Siege Ayzar Stronghold

Currently viewing this thread:

Dejan

Community Manager
WBNWVCM&B
siegemap09.png

Please leave all map-related feedback for Ayzar Stronghold in this thread.
image.png
 
Last edited:

Sh1mbo

Veteran
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
i really love this map, but imo the siege ram is too far away from the gatehouse, you can literally break the gate near the A flag wich is easy to break and enter to the castle, before the siege ram can even reach the gatehouse.
AB17E23B740C2983EA8E616F36CA01572896352C

E68DE45C348D9DD1D28012274D3253AE8E363E65
 
Last edited:

Kripaz

Master Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Map looks really good! Might be too big for 120 players but we will see how it works (200 players in the future maybe?).
There's couple of improvements I'd like to point out:

AZQHBS8.png


There's a big chance that area marked as 1 will become completely useless, if defenders manage to destroy the only siege tower that can access the area. I would place ladders next to the siege tower so the area could still be accessible even if defenders destroy the tower.

Area marked as 2 is a really bad bottleneck when attackers have captured A, B, C and D flags. This will get even worse if defenders destroy the siege tower leading to area marked as 1. I'm not sure how this plays out when there's a full server, but this is the second reason why I think there should be ladders leading to area marked as 1 to alleviate the bottleneck.

Also these stairs are really wonky :smile:
NDC3rFg.png


Edit.
Also maybe do something to this :wink::
 
Last edited:

NIN3

Level Design, Combat Design
Developer
NW
Hey thank you for your feedback. Sorry that I didnt get to it before.

i really love this map, but imo the siege ram is too far away from the gatehouse, you can literally break the gate near the A flag wich is easy to break and enter to the castle, before the siege ram can even reach the gatehouse.
For me the battering ram is more of a safe brt if you cant manage to break through the first gate cause of defenders blocking it. But I see what you mean. I increased the speed of it now. Thanks!



I think you are making valid points about area 1. my fear was that it would be to easy too flank the enemy if attackers have a "constant" way of getting up to it. I think a defendable ladder might help, Ill try it out.

About area 2, I think it only looks like a bad bottlekneck on paper. The defender spawns are very far back at this point of the game (behind the 2nd gatehouse), so attackers should be able to roll over them. I also made it so attackers can get on both walls on the sides. So there is actually 3 paths to take there!

Also maybe do something to this :wink::
Thanks. There is a barrier there but I guess I made it AI only, oops! Thanks for pointing it out. This fix wont make it until the next beta though. So I guess not only for this we will see how it plays out on the public servers.
 

TheDoge

Regular
Is there a way for the defenders to get from the 1. area (Kripaz's map) to the inner castle to defend last flags? Yesterday I got spawned there and the only way to get to the inner castle was through the gate in the middle of the castle, but as it was closed and unable to open from"outside", I was forced to jump down to the sandy part and go all the way around. Might be just a wrong spawn issue, as the map clearly shows the spawn area being on the higher ground with an option to descend to the lower area if needed.
JA2MIuE.png
 
Last edited:

NIN3

Level Design, Combat Design
Developer
NW
Is there a way for the defenders to get from the 1. area (Kripaz's map) to the inner castle to defend last flags? Yesterday I got spawned there and the only way to get to the inner castle was through the gate in the middle of the castle, but as it was closed and unable to open from"outside", I was forced to jump down to the sandy part and go all the way around. Might be just a wrong spawn issue, as the map clearly shows the spawn area being on the higher ground with an option to descend to the lower area if needed.
JA2MIuE.png
There is some spawns there for very early on in the game. Maybe its best to remove defnders spawns from that building entirely to give more freedom, I'll look into it.
Also with the next patch, I moved many of these spawns over now to the other side of the castle with the next update.
 

Mushbeast

Knight
This map is sick. I love the layout and different paths to choose, and the bridge at the start especially.

I haven't played it enough to find any glitches or imbalances, but my first impression of it so far was great.
 

Hans 77

Knight
WBWF&SVC
This map has a great aesthetic, interesting visuals and layout.

