DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
Aye.. custom maps are great but so few people are willing to play on greyscales AND give feedback.
While I often lack the time to play maptest session I fully support the idea. (hence im one of the voices in TAW for keeping up maptesting)
At least I do my small share putting the new maps on the (maptest) server.
Want more custom maps? Or pub has caged & jambi and in the future will most likely run more custom maps. (probably when @Mephilles inform me a map is passed testing)
They're focusing on their project for many months now and they're still receiving feedbacks from the community although I'm still complaining because @Flaterectomy removed the unicorn.
The unicorn is still in Caged, it's just a little more hidden. :P
MephillesGermanyJoin Date: 2013-08-07Member: 186634Members, NS2 Map Tester, NS2 Community Developer
edited October 2014
@DC_Darkling there is no pass or fail in our maptests. We give feedback on what we liked/disliked and give suggestions how to solve problems if there are any. There is no magical line when a map is good. The map is done when the mapper think it's done.
But if you want a general rule: in my oppinion a map has definately passed when it's played in the ENSL.
Didn't I hear somthing about another Custom Map Cup in the works? Or am I just dreaming?
Generally speaking, Pub opinion on maps and tactics are derived from Comp games (i.e. When someone says a map is bad, ask why, they usually dont have an answer and just heard it was bad from someone else/comp player/comp streamer).
(imo) In order to get people to accept new maps, comp players have to be OK playing on them.
They're focusing on their project for many months now and they're still receiving feedbacks from the community although I'm still complaining because @Flaterectomy removed the unicorn.
The unicorn is still in Caged, it's just a little more hidden. :P
In the hardest secret room to reach, I know. Enjoy the lerks. x)
Didn't I hear somthing about another Custom Map Cup in the works? Or am I just dreaming?
Generally speaking, Pub opinion on maps and tactics are derived from Comp games (i.e. When someone says a map is bad, ask why, they usually dont have an answer and just heard it was bad from someone else/comp player/comp streamer).
(imo) In order to get people to accept new maps, comp players have to be OK playing on them.
I really really like Kodiak, but since the updated changes never had a chance to really play cos ppl always vote it off or leave within 5 minutes and kill the server. But the two things I figured when playing it was that
A) for marines you need a really good com who uses VOIP
and most importantly by far The marines need to listen to that com.
The same is for many of the other maps (i'm looking at you Eclipse) that are "biased",
yet cos half the team wants to go Rambo, and not work as a team they then claim it sucks
NS has always been about communication, teamwork and strategy, and the four/five overplayed maps I mentioned in my first post I feel are most forgiving in this respect.
To return to my original conundrum of overplayed maps I think that NS needs to (over?) emphasize this key mechanic of the com role, that to follow the tactics dictated by the com will increase the chance of victory. Yet here in itself is another problem:
On servers that have a good regular base one cannot com unless one is experienced, yet going on servers where there are more inexperienced players can be just as difficult because they are simply not used to having another player issue them with orders, and so don't do what is asked. This then leads to frustration for both players and Com and thus no one wants to com.
How do we improve the role of the com?
I guess one way would be maybe have a proper tutorial where the com is AI (I know, I know wishful thinking here, but maybe it doesn't have to be as clever as that). If the new player follows the instructions of the AI com (recorded voice commands - go to A, build this, let someone else build this and you go to B, protect this gorge, etc etc) they will succeed and be victorious. If they disobey the AI com they get ripped apart by the enemy. New players coming from CS, Battlefield, COD, whatever, where there are no Coms need an incentive to follow the com, and if they don't, get punished for it.
My other thought is that a proper com tutorial needs to be implemented because at the moment the bots are really really dumb and it's more of a short cut key learning exercise which isn't very fun. Com needs a less steep learning curve to be more inclusive and encourage players to do it, but as I have already said it needs the cooperation of a whole team to follow through.
Possibly there needs to be more pre recorded orders (so people don't need to rely so much on VOIP); waypoint lines to follow; or something to make giving/following orders a little less intimidating/threatening/ more bleeding obvious ?
I'm sure others can think of far better ways to do this but I think with the climate of stupid silly games with instant gratification, NS is a very different animal, and because of this, new players (and plenty of experienced ones) need a lot more guidance into how to actually play it rather than get mega kill counts.
There are plenty of balanced maps, those are called Summit and Tram, for quoting the best examples. Most of the regular maps are played because they're balanced. At the contrary, there are also unbalanced maps, those are called Eclipse and Docking (best examples again). Some are balanced because at the same skill level, both teams will fight against each other strongly and it won't be an easy win for a particular side. Some are unbalanced because there's one side highly favored. Eclipse for instance, is definitely pro-aliens, I hope I don't need to say why. Talking about the same result (aliens wins) doesn't make any sense in this case because it is bound to the NS2 gameplay and not their maps.
There are Aliens wins on every maps, but the games themselves are more balanced and easier to offset on those said balanced maps. I'm afraid to say there's a bunch of custom maps that cannot pretend in their current state to be balanced enough. I've played a lot of custom maps, and even if I do prefer playing sometimes on those custom maps than the more regular ones, I also admit I realize why some are officials and some remain customs.
