Competitive Map Pack: CoMP

Mad Dawg said:

I'm for classification guidelines to avoid another "River Valley - Open" fiasco.  However, using what troop types teams may use on the map as part of them is off base. 

Click to expand...

Agree that pigeon-holing troop types into maps is a bad idea.

Even though taking infantry on plains isn't the best idea, it can be done, and I don't think we should stifle creative thinking.

I think classification guidelines may be a bit too subjective though. It's pretty easy to follow the rough guidelines so far and get the captains to sit in TS and hammer out which falls where pretty fairly imo.

I wouldn't call taking troop composition into consideration completely off base. If a map feels like a certain classification--in agreement with it's current classification or otherwise--you're going to regularly see compositions that work well for that type of map. It's not something to call the whole classification on, but it is a factor.

Mad Dawg said:

I'm for classification guidelines to avoid another "River Valley - Open" fiasco.  However, using what troop types teams may use on the map as part of them is off base.

Click to expand...

Just so that we have the full story, River Valley was never classified as Open in CoMP until Cal&Wil classified it as such in UNAC. Until then it was Open/Mixed, pending an update to make it a clearly mixed map.

I think it's a good initiative to try to develop clear guidelines on what constitutes each map class. However, it's not that simple. I've had lengthy discussions with Captain Lust about the meanings of life original ENL map classifications and the best we could come up with was a set of "rules of thumb" and a firm belief that it's the ultimate responsibility of the tournament organizers to classify maps used there.

So yeah, if you guys come together as a community (like you did for UNAC) and come up with clear guidelines for each map classification, I feel that would of great help to the mappers (I know it would have been helpful for me as the pack maintainer). If not -- no biggie. It's not like the mappers have been producing hard-to-classify maps left-and-right.

Also, judging maps by preferred troop composition is good and all -- but I remember TMW being successful on Nord Town with a ranged-cav split (no inf at all) and Balion having predominantly ground troops on Open Plains. Judging by that, one would classify Open Plain as closed or mixed and Nord Town as open or mixed.  So, of course, it could be one of the guidelines -- but not the only one.

Here are top-down views of Sally Out and Dreiecksdorf, which were silently added to the pack a few days ago.

Ok, we have to play dreiksdorf and sally out on sunday, btw kherven looks like we can do 8 or 9pm after all.

Dreiksdorf looks great, I want to test it! 

Edit: Tested it out in a pickup, I loved it. Please remove the floating berries on the table in the center of the map, they cause about 40 FPS drops for me. If its not the berries then its something on that same table

All these maps are labeled custom map 1,2,3 ect on the admin panel. Can we get the map names in there so I don't have to guess? Or, even post a map key.

Played Liberty and Dreicksdorf lastnight in a random pickup party. Both maps played okay but Dreicksdorf was definately more liked than Liberty. The biggest issue people had with Liberty is they did not like the flag placement (I hope some others when chime in on this so I don't have to explain everything) There was also a consensus that it played very much like a closed map rather than mixed.  due to cav playing a limited roll in a majority of the village.

Dreicksdorf on the other hand was argued both ways. Some said it was closed some said it was mixed. But everyone agreed cav played a major role in the map and for that reason I think with some minor edits it would make a good mixed map. With that said, some people were noticing FPS issues due to the floating grapes on a table. So those should probably be removed.

Overall it was a fun scrim, and we'll still be having the public sf vs tmw comp testing this sunday.

I know you need more feedback than that Romans, but im hoping this gets the ball rolling for others (John, Volpel, Zaffa, etc) to explain what they did/did not like about Liberty.

Liberty:
The biggest problem with Liberty for me was it didn't really feel like it was one continuous map. It felt like a bunch of sections of things. It didn't make sense to me as an actual physical place. I know we're not looking for aesthetics or anything, but having it feel like a real place certainly helps.
In terms of how it played, the cav thing was kinda weird. I really hate that one entrance to the sort of main pub place where cav can go up half of it but can't go up the other half. It just seems stupid. The entrance is pretty small, if you wanted to stop 2 cav going through there with 1 spear you could do it. There's no need to divide it. And I personally just often got stuck on it. Maybe its cause I'm bad, idk. Also the clotheline things on top of that area seriously restrict view for cav.
The second courtyard, where you can go on top of the many buildings, was also very campy. If you had a number of archers it was almost impossible to break.
I feel like maybe spreading out the high ground so its not all concentrated in one place, and just creating a bigger sense of one space, rather than 3, would help fluidity. I don't know how to describe it :/

Dreicksdorf:
I really liked Dreicksdorf. The spawns were weird in that they weren't in super obvious places to me, but I don't know if thats a bad thing. I think some of the main alleys could be a little more restricted, but it really felt like a mixed map from a cavalry's perspective.