*I want to give a very special kudos to the devs for making the G flag harder to access for cavalry. In certain maps, such as Castle of Fen Altai, it's almost ubiquitous for the fight at G flag to be a cavalry spam fest. By making the final area of the castle narrower and with multiple levels of elevation, it's much more difficult for cav to dominate the final fight, making the conclusion a fierce infantry struggle (as it should be). Excellent work.*

Also, the quicksand at B flag -while it can be annoying, is admittedly a pretty cool feature, and really I like it.

As far as spawns go, they seem solid, but the defenders' spawns may be slightly imbalanced, but some more time is needed to play it out and analyze.

Cool map nonetheless.
 

NIN3

Level Design, Combat Design
Developer
NW
Hey! Just like I did for my skirmish maps (Xauna, Echerion), I wanted to give you a sneak peak on upcoming changes (hopefully next beta) for this map. Excuse the editor screenshots.

My main focus was to halt fast pushes of attacker cavalry, by adding more chokepoints on the way, and do some more work on the spawning positions for both teams, reducing walk time for attackers, and spawning defenders more sensibly spread between the defence points. Also a lot of new details and terrain work has been done.

1 New Chokepoints
Mayn new chokepoints designed as sort of “wave breakers” for attacking waves of inf and cav. They also serve as fallback points for defenders. Attackers will be spawning slightly more aggressive with the new changes, so this together with the defender spawn changes is there to counter it.

j21kD.png

ir7nC.png

The stairs help to keep cav at bay. Also they give a clear distinction between the elevation levels

The new chokepoint close to G, hopefully makes attackers use the other side gate or the wall approach more. IThe powerful ballista positions overlooking it, can then also be used by attackers if they hold “G flag”.

pDFKm.png

You can see (the red cause of the editor) ballista behind the gate, overlooking the gateway.

2 Spawn Position changes
I moved the attacker spawn earlier in the game closer to A flag. They seemed to have problems taking the flag early, so that should help a bit. Defenders will still be able to use the Aragon/Gimli jumps to get on and contest the bridge though.

Especially after taking 2-3 flags, attacker spawns have been moved forward sensibly as well. In turn Im adjusted the defender spawns to be able to halt them for longer in the big courtyard at F+E flags. I think this area is cool to fight in for both teams so I hope there will be more going on there now.

I also spread the defender spawns more equally between the left and right side of the castle and removed most of them from the house near the siege tower (instead they spawn on top of it and can choose to drop down or rather defend the courtyard (flags: f,e,g)

3 Other Gameplay changes
I tried to make the ram more relevant by moving it ever so slightly closer and adjusting the gate HP (also of the bridge gate).

Also I adjusted a lot of physics so people should get stuck less. Thanks for the reports!

4 Details
Many new details, especially around the new chokepoints. Also I tried to give slight elevation changes in the more flat area around paths. Differentiating them, without changing gameplay.

GYHob.png

One of the more detailed spots now. The roof next to the palm tree now has more cover and details, so it should feel less empty and be a bit more usefull now. Also there is a new ladder leading up to it, to pressure camping archers.
 
Last edited:

dijiTurk

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WBNWVCM&BWF&S
Hey! Just like I did for my skirmish maps (Xauna, Echerion), I wanted to give you a sneak peak on upcoming changes (hopefully next beta) for this map. Excuse the editor screenshots.

My main focus was to halt fast pushes of attacker cavalry, by adding more chokepoints on the way, and do some more work on the spawning positions for both teams, reducing walk time for attackers, and spawning defenders more sensibly spread between the defence points. Also a lot of new details and terrain work has been done.

1 New Chokepoints
Mayn new chokepoints designed as sort of “wave breakers” for attacking waves of inf and cav. They also serve as fallback points for defenders. Attackers will be spawning slightly more aggressive with the new changes, so this together with the defender spawn changes is there to counter it.

j21kD.png

ir7nC.png

The stairs help to keep cav at bay. Also they give a clear distinction between the elevation levels

The new chokepoint close to G, hopefully makes attackers use the other side gate or the wall approach more. IThe powerful ballista positions overlooking it, can then also be used by attackers if they hold “G flag”.

pDFKm.png

You can see (the red cause of the editor) ballista behind the gate, overlooking the gateway.