Tram and Summit have their weakness too (in fact some are huge), but that's not the point I'm making. If you take 2 teams that play the map for the first time (good or bad player; same level for both teams), it will usually be a win for the aliens a little more. Most of it because the marines have to add pressure on alien territory. So they need the map knowledge to do so and be efficient.
If they don't; aliens can breathe a little more. In the end aliens get more chances to win. It may happens more if you move the cursor towards rookie level. But still, it's not an easy task for the marines when they have to explore as much as punching the alien. I've seen that on many custom maps. By extent it can be the same scenarios on official maps too. I did see it.
On the opposite side; if you know what to do as marine. You may change the odds in favor of your team. So the balance isn't only the map in itself. it's a mix between the map AND the knowledge of it. Tram is not exception to that. If the marines don't know the map well enough; alien can punch them hard enough to make it a win.
You have to play more than 2 rounds to get a good grip on a map. To understand what is provided to help or what would be needed. The official maps went through that testing process too. Play, play play.
In other words, nothing is perfect as you said. Some maps are better than others (custom and official all together). But people tends to put a sticker on maps while they still lack some of the knowledge needed to fully appreciate/evaluate it.
Ex : Who knows that ? on the road from Veil/Cargo to Dome (big horizontal pipes) there is a spot atop the lights you can hide in. Guess what?! Nobody checks...
I got many like this and "pros" do have them too. But who can tell for sure that 12 players (pro or not) in a game know the spot (or a trick to get in the vent without any help etc).
In the end some people can give some negative feedback not based on proper analysis but feelings. It happened on official maps too.
I believe a map need to be played regularly to make the author able to truly address the issues. It was the case for the official maps. Unfortunately the custom map don't get the same life. It's ok right now or die (close to it). Kind of a impatient population IMO.
It may have an impact of course but doesn't reflect all the reasons Tram for instance is balanced. As far as I remember, Descent and Biodome have been qualified as balanced a few days after their release. They're not perfectly balanced but I'm not even sure a such thing is possible. Nevertheless, I keep thinking there are some custom maps that could be improved and become more balanced but for this, they need feedbacks from the community. A custom map could be ignored by the players because it's not balanced enough but that's not the only reason. There are many things that make a map enjoyable.
(...)
It is true again. There's a lack of people concerning this fact. I personally don't have the time anymore to test those maps but I was very active in the past. I kinda contributed to make some maps better. Nice one for quoting TAW but you seem to forget the SCC playtests that occur for a while now. Giving feedbacks is important but I really think that people interested to do so already did it or are currently doing it. I mean, you don't need a ton of messages on your own thread to get feedbacks from players, it is not easy thing to give proper feedbacks and it goes better to have a small amount of players providing helpful opinions than a lot of people saying something pointless or useless to develop a map.
Apologies to SCC. I was lazy. But in the mean time i'm a bastard so it's ok i guess. I got a reputation you know.
There is another issue. The sticker issue. A map gets a sticker fast. Even if it is improved later. Kodiak for example suffered from this while it was improved (removal of some OP spots etc..). While I do think it would gain from being a 5 TPs map (Kodiak5) the map suffers from a reputation that is outdated now.
That's a typical behavior: Someone find a good product he will tell 3 ppl. He finds a bad one, he will tell 15 ppl. These people are usually driven by feelings while authors need facts, and proper testing (did you try every possibilities ?).
And that's kind of reaction that doesn't help either. As far as I know, people are not complaining about the lack of custom maps but the lack of custom maps played and approved by the public and / or competitive community. It is so much different. Of course, players could do better, but reading your last sentences won't help in any way. I honestly think a map must have a real thing to attract people. There's a few maps I love to play on, Fusion, Caged and Prison because I really appreciate those maps and it's very interesting to find out how they have evolved since these mappers started to work on them. They're focusing on their project for many months now and they're still receiving feedbacks from the community although I'm still complaining because @Flaterectomy removed the unicorn. @Mouse, meanwhile made a wonderful secret room (oh gorges).
Many people think a custom map is "grey boxed" or a lower quality product than official maps. Another wrong idea in NS2 case. It has an effect on how people perceive the map, and ultimately drives them to select other maps.
Put an official approval on a custom map (include in map cycle etc..). It may get a "balance sticker" non the less but it will be played more than what it is today.
It's like video on Youtube. Some authors buy "fake clicks" because more clicks on a counter means more real humans susceptible to click on the video and watch the content. It's sad but it's how it works. Gamers are no exception to this. Not a close example but you get the idea.
Ex : Who knows that ? on the road from Veil/Cargo to Dome (big horizontal pipes) there is a spot atop the lights you can hide in. Guess what?! Nobody checks...
I literally just found this last night, and my mind was blown.
