wins. You can fairly easily access every non tech point RT from Hydro, except maybe Gravity. You could say the same about Crossroads on Summit, but unlike Crossroads, Hydro is a fairly small closed space that is almost impossible to attack as marine without ARCs with its 2 tiny access points, one of which for some reason being a corner piece (and I'm not counting the entrance from Water Treatment because it's a staircase...). If you make the whole map about one place, make that place fun and fair for both sides to fight in and fight for.
- In general, basically all the acess points to tech points don't work and offendability as well as defendability of tech points isn't balanced. They're either impossible (Mono, Launch, Hydro) or too easy (Fabric, Drone) to get into due to the design of the rooms or hallways leading to them. Every TP apart from Fabric also has no space to move or fight in as well as needless artificial obstacles. Wouldn't you say the first thing marines get rid off in a room they set up their base in would be giant mechs with no function standing in the middle of the room? Also, tech points either have no siege spots, or ridiculously easy ones, e.g. the landing pad south of Launch and everything to the left of Hydro.
- The geometry of the map doesn't work, gameplay wise or aesthetically. The whole thing doesn't feel like a space station or building. It's a bunch of interchangable rooms randomly connected to each other. There's no architectural logic. Nobody would have giant obstacles that fill entire rooms as seen in Observation or Energy without good reason or purpose and nobody would build a tiny and cramped club that openly leads into a plaza. Nobody would have a giant silo and a huge room for water treatment next to a train station. The monorail that people apparently access this space station with is literally on the opposite side of the space station that has Crew Quarters, Club and Plaza, and in between that are a whole bunch of "engineering" type of rooms. As for gameplay, apart from the already established and for some reason largely ignored issue that large areas of the map don't ever have to be used; the whole map consists of cramped spaces with tons of obstacles and non-optional staircases (!), making me wonder how I'm ever supposed to move around as Fade in places like Club, Monorail, Gravity, Observation, Crew Quarters, Plaza, Energy, Silo... yup, pretty much anywhere. Now, you could of course argue that humans didn't build this with alien movement accessability in mind, but my whole point is believability can be sacrificed for good gameplay if need be. Right now, the map has neither.
To sum up, my feedback basically is "rework the entire map" so you can see why people are reluctant to give you any "actual suggestions". You're obviously a very talented mapper, but this one is a pretty much unsalvagable failure in the eyes of many people. I realise having your hard work be talked down on is not the greatest thing, but people don't have to like it just because it was hard work and just because they can't do better themselves. If we stick to someone's analogy that I don't have to be a filmmaker to criticise someone's film, Descent is not a bad edit of good material, it's simply bad material with really nice production value. The re-shooting it would need to salvage the project would be so severe that I would simply tell you to ditch it if it was a test screening.
It's a shame that's not really an option though as it's already an official map. I guess it's hard to resist eye candy.
Summit and tram went through several iterations and even recently so.
Most of your points are arguing that the map is UNBALANCED, however it's mostly balanced...
According to the official stats for this patch (for all the maps combined) the balance is 56% alien wins and 44% marine wins.
Descent? 58% Alien and 42% Marine.
Is it perfect? No. But you realize the map has been out for not even two months, right? Docking has been out for many many months and is only just now getting to be more balanced. Most maps are a work in progress and are constantly being worked around to fix them. Docking has changed immensely in the last couple of months in particular. Tram just had Platform worked around. It's all constantly being changed. It isn't an instant thing, you know.
And are you SERIOUSLY arguing that .... seriously? That's the most retarded argument I've ever heard. God forbid a mapper actually made rooms interesting instead of doing the same generic shit. What a tragedy.
This argument is really a moot point, since no map currently in existence follows a logical architectural layout. Not in NS2 as they did not in NS1. Take Summit, for example, which is elegant in its simplicity, but none of the rooms actually make any sense at all from a realistic point of view. I've always thought that Descent is one of the few maps that at least TRY to pull this off, with Plaza having a feel of a real shopping mall and Club looking way more enjoyable than, for instance, the Onos bar in Docking.
That being said, the monorail is most likely used both by the visitors and the staff of the space station, and as such, why shouldn't one line lead to the maintenance section (i.e. the current Monorail-room)? Don't assume that all we see in Descent is all that the space station is made of, more than likely there is an even bigger monorail station next to Plaza, behind one of the doors. And isn't the most logical place for the club just where it is now? In a big shopping mall with flashing lights and music seeping onto the streets?
Nothing to do with gameplay-balance, though. I just wanted to nitpick. Many of the things you said I agree with, though I still enjoy Descent more than Docking, Refinery or Mineshaft combined.
And win percentages say nothing about how a map plays or how balanced it is across teams, at least not as long as spawns are random. The fact that you even bring it up and say my post was mainly about imbalance when I never even mentioned team balance pretty much proves that you either didn't bother to read anything I wrote or have no valid counter arguments to anything I criticised. I said the map plays badly, focusses on Hydro too much, has a bad layout and bad design. I never had fun on it as either side, and I've won and lost plenty. Win percentages could be 50% in total, that doesn't mean any team that spawns in Fabrication or any team that fails to secure Hydro isn't completely screwed.