2 Spawn Position changes
I moved the attacker spawn earlier in the game closer to A flag. They seemed to have problems taking the flag early, so that should help a bit. Defenders will still be able to use the Aragon/Gimli jumps to get on and contest the bridge though.

Especially after taking 2-3 flags, attacker spawns have been moved forward sensibly as well. In turn Im adjusted the defender spawns to be able to halt them for longer in the big courtyard at F+E flags. I think this area is cool to fight in for both teams so I hope there will be more going on there now.

I also spread the defender spawns more equally between the left and right side of the castle and removed most of them from the house near the siege tower (instead they spawn on top of it and can choose to drop down or rather defend the courtyard (flags: f,e,g)

3 Other Gameplay changes
I tried to make the ram more relevant by moving it ever so slightly closer and adjusting the gate HP (also of the bridge gate).

Also I adjusted a lot of physics so people should get stuck less. Thanks for the reports!

4 Details
Many new details, especially around the new chokepoints. Also I tried to give slight elevation changes in the more flat area around paths. Differentiating them, without changing gameplay.

GYHob.png

One of the more detailed spots now. The roof next to the palm tree now has more cover and details, so it should feel less empty and be a bit more usefull now. Also there is a new ladder leading up to it, to pressure camping archers.

Hey 9,
Could you please have a look at these(I think these things can improve the map):


Respond number: 14

&

Respond numer: 16

And more balanced height design for the castle's stages:
LwPQ2.jpg


Things in respond are not in a good condition, they're just for imagination.
 
Last edited:

flashn00b

Regular
So how exactly are players supposed to survive the chokepoints that are Echo and Foxtrot? Seems to me that in more situations than not, those areas are just an invitation to eat volleys of arrows, crossbows and throwing weapons with pretty much no chance of survival or retaliation.

There needs to be an opening for the defending team to be flankable should they choose to defend those positions.
 

NIN3

Level Design, Combat Design
Developer
NW
So how exactly are players supposed to survive the chokepoints that are Echo and Foxtrot? Seems to me that in more situations than not, those areas are just an invitation to eat volleys of arrows, crossbows and throwing weapons with pretty much no chance of survival or retaliation.

There needs to be an opening for the defending team to be flankable should they choose to defend those positions.
Hey!

So there are two routes over the wall to flank these positions. I also added a new set of stairs on the left path (next to the house), from where you can jump on the elevated retaining walls near F. I hope the stairs will make players use that path more often as it is really practical. I haven't played on the siege servers this week at all, so dont know about the current meta. Is it really that hard to get past the chokepoint before F? It wasn't like that the week before.

zVqwO.jpg
Hey 9,
Could you please have a look at these(I think these things can improve the map):


Respond number: 14

&

Respond numer: 16

And more balanced height design for the castle's stages:


Things in respond are not in a good condition, they're just for imagination.

I dont speak turkish sorry (2nd link). But let me tell you adding so many ladders around the castle would not be a good idea. It would be impossible to properly defend the flags then as 1-2 attackers would climb up on the other side of the map and just capture F. It also breaks our spawning system design if we do that.

I also watched that video as I am equally excited about chiv 2. They have a cool approach to their Siege Design, but they do somethings quite different from us since the gamemode also works a bit differently. The approaches they have in there are a lot more restrictive at is seems. Definitely cleaner by design because of it, but it doesn't fit our approach to siege, which is a lot more dynamic and more player than objective driven.

About elevation inside the scenes. I want to do that more with newer scenes, it works pretty well in the battania siege scene. It does come with a lot of gameplay implication though, especially for defenders. I think in practice this elevation is already in effect in this scene, if you think about the 3 layers of the left side of the map where the siege tower docks, or the approach to G.
 

dijiTurk

Sergeant Knight at Arms
WBNWVCM&BWF&S
I dont speak turkish sorry (2nd link). But let me tell you adding so many ladders around the castle would not be a good idea. It would be impossible to properly defend the flags then as 1-2 attackers would climb up on the other side of the map and just capture F. It also breaks our spawning system design if we do that.