I'm pretty sure, thinking back to times i've been ambushed in there, that I've seen maybe 1-2 players use that spot... Ever! Not realising at the time where they came from, I had assumed from the sides behind the pipes, but those occaisions always stuck in my mind.
Time to get the word out on this spot ermagurd.
Also there's basically a whole maps worth of hiding spots in tram I never knew about before a couple of months ago
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
@Benson
Yes, TAWsome and TAWific, combined with the TAW ns2 community all bring players for our TAW maptests.
At days its more comp players, at other days it more community players. Meph knows better. But yes... comp players do play them.
Mineral needs your help. The word on the street says it might make it to season 6. Help it become a better map. It's getting prettier and prettier everyday, and it's quite balanced at the moment. Might need a few tweaks here and there, but MasterG needs feedback, and his map needs to be played. It's been played more and more for the last few weeks. Go on ! Add it to your public servers
You can follow the mapper here, watch him stream and give feedback : hitbox.tv/MasterG
Adn you can also do that on the UWE ns2_mineral thread. Go go go !
if you want people to play new maps, lower the learning curve.
make routes intuitive on the map.
get rid of glass.
label rooms by clock positions or compass points or something
then new maps might feel like a good game instead of just some new experience for the sake of new experiences
Lowering the learning curve is dumb. Yeah make a 4TP map, two long corridors so that new players don't get lost.
It's funny to notice that pubs usually accept custom maps way easier than veterans. Because for new players, everything is new, even Tram or Veil.
And veterans are smart enough to learn the general layout in like maybe two games, then identify what are the choke points of it really quickly.
I say : just play the damn custom maps. and give feedback, these are works in progress. If something feels wrong, if you don't manage to go through a room, an area smoothly, report it on the forums. If your feedback is coherent and well formulated you'll be listenned to.
Mineral was messy as fuck in the beginning, too many narrow shitty corridors in which you'd get lost. Look at the map now. It took one single playtest to find that issue. MasterG instantly started to work on these corridors and now they're gone, and you have something instead that flows much better.
The solutions are there, no need to think of new stuff. I think the main problem is the lack of feedback. You don't need to make boring maps to retain players. NS2 is a complex game, and that's what we all love about it. We don't want stupid maps that are boring to play. We want complex maps that are interesting. What you're saying about the learning curve isn't totally wrong but I think the solution you're advocating is not appropriate.
There's nothing that can't be fixed on a custom map. Hell even official maps were shitty at first. You need people playing, reporting stuff, to make it better. There's no secret to it. That's the solution. Just look how far Mineral was two months ago. It had potential, now it's close to be balanced, layout is more or less final, detailing has started. Just needs a few tweaks here and there to deal with any balance issues that come up in the future.
And it doesn't even take too much time to give feedback. So it's really up to the players, to the community to have better custom maps.
It's funny to notice that pubs usually accept custom maps way easier than veterans. Because for new players, everything is new, even Tram or Veil. And veterans are smart enough to learn the general layout in like maybe two games, then identify what are the choke points of it really quickly.
speak for yourself. some of us don't have photographic memory
it's not at all funny that people would rather play on maps they know in a game about executing tactics (map control / positioning / etc.)
i'm not saying custom maps are worse than standard maps. but being new is a disadvantage in and of itself
you lose nothing by changing room names to hint geography. i'm not sure how you equated that suggestion with turning every map layout into something simple
every time I respond late to a threat, run into glass, or lose a fade because I can't find the exit, it's a L2P issue because I haven't memorized the map
every time I respond late to a threat, run into glass, or lose a fade because I can't find the exit, it's a L2P issue because I haven't memorized the map
Finally, yes! You did well young padawan.
In all seriousness, how can you suggest that it is anything BUT a L2P issue?
It's not at all funny that people would rather play on maps they know in a game about executing tactics (map control / positioning / etc.)
Weird, because this thread is about complaining about "the same old maps". If they can't learn a new layout, there's literaly nothing I can do for them.
In everything you do in life there's a learning curve. Learning a new map's layout isn't the hardest thing to do. When you first play any game you aren't gonna own everything in the first hour of playtime.
Then again, are you opening your map ingame ? As a comp player I do that all the time and when I play a new map, my minimap is almost always open. That's how you learn how to locate stuff arround the map.
I don't get what you're trying to say. I don't see that as an issue, I see that as your issue, not being able to learn a map (as you yourself told us earlier)
every time I respond late to a threat, run into glass, or lose a fade because I can't find the exit, it's a L2P issue because I haven't memorized the map
Finally, yes! You did well young padawan.
In all seriousness, how can you suggest that it is anything BUT a L2P issue?
Some of the custom maps have dead-ends in them that are actually more accessible than the path you're supposed to take; which I imagine has lead a number of lifeforms to their death. Things like that are more of a learn 2 map issue than a L2P issue.
I want to explore a slightly different angle on this... are more maps actually a good thing?
People usually want "new", but they don't really think about what a new map entails for gameplay. Like UncleCrunch mentions it takes multiple plays to even get a basic grasp of a map, and without that the game is unbalanced. It takes far more time to really know and understand a map. Not even to really master it, just to develop a mature meta.
