[APPROVAL REQUEST] lrv-green_versus_blue

[APPROVAL REQUEST] lrv-green_versus_blue

Postby lrv » 7 August 2020, 16:12

[1]
- To the best of my knowledge, the following map fits all requirements to be approved: YES
- The following map contains no unfair hidden features: YES
- The following map contains nothing against the PB2 Code of Conduct: YES
- I have read and understand fully the Required Reading for posting a Map Approval Request: YES
- I have read and understand fully the Map Approval Rules: YES

[2]
- Map Name: Green vs. Blue
- Map ID: lrv-green_versus_blue
- Link to Map Page: https://www.plazmaburst2.com/?s=9&a=&m= ... &id=992359
- Link to Map Demo: https://www.plazmaburst2.com/?s=2&map=l ... ersus_blue

[3]
- Give a brief description of the map: Two teams fight each other in a small base with CS-Pro Pistols, CS-RC Rifles and light railguns.
- Why you think the map deserves to be approved: It seems balanced and I haven't yet seen any Green vs. Blue map.
- Any other comments: -
User avatar
lrv
Falkok [250]
 
Posts: 272
Joined: 2 July 2017, 14:39

Re: [APPROVAL REQUEST] lrv-green_versus_blue

Postby Stryde » 10 August 2020, 00:20

- Map preview should be preview of whole map, not just a small portion of map. This must be updated.
- Health is 170 HP instead of 150 HP (should be 150 considering weapons).
- Your map also has a large presence of lag when hovering over other players, so I'm unsure what triggermechanisms you are using to change skins, but I am only super laggy when I am in left team spawn.

https://prnt.sc/twec1y https://prnt.sc/twec85
- Some parts of your map are way too open while other parts severely hinder player movement.
- Lastly, just because green vs blue team hasn't been done before, doesn't make this map unique, original or balanced. In fact, this map can't be balanced, as it isn't symmetrical.

Based off of these last two points, it doesn't seem that this map has been playtested or that this map should be considered for approval.

Stryde
Usurpation Destroyer [350]
 
Posts: 361
Joined: 9 November 2015, 02:17

Re: [APPROVAL REQUEST] lrv-green_versus_blue

Postby lrv » 10 August 2020, 10:26

Stryde wrote:- Health is 170 HP instead of 150 HP (should be 150 considering weapons).

This worked very well during playtesting. More HP demands better tactics and 150 HP would lead to a 1-shot-kill scenario, which is basicly just a sniper map and wasn't the goal here.[/quote]
Stryde wrote:-
- Your map also has a large presence of lag when hovering over other players, so I'm unsure what triggermechanisms you are using to change skins, but I am only super laggy when I am in left team spawn.

This is probably due to a bad method of synchronisation with the color pattern triggers. It will be fixed.
Stryde wrote:https://prnt.sc/twec1y https://prnt.sc/twec85
- Some parts of your map are way too open while other parts severely hinder player movement.

This was done on purpose to balance out one team having more players than the other team, as the lower path provides more cover but is also slower and cramped, so for a single player it's easier to move through than for one.
The choice between a fast badly-covered path and a slow safe path provides tactical diversity.

In DM and TDM this indeed presents a problem, those modes will be disabled in the next update though.

EDIT:
Map has been symetrised.
Proper Preview Added.
User avatar
lrv
Falkok [250]
 
Posts: 272
Joined: 2 July 2017, 14:39

Re: [APPROVAL REQUEST] lrv-green_versus_blue

Postby yizhe » 10 August 2020, 15:21

1. The lower part of the map feels like a deathtrap for movements are too bounded by walls.

2. is the pistol really needed considering you already have rifles? If your answer is going to be movement, then your walls at the lower area would have killed its purpose

3. the top of the L shaped walls cant be reached by players with guns. Its part of the requirements for all places to be accessible for players holding guns/map should be newbie friendly as some newbies wouldnt know sword jump.