Snoop said:

All these maps are labeled custom map 1,2,3 ect on the admin panel. Can we get the map names in there so I don't have to guess? Or, even post a map key.

Click to expand...

You can see CoMP map names in the admin panel if you install the CoMP module (instead of the Native one) on your computer. Note that it would only be valid for CoMP_testing and any other server that uses the CoMP development module.

Also, I used to maintain key that allowed to tell the ENL Custom Map number for a CoMP map on the server in the CoMP module readme, but it's outdated now. Not sure if it even makes sense to update that, because, by my last count, there were 24 (or 20, excluding the waiting/needs work category) maps in CoMP, which is more than the 20 custom map slots in the ENL module. Which means, right now you can't select some of the maps on CoMP_testing without having the CoMP module on your computer. Naturally, this situation would only become worse as CoMP grows.

I'll try to get around posting an updated key today or tomorrow. It might be worth asking for the next port of ENL to include more custom map slots (assuming we get another update). Also, it's mentioned in the OP, but I wanted to stress that the CoMP module is a 1.158 ENL module with just the maps and 2-minute masters added, so aside from CoMP maps, it should be compatible with any Native server, especially those running ENL.

MadocComadrin said:

It might be worth asking for the next port of ENL to include more custom map slots (assuming we get another update).

Click to expand...

If you (or someone else) could figure out how to combine a flexible map pack update/development process with medium term (every 3-6 month) stable releases, then we could just use CoMP as the replacement for the ENL module (at least, in the NA community). I wanted to do that for a long time, but never figured out how to do that efficiently.

Reminder to everyone that we'll be having our public SF vs TMW CoMP testing match tonight at 7:30 Eastern!

Public as in we can come play or public as in we can watch?

Both!

Aura (Zaffa) said:

Kherven said:

Reminder to everyone that we'll be having our public SF vs TMW CoMP testing match tonight at 7:30 Eastern!

Click to expand...

Considering that a SpeciFic team dropped the ball on this, any chance of the match being rescheduled for future testing? The community has expressed a need for maps, and while map makers can toll away at creating new ones, the community really needs to get behind the project so the maps can be properly tested and added to future map pools.

Click to expand...

Yes I will talk to kherven about rescheduling, I think alot of our guys were just tired, too much warband this weekend

Do i have permission to use some of CoMP maps(Farm,Shariz Village and Dreicksdorf) in WWC?
Of course credits would be given to players who created them and this map pack as whole.

Since i also contributed few maps to CoMP i hope it won't be a problem
Also it could be good testing ground for some maps and as i am planning of introducing WWC to NA scene some maps might need testing.

Anyhow good bump to this thread.

Erminas said:

Do i have permission to use some of ComP maps(Farm,Shariz Village and Dreicksdorf)

Click to expand...

You're fine for The Farm. Just make sure you have the current version. It went up just a day or so ago. PM me an e-mail if there is any doubt and I can send it over.

Balion-Romans said:

Erminas said:

Do i have permission to use some of ComP maps(Farm,Shariz Village and Dreicksdorf)

Click to expand...

You're fine for The Farm. Just make sure you have the current version. It went up just a day or so ago. PM me an e-mail if there is any doubt and I can send it over.

Click to expand...

Thanks Romans,sending pm with my email shortly.

Erminas said:

Do i have permission to use some of CoMP maps(Farm,Shariz Village and Dreicksdorf) in WWC?
Of course credits would be given to players who created them and this map pack as whole.

Click to expand...

Ahem, you've agreed to those terms when you submitted your maps -- you should know  Anyway, I'm reproducing the relevant bits below. The short answer is, yes you can use the maps on the terms that you've described.