That's the ideal point to be when playing the game, where you really understand the map you are playing on and can make it work for you. Anything less is damaging to the game experience as a whole. It takes a good long time to reach that point though, dozens of hours on that one map at minimum. Then you multiply that by the number of maps you regularly play on. Dozens of hours per map becomes hundreds, maybe thousands of hours to reach a decent comfort level even on 10 maps, and you probably wont be comfortable with any of them before you are comfortable with all of them because you play them in rotation.
So the more maps in rotation, the longer it takes to actually even start to play the game the way it should be played. I think it's a strong argument for fewer maps rather than more. I think a lot of people already grasp this instinctively. It's why they are so quick to dismiss a new map or a slightly inferior old one because it allows them to trim down the list of content they have to go through learning, reaching a more comfortable level of play faster.
@Mouse I guess I don't draw a distinction there. "Learn to Map" is L2P as I see it. To me it's like saying; "The reason that lerk killed me was because I had bad aim, it isn't a l2p issue, it's a l2aim issue."
Don't get me wrong, there's great value in designing a map to be intuitive. I'm just baffled at the language used there.
MouseThe Lighter Side of PessimismJoin Date: 2002-03-02Member: 263Members, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
I didn't mean to rule out the (in)ability of the player as being a factor, I just wanted to make the point that well designed maps are easier to play on than on poorly designed maps.
Aye.. custom maps are great but so few people are willing to play on greyscales AND give feedback.
In all fairness, it is hard to give feedback you know is accurate due to the way greyboxed maps play. You've got issues like
- no detail on walls = no places for skulks to hide
- skulks stand out pretty strong against matte light grey
- corridor/wall detail adds volume to the wall/ often makes corridors much smaller than they were in greybox phase.
All these things simply add noise to the feedback process (and add a bias towards marine wins in the greybox phase, possibly explaining why some maps are alien-favoured on completion when they needn't be, despite extensive in-dev balancing)
The way to combat this, I think, is to start basic detailing and texturing early?
A lot of players seem to greatly prefer the most rudimentary texturing over greybox textures, which might be something to consider for future mapping efforts to enable better quality feedback and better reception from players when the maps still in early development.
>ahem<
Just thought I'd put this out there. I've not seen anyone formally identify these points of contention regarding the map development process. If anyone has anything to add or contest, please do so
I want to explore a slightly different angle on this... are more maps actually a good thing?
People usually want "new", but they don't really think about what a new map entails for gameplay. Like UncleCrunch mentions it takes multiple plays to even get a basic grasp of a map, and without that the game is unbalanced. It takes far more time to really know and understand a map. Not even to really master it, just to develop a mature meta.
That's the ideal point to be when playing the game, where you really understand the map you are playing on and can make it work for you. Anything less is damaging to the game experience as a whole. It takes a good long time to reach that point though, dozens of hours on that one map at minimum. Then you multiply that by the number of maps you regularly play on. Dozens of hours per map becomes hundreds, maybe thousands of hours to reach a decent comfort level even on 10 maps, and you probably wont be comfortable with any of them before you are comfortable with all of them because you play them in rotation.
So the more maps in rotation, the longer it takes to actually even start to play the game the way it should be played. I think it's a strong argument for fewer maps rather than more. I think a lot of people already grasp this instinctively. It's why they are so quick to dismiss a new map or a slightly inferior old one because it allows them to trim down the list of content they have to go through learning, reaching a more comfortable level of play faster.
Let me show you something that will eventually change your mind.
Actually NS2 is :
Summit, Tram, Mineshaft, Refinery, Docking (5TP) & Veil, Eclipse (4TP). Biodome, Descent & Kodiak came after release. More than 1 year after release if my memory isn't failing.
So basically we had :
-3 x balanced map that did evolve (non the less) => leads to playing it over and over.
-2 x 5TP maps with a single huge issue (Refinery, Docking) => leads to rants on forums and game reputation
-1 x 5TP Mineshaft map that got many Ups and Down month.
-2 x maps ...Veil, Eclipse (4TP)... Need i say more ? => did not helped either (sorry guys).
-Biodome, Descent & Kodiak have fans and haters as well. => It led to more rant or bad reputation.
But most of the time they play Ok with a proper teamwork that enables the team to cope with these difficulties in public play. Public play is more "loose" than competitive play. You can make a come back if done well. Still, you can't satisfy everybody. One will hate Veil (I'm one of those) another one will hate Tram, etc.
That's the first point : Whatever you try; you can't have 100% success. No matter what. It can be the Art, the layout, or the number of possibilities etc... there's always something.
You're right to say it takes time to learn a map. But think about this: Imagine you're a player that plays only on the week end; Like Friday, Saturday and Sunday (a regular Joe). Let's say 4 hours on each of the 3 days. It makes already 12hrs and 48hrs in a month. Imagine now this player plays one official map per month; exploring everything can to master it one by one. 10 months later, he's a master at NS2 map knowledge. So 480hrs later. Imagine now he gets back to the 1st map. The feeling will clearly be different as he is a master and don't have to explore again.