4. preview is misaligned.

5.reduce gravitators to -0.45.

6. single bars of walls dont look that appealing to the eye, no doubt it is simple. I would recommend you improve the design of the walls

7. If you didnt explain the reason for the lower part of the arena, i would have thought that those walls were merely randomly placed. same goes for other players that would play your map without reading the forums/description and demerit you for that. i recommend that the lower part of the arena be improved while maintaining cover but not to the point whereby players need to crouch too much as covers naturally slows players movement in a fast paced arena.

8. remove the wall that shields the teams at their respective bases. in coop, whole team can just camp there and spam 2 to cover all entries.
Meep!
User avatar
yizhe
Android T-01187 [200]
 
Posts: 224
Joined: 5 February 2014, 09:26
Location: Advance level editor

Re: [APPROVAL REQUEST] lrv-green_versus_blue

Postby Stryde » 10 August 2020, 16:28

lrv wrote:This was done on purpose to balance out one team having more players than the other team, as the lower path provides more cover but is also slower and cramped, so for a single player it's easier to move through than for one.
The choice between a fast badly-covered path and a slow safe path provides tactical diversity.

In DM and TDM this indeed presents a problem, those modes will be disabled in the next update though.

EDIT:
Map has been symetrised.
Proper Preview Added.

If this is the only change you have made between a playtest, this is not a good start. All of the previous issues still exist, and in addition to this, a map must be available for all gamemodes. You cannot "disable" or "block" a map from being played in DM or TDM.
Furthermore, based on feedback from other map approval contributors, this map is not fit for competitive gameplay for approval at a vote of 5 to 0.
Spoiler: Show More

Stryde
Usurpation Destroyer [350]
 
Posts: 361
Joined: 9 November 2015, 02:17

Re: [APPROVAL REQUEST] lrv-green_versus_blue

Postby lrv » 10 August 2020, 16:56

Stryde wrote:
lrv wrote:This was done on purpose to balance out one team having more players than the other team, as the lower path provides more cover but is also slower and cramped, so for a single player it's easier to move through than for one.
The choice between a fast badly-covered path and a slow safe path provides tactical diversity.

In DM and TDM this indeed presents a problem, those modes will be disabled in the next update though.

EDIT:
Map has been symetrised.
Proper Preview Added.

If this is the only change you have made between a playtest, this is not a good start. All of the previous issues still exist, and in addition to this, a map must be available for all gamemodes. You cannot "disable" or "block" a map from being played in DM or TDM.
Furthermore, based on feedback from other map approval contributors, this map is not fit for competitive gameplay for approval at a vote of 5 to 0.
Spoiler: Show More


I wasn't done with updating. My time only permitted me for those two quick changes when reading the post.
I will make it more clear when an update is finished next time...
DM and TDM can not be disabled I know, however there are ways to prevent matches on that mode from yielding any kills or deaths.
User avatar
lrv
Falkok [250]
 
Posts: 272
Joined: 2 July 2017, 14:39

Re: [APPROVAL REQUEST] lrv-green_versus_blue

Postby Stryde » 10 August 2020, 17:03

lrv wrote:I wasn't done with updating. My time only permitted me for those two changes.
DM and TDM can not be disabled I know, however there are ways to prevent matches on that mode from yielding any kills or deaths.

1. Maps MUST be available for all three gamemodes, DM, TDM and COOP. You cannot manipulate this in any manner to automatically kick players from a specific gamemode being hosted or a way to prevent kills or deaths in a specific gamemode hosted.
2. This approval system is meant to submit maps that are ready or near ready for approval, not to submit maps that are far from expectations or quality gameplay for ranked/unranked mode. In addition, there are expectations on the mapmaker to playtest their map and to gather support from the community for it to be approved before submitting maps for approval.

Stryde
Usurpation Destroyer [350]
 
Posts: 361
Joined: 9 November 2015, 02:17


Return to Approval Request Archive

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users