There is exactly one tactic on this map. If you don't hold Hydro, you lose. And the mapper wants to make us believe you need "different tactics" to win...
Don't get too into hyperbolia though. I've seen plenty of hives killed in Hydro with the marine team rolling into victory, and I've also seen a lot of late game phase gates in Hydro with the aliens holding three hive rooms. It's all anecdotal, though it is true that the map is too concentrated on holding Hydro.
Not enough people seem to appreciate how easy it is to arc hives on descent. You've got the obs side of monorail, security, receiving and shuttle bay making 4 out of the 5 hives potentially quite vulnerable....
Overall, i like the map, and I'm excited to see what improvements are in store.
I appreciate the scale and what atmosphere they have, colours/sounds they have and that they don't feel constricted compared to maps like tram and mineshaft which I dunno maybe better layout wise but are so achingly dull to play in and look at.
Because that point formed the wordiest part of your post and made up 26% of your complaint, not 5%. In other words, when you make such a deeply subjective analysis the cornerstone of your post, you make it clear that this is just a personal, subjective opinion that you are nonetheless deeply invested in having accepted as gospel truth. Jona has told you that the map is being worked on, but that's not good enough for you: you would rather have it thrown out entirely if it meant that everyone agreed with you. Well... not going to happen.
So have a break. Have a KitKat. Chillax.
They are essentially hallways, how are they useless? Or not elegant?
I thank you for this map, I really like the feel of it and the more somewhat disjointed design works well.
I think the whole wagon wheel design a lot of maps have ended up with is rather boring.
My only criticism is that a few of the vents dont offer any real shortcuts for early game aliens....or late game for JP marines.
I really like the way your forced to decide which way to expand, was how I always remembered NS1 maps..one direction always seemed to offer faster access to res nodes...symmetrical maps are boring..
I think this map, more than any other, forces you to be more co-ordinated in your planning and a disjinted expansion is often game deciding (as it should be).
I think a high vent from mono to hydro would help a little as it can be a tough starting hive.
The somewhat empty rooms I think work well and offer potential nooks and crannies to set up PG's or gorge tunnels.
Also, I thought we were among grown ups where I don't have to specify everything I type and say is my opinion. Jona asked for "engaging critique" and I delivered. So far, I see none of you disagreeing with, let alone trying to invalidate any of the gameplay problems I brought up, and I know for a fact that tons of people agree with me. You may not like my tone and the way I express my dislike, but that's no reason to try to make me look like an asshole and accuse me of ill-intention.
Look, if everything I criticised is being worked on, that's fantastic and I look forward to playing the new version. However in my opinion (see what I did there?), the map would have to be changed so drastically that it's not even the same map anymore, which I simply highly doubt will happen post-release to the extent it needs to. Refinery and Docking are two prime examples of that.
All of the routes on summit are main routes leading into main rooms (techpoints), apart from that little hallway behind the door :P I don't mind those "dead zones" one bit, as long as they are kept to a minimum and are viable for those little outposts or outflanking manoeuvres.
Now descent basically has two main dead zones, Water Treatment and Receiving/Shipping. Both are mostly used as hallways, but Water Treatment has at the very least a viable option to function as a forward base to assault Hydro (crag or armory station). Receiving is a bit of an oddball, it can be observed by a single obs in Hydro, but still is a nice outflanking hallway... The issue is though, there are better spots on the map to function as such (ie: Energy Flow)
The downside to the Descent dead zones is that they don't lead directly into Hydro on even ground, both are an uphill battle in tight corridors, creating a bottleneck. And the team on higher ground usually has the upper hand, where Bile Bomb arcing and general lines of sight are concerned, especially with these tight bottlenecks. Making Hydro a good location to hold of an assault. This is unlike Summit's Crossroads, which has wider entrances with cover. And the little hallway on Summit on the other hand does lead directly into Crossroads and has direct access to Pipe Junction/Maintenance Access (Ventilation).
As such the Descent dead zones are less deadly/effective as forward bases, so to speak. But they still function perfectly as outflanking hallways. Also, people really need to explore the ventilation systems more on Descent, they are awesome as aliens (or jetty marines :P)
I hate the vents in descent. too narrow to lerk down effectively. overly complex for complexities sake... which kind of sums up the map itself. why staircases? they make it harder to navigate, club is long enough without also being circuitous. energy flow is a joke. I don't really know why I don't like it... it just feels like crap to play.
LOL, that part was my fravorite. So basicly your proff of why people dont like it is text of you bitching about it on diffrent days and diffrent people? Okay, So tell me, How does that work then?
Just because you don't like it doesn't make it a bad map, they you seem to be trying to preach to people to think like you and think it's a bad map. If people like it let them like it, stop being all whiney and let people get on with is. Wow you're such a negative nora!