It's like seeing a movie several times. Transformers/Marvel movies are cool with tons of explosions, bad ass stuff, name it; they got it. See one of them 10 times and you will see your critic evolve each time.
-The first 3 times you will be in a process of discovery. Most likely positive reviews.
-3 times later, You start to see the goofs and issues the movie has.
-3 times after that; you're bored.
-The 10th time you press fast forward (if not already done) to get to the parts you eventually really like. Not to mention it would be a different part from another viewer (see first point).
Point 2: Humans needs a little new in everything. Even if Veil (or any other) is changed a little, but still is the same on the general layout, people will at least try it once.
Bringing new maps is a way to renew the game interest. But not to many maps. Quality decrease if we don't take the time to do good stuff (Who said Doom the first ? : +2500 maps...).
It has good point and only good points IMO.
-We all start at day 0. But it's doesn't take 3 quantum physics degree to find his way around in a map. Launch the map as "local server" then explore. 15 minutes are enough. One player can't do that without any help. It's far more efficient than to connect a server with no clue of where to go. NS2 isn't a regular shooter... At all.
-It can be impressive for new comers. But in the mean time it's the insurance to be able to play the game longer than a lot of shooters on the market that only last 10 to 20hrs Solo and maybe 50hrs online. Plus they don't have to play all the maps at the same time. I know that people (especially young ones) wants to eat all the cookies at the same time. But one by one is quite ok actually.
-Fewer maps make people becomes robots. They got a program and execute it at some point (over played maps). When it comes to new maps the program can eventually be useless. That what NS2 is all about. Of course map knowledge is important when it is games with skilled people. But on public play it's ok, what is important is teamwork. That my friend will always make you be forgiven every time you do the right thing (phase through!!!!! ).
-People enjoy exploring. More maps = more exploration. More "new".
-It's better to have 50% unbalanced maps out of 20 than 50% unbalanced maps out of 10 and 100% bored ppl. Say to somebody you know a terrific game and it has 10 maps but 5 are a little cranky will not really be appealing (only 5). Say it's got 20 maps but 10 are a little cranky. What was heard is "10 maps". And compared to other shooters, it makes the difference. Of course quality standards have to be met for custom map. With NS2 we can reach it.
Summoning @Person8880 and @GhoulofGSG9
On that note, we'd like to offer an even broader choice of maps, but the current shine mapvote limits that to about 19 total maps (10 are standards):
For example, we're displaying a total of 12 votable maps with each mapvote. This is tuned only with "ExcludeLastMaps": 6 and "MaxOptions": 16, as this is currently the only way to have it consistently display 12 maps in the vote...
Too many customs appearing in that vote would do them a disfavor by promoting them too much.
We'd like to have more maps in the active cycle (let's say 25), with an option for each map to set a display chance percentage. The less played customs become a gem if they only appear in the vote every once in a while!
I am unsure whether this is the correct scripting approach. It'd look something like this:
All standards set to 100%, really popular and finished customs 80%, general bunch of customs 50%, less played/updated customs 20%.
(Well, maybe even the standards can be tuned with that, based on popularity)
Forcing customs on players is the one thing that breaks their neck. Let players get tired of the same old maps and just offer alternatives to explore. They will automatically try them, learn and remember them bit by bit.
It'd be nice if you two could find a way to improve the mapvote to allow for this. 8->
Comments
While I often lack the time to play maptest session I fully support the idea. (hence im one of the voices in TAW for keeping up maptesting)
At least I do my small share putting the new maps on the (maptest) server.
Want more custom maps? Or pub has caged & jambi and in the future will most likely run more custom maps. (probably when @Mephilles inform me a map is passed testing)
The unicorn is still in Caged, it's just a little more hidden. :P
But if you want a general rule: in my oppinion a map has definately passed when it's played in the ENSL.
EDIT: must...find...unicorn...
Generally speaking, Pub opinion on maps and tactics are derived from Comp games (i.e. When someone says a map is bad, ask why, they usually dont have an answer and just heard it was bad from someone else/comp player/comp streamer).
(imo) In order to get people to accept new maps, comp players have to be OK playing on them.
@Mephiles
are there any comp players that participate in the custom map playtest sessions?
In the hardest secret room to reach, I know. Enjoy the lerks. x)
In case you don't know what I'm talking about it all starts here: http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/comment/2220185/#Comment_2220185
I double this.I've asked people why they didn't like Kodiak on release and I couldn't get a real answer except from comp players.
A) for marines you need a really good com who uses VOIP
and most importantly by far
The same is for many of the other maps (i'm looking at you Eclipse) that are "biased",
yet cos half the team wants to go Rambo, and not work as a team they then claim it sucks
NS has always been about communication, teamwork and strategy, and the four/five overplayed maps I mentioned in my first post I feel are most forgiving in this respect.
To return to my original conundrum of overplayed maps I think that NS needs to (over?) emphasize this key mechanic of the com role, that to follow the tactics dictated by the com will increase the chance of victory. Yet here in itself is another problem:
On servers that have a good regular base one cannot com unless one is experienced, yet going on servers where there are more inexperienced players can be just as difficult because they are simply not used to having another player issue them with orders, and so don't do what is asked. This then leads to frustration for both players and Com and thus no one wants to com.
How do we improve the role of the com?
I guess one way would be maybe have a proper tutorial where the com is AI (I know, I know wishful thinking here, but maybe it doesn't have to be as clever as that). If the new player follows the instructions of the AI com (recorded voice commands - go to A, build this, let someone else build this and you go to B, protect this gorge, etc etc) they will succeed and be victorious. If they disobey the AI com they get ripped apart by the enemy. New players coming from CS, Battlefield, COD, whatever, where there are no Coms need an incentive to follow the com, and if they don't, get punished for it.
My other thought is that a proper com tutorial needs to be implemented because at the moment the bots are really really dumb and it's more of a short cut key learning exercise which isn't very fun. Com needs a less steep learning curve to be more inclusive and encourage players to do it, but as I have already said it needs the cooperation of a whole team to follow through.
Possibly there needs to be more pre recorded orders (so people don't need to rely so much on VOIP); waypoint lines to follow; or something to make giving/following orders a little less intimidating/threatening/ more bleeding obvious ?
I'm sure others can think of far better ways to do this but I think with the climate of stupid silly games with instant gratification, NS is a very different animal, and because of this, new players (and plenty of experienced ones) need a lot more guidance into how to actually play it rather than get mega kill counts.
~O)
Tram and Summit have their weakness too (in fact some are huge), but that's not the point I'm making. If you take 2 teams that play the map for the first time (good or bad player; same level for both teams), it will usually be a win for the aliens a little more. Most of it because the marines have to add pressure on alien territory. So they need the map knowledge to do so and be efficient.
If they don't; aliens can breathe a little more. In the end aliens get more chances to win. It may happens more if you move the cursor towards rookie level. But still, it's not an easy task for the marines when they have to explore as much as punching the alien. I've seen that on many custom maps. By extent it can be the same scenarios on official maps too. I did see it.
On the opposite side; if you know what to do as marine. You may change the odds in favor of your team. So the balance isn't only the map in itself. it's a mix between the map AND the knowledge of it. Tram is not exception to that. If the marines don't know the map well enough; alien can punch them hard enough to make it a win.
You have to play more than 2 rounds to get a good grip on a map. To understand what is provided to help or what would be needed. The official maps went through that testing process too. Play, play play.
In other words, nothing is perfect as you said. Some maps are better than others (custom and official all together). But people tends to put a sticker on maps while they still lack some of the knowledge needed to fully appreciate/evaluate it.
Ex : Who knows that ? on the road from Veil/Cargo to Dome (big horizontal pipes) there is a spot atop the lights you can hide in. Guess what?! Nobody checks...
I got many like this and "pros" do have them too. But who can tell for sure that 12 players (pro or not) in a game know the spot (or a trick to get in the vent without any help etc).
In the end some people can give some negative feedback not based on proper analysis but feelings. It happened on official maps too.
I believe a map need to be played regularly to make the author able to truly address the issues. It was the case for the official maps. Unfortunately the custom map don't get the same life. It's ok right now or die (close to it). Kind of a impatient population IMO.
Apologies to SCC. I was lazy. But in the mean time i'm a bastard so it's ok i guess.
There is another issue. The sticker issue. A map gets a sticker fast. Even if it is improved later. Kodiak for example suffered from this while it was improved (removal of some OP spots etc..). While I do think it would gain from being a 5 TPs map (Kodiak5) the map suffers from a reputation that is outdated now.
That's a typical behavior: Someone find a good product he will tell 3 ppl. He finds a bad one, he will tell 15 ppl. These people are usually driven by feelings while authors need facts, and proper testing (did you try every possibilities ?).
Many people think a custom map is "grey boxed" or a lower quality product than official maps. Another wrong idea in NS2 case. It has an effect on how people perceive the map, and ultimately drives them to select other maps.
Put an official approval on a custom map (include in map cycle etc..). It may get a "balance sticker" non the less but it will be played more than what it is today.
It's like video on Youtube. Some authors buy "fake clicks" because more clicks on a counter means more real humans susceptible to click on the video and watch the content. It's sad but it's how it works. Gamers are no exception to this. Not a close example but you get the idea.
I'm pretty sure, thinking back to times i've been ambushed in there, that I've seen maybe 1-2 players use that spot... Ever! Not realising at the time where they came from, I had assumed from the sides behind the pipes, but those occaisions always stuck in my mind.
Time to get the word out on this spot ermagurd.
Also there's basically a whole maps worth of hiding spots in tram I never knew about before a couple of months ago
Yes, TAWsome and TAWific, combined with the TAW ns2 community all bring players for our TAW maptests.
At days its more comp players, at other days it more community players. Meph knows better. But yes... comp players do play them.
You can follow the mapper here, watch him stream and give feedback : hitbox.tv/MasterG
Adn you can also do that on the UWE ns2_mineral thread. Go go go !
make routes intuitive on the map.
get rid of glass.
label rooms by clock positions or compass points or something
then new maps might feel like a good game instead of just some new experience for the sake of new experiences
It's funny to notice that pubs usually accept custom maps way easier than veterans. Because for new players, everything is new, even Tram or Veil.
And veterans are smart enough to learn the general layout in like maybe two games, then identify what are the choke points of it really quickly.
I say : just play the damn custom maps. and give feedback, these are works in progress. If something feels wrong, if you don't manage to go through a room, an area smoothly, report it on the forums. If your feedback is coherent and well formulated you'll be listenned to.
Mineral was messy as fuck in the beginning, too many narrow shitty corridors in which you'd get lost. Look at the map now. It took one single playtest to find that issue. MasterG instantly started to work on these corridors and now they're gone, and you have something instead that flows much better.
The solutions are there, no need to think of new stuff. I think the main problem is the lack of feedback. You don't need to make boring maps to retain players. NS2 is a complex game, and that's what we all love about it. We don't want stupid maps that are boring to play. We want complex maps that are interesting. What you're saying about the learning curve isn't totally wrong but I think the solution you're advocating is not appropriate.
There's nothing that can't be fixed on a custom map. Hell even official maps were shitty at first. You need people playing, reporting stuff, to make it better. There's no secret to it. That's the solution. Just look how far Mineral was two months ago. It had potential, now it's close to be balanced, layout is more or less final, detailing has started. Just needs a few tweaks here and there to deal with any balance issues that come up in the future.
And it doesn't even take too much time to give feedback. So it's really up to the players, to the community to have better custom maps.
speak for yourself. some of us don't have photographic memory
it's not at all funny that people would rather play on maps they know in a game about executing tactics (map control / positioning / etc.)
i'm not saying custom maps are worse than standard maps. but being new is a disadvantage in and of itself
you lose nothing by changing room names to hint geography. i'm not sure how you equated that suggestion with turning every map layout into something simple
every time I respond late to a threat, run into glass, or lose a fade because I can't find the exit, it's a L2P issue because I haven't memorized the map
Finally, yes! You did well young padawan.
In all seriousness, how can you suggest that it is anything BUT a L2P issue?
In everything you do in life there's a learning curve. Learning a new map's layout isn't the hardest thing to do. When you first play any game you aren't gonna own everything in the first hour of playtime.
Then again, are you opening your map ingame ? As a comp player I do that all the time and when I play a new map, my minimap is almost always open. That's how you learn how to locate stuff arround the map.
I don't get what you're trying to say. I don't see that as an issue, I see that as your issue, not being able to learn a map (as you yourself told us earlier)
Some of the custom maps have dead-ends in them that are actually more accessible than the path you're supposed to take; which I imagine has lead a number of lifeforms to their death. Things like that are more of a learn 2 map issue than a L2P issue.
People usually want "new", but they don't really think about what a new map entails for gameplay. Like UncleCrunch mentions it takes multiple plays to even get a basic grasp of a map, and without that the game is unbalanced. It takes far more time to really know and understand a map. Not even to really master it, just to develop a mature meta.
That's the ideal point to be when playing the game, where you really understand the map you are playing on and can make it work for you. Anything less is damaging to the game experience as a whole. It takes a good long time to reach that point though, dozens of hours on that one map at minimum. Then you multiply that by the number of maps you regularly play on. Dozens of hours per map becomes hundreds, maybe thousands of hours to reach a decent comfort level even on 10 maps, and you probably wont be comfortable with any of them before you are comfortable with all of them because you play them in rotation.
So the more maps in rotation, the longer it takes to actually even start to play the game the way it should be played. I think it's a strong argument for fewer maps rather than more. I think a lot of people already grasp this instinctively. It's why they are so quick to dismiss a new map or a slightly inferior old one because it allows them to trim down the list of content they have to go through learning, reaching a more comfortable level of play faster.
Don't get me wrong, there's great value in designing a map to be intuitive. I'm just baffled at the language used there.
- no detail on walls = no places for skulks to hide
- skulks stand out pretty strong against matte light grey
- corridor/wall detail adds volume to the wall/ often makes corridors much smaller than they were in greybox phase.
All these things simply add noise to the feedback process (and add a bias towards marine wins in the greybox phase, possibly explaining why some maps are alien-favoured on completion when they needn't be, despite extensive in-dev balancing)
The way to combat this, I think, is to start basic detailing and texturing early?
A lot of players seem to greatly prefer the most rudimentary texturing over greybox textures, which might be something to consider for future mapping efforts to enable better quality feedback and better reception from players when the maps still in early development.
>ahem<
Just thought I'd put this out there. I've not seen anyone formally identify these points of contention regarding the map development process. If anyone has anything to add or contest, please do so
Let me show you something that will eventually change your mind.
Actually NS2 is :
Summit, Tram, Mineshaft, Refinery, Docking (5TP) & Veil, Eclipse (4TP). Biodome, Descent & Kodiak came after release. More than 1 year after release if my memory isn't failing.
So basically we had :
-3 x balanced map that did evolve (non the less) => leads to playing it over and over.
-2 x 5TP maps with a single huge issue (Refinery, Docking) => leads to rants on forums and game reputation
-1 x 5TP Mineshaft map that got many Ups and Down month.
-2 x maps ...Veil, Eclipse (4TP)... Need i say more ? => did not helped either (sorry guys).
-Biodome, Descent & Kodiak have fans and haters as well. => It led to more rant or bad reputation.
But most of the time they play Ok with a proper teamwork that enables the team to cope with these difficulties in public play. Public play is more "loose" than competitive play. You can make a come back if done well. Still, you can't satisfy everybody. One will hate Veil (I'm one of those) another one will hate Tram, etc.
That's the first point : Whatever you try; you can't have 100% success. No matter what. It can be the Art, the layout, or the number of possibilities etc... there's always something.
You're right to say it takes time to learn a map. But think about this: Imagine you're a player that plays only on the week end; Like Friday, Saturday and Sunday (a regular Joe). Let's say 4 hours on each of the 3 days. It makes already 12hrs and 48hrs in a month. Imagine now this player plays one official map per month; exploring everything can to master it one by one. 10 months later, he's a master at NS2 map knowledge. So 480hrs later. Imagine now he gets back to the 1st map. The feeling will clearly be different as he is a master and don't have to explore again.
It's like seeing a movie several times. Transformers/Marvel movies are cool with tons of explosions, bad ass stuff, name it; they got it. See one of them 10 times and you will see your critic evolve each time.
-The first 3 times you will be in a process of discovery. Most likely positive reviews.
-3 times later, You start to see the goofs and issues the movie has.
-3 times after that; you're bored.
-The 10th time you press fast forward (if not already done) to get to the parts you eventually really like. Not to mention it would be a different part from another viewer (see first point).
Point 2: Humans needs a little new in everything. Even if Veil (or any other) is changed a little, but still is the same on the general layout, people will at least try it once.
Bringing new maps is a way to renew the game interest. But not to many maps. Quality decrease if we don't take the time to do good stuff (Who said Doom the first ? : +2500 maps...).
It has good point and only good points IMO.
-We all start at day 0. But it's doesn't take 3 quantum physics degree to find his way around in a map. Launch the map as "local server" then explore. 15 minutes are enough. One player can't do that without any help. It's far more efficient than to connect a server with no clue of where to go. NS2 isn't a regular shooter... At all.
-It can be impressive for new comers. But in the mean time it's the insurance to be able to play the game longer than a lot of shooters on the market that only last 10 to 20hrs Solo and maybe 50hrs online. Plus they don't have to play all the maps at the same time. I know that people (especially young ones) wants to eat all the cookies at the same time. But one by one is quite ok actually.
-Fewer maps make people becomes robots. They got a program and execute it at some point (over played maps). When it comes to new maps the program can eventually be useless. That what NS2 is all about. Of course map knowledge is important when it is games with skilled people. But on public play it's ok, what is important is teamwork. That my friend will always make you be forgiven every time you do the right thing (phase through!!!!!
-People enjoy exploring. More maps = more exploration. More "new".
-It's better to have 50% unbalanced maps out of 20 than 50% unbalanced maps out of 10 and 100% bored ppl. Say to somebody you know a terrific game and it has 10 maps but 5 are a little cranky will not really be appealing (only 5). Say it's got 20 maps but 10 are a little cranky. What was heard is "10 maps". And compared to other shooters, it makes the difference. Of course quality standards have to be met for custom map. With NS2 we can reach it.
(Dammm another wall of text...)
It'd be nice if people played custom maps because they take ages to make, let alone balance.
On that note, we'd like to offer an even broader choice of maps, but the current shine mapvote limits that to about 19 total maps (10 are standards):
For example, we're displaying a total of 12 votable maps with each mapvote. This is tuned only with "ExcludeLastMaps": 6 and "MaxOptions": 16, as this is currently the only way to have it consistently display 12 maps in the vote...
Too many customs appearing in that vote would do them a disfavor by promoting them too much.
We'd like to have more maps in the active cycle (let's say 25), with an option for each map to set a display chance percentage. The less played customs become a gem if they only appear in the vote every once in a while!
I am unsure whether this is the correct scripting approach. It'd look something like this:
All standards set to 100%, really popular and finished customs 80%, general bunch of customs 50%, less played/updated customs 20%.
(Well, maybe even the standards can be tuned with that, based on popularity)
Forcing customs on players is the one thing that breaks their neck. Let players get tired of the same old maps and just offer alternatives to explore. They will automatically try them, learn and remember them bit by bit.
It'd be nice if you two could find a way to improve the mapvote to allow for this. 8->