I also watched that video as I am equally excited about chiv 2. They have a cool approach to their Siege Design, but they do somethings quite different from us since the gamemode also works a bit differently. The approaches they have in there are a lot more restrictive at is seems. Definitely cleaner by design because of it, but it doesn't fit our approach to siege, which is a lot more dynamic and more player than objective driven.

About elevation inside the scenes. I want to do that more with newer scenes, it works pretty well in the battania siege scene. It does come with a lot of gameplay implication though, especially for defenders. I think in practice this elevation is already in effect in this scene, if you think about the 3 layers of the left side of the map where the siege tower docks, or the approach to G.



You are right as what is it right now, and if there is no further changes, its better to stay like this. However, when i look these needs:

"
>Siege matches should be more fun at actions for both teams.(attackers must feel the breakthrough. and, defenders should feel better when they defend their space )

>Castle should be vulnerable from every possible direction( you can make this for only outermost fortifications/walls )

>Flag capture system should be more efficent (longer capture time + the existence of an order in capturing the flag + the freedom to capture flags that are out of order, but much more difficult because it's out of order at that moment )

>Spawn system should be open to more eventuality(like if defenders defend the castle well, enemy should turn back to first spawn location back & this should be repeat itself)

>The chance to defend many regions from some dominant points should be offered

>There must be different stages / regions within the castle, and the last ones must be very difficult to capture(last stages should have dominant towers/more siege weapons/chokepoints-ways etc ).

>Geographical structure, castle shape and cultural diversity should be seen in map pool ( btw, map terrains shouldnt be flat at everytime. some should be totally inclined, some mixed etc. G.Structre+CastleShape+Culture should reveal many different maps. So, i can see some elevation touches, but deffinetly not enough or mixed as too characteristic. )

>An enriching special mastery system for players that in action & need more to achive their goal.

(etc..)

I strongly think that TW can make sieges better.


I think this map, Ayzar Stronghold, also can be better. However, as i give some examples above, there're many things to do for it, not just scene editing.. I hope these kind of things can be seen in future..

And, as final i have some pictures for "G.Structre+CastleShape+(6)Culture" thing:

AWI-8.png

Jb4Pc.jpg


u9c4g.jpg

dm_aI.jpg

C7J12.jpg

iV36F.jpg
 
Map is so huge that its barely fun to play, such map should have sense if there was 100vs100 siege at least, but it feels like a ghost town in typical 50vs50 situation
With so little resistance in cruicial points because of hard logistics after spawn, typical chokepoint fights are consisting of 5-10 people from both sides, and side with better skills/valuable equipment just rushes through enemy without stop until last 3 points like a knife through butter
 

NIN3

Level Design, Combat Design
Developer
NW
Map is so huge that its barely fun to play, such map should have sense if there was 100vs100 siege at least, but it feels like a ghost town in typical 50vs50 situation
With so little resistance in cruicial points because of hard logistics after spawn, typical chokepoint fights are consisting of 5-10 people from both sides, and side with better skills/valuable equipment just rushes through enemy without stop until last 3 points like a knife through butter

I think what makes it seem big is that the spawns right now are very far apart, forcing people to run a lot. I am changing that with the other stuff I teased above hoping to make the experience tighter.
 

Mabons

Sergeant Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
I really hope the cavalry price increase for siege and tdm makes them actually a rarity because between this and the new map you haven't made it any better for the non-cavalry players. Attackers have no defence against cavalry rushing out and it's extremely obvious when you start as defender on either map and watch as 10 or so cavalry rush out the gate to spawn kill.
 

NIN3

Level Design, Combat Design
Developer
NW
I really hope the cavalry price increase for siege and tdm makes them actually a rarity because between this and the new map you haven't made it any better for the non-cavalry players. Attackers have no defence against cavalry rushing out and it's extremely obvious when you start as defender on either map and watch as 10 or so cavalry rush out the gate to spawn kill.
I mean cav charging out is gonna be a problem on any siege map. Unless you trap them inside or make the attacker approaches super narrow, both I think arent great solutions.

I do think as the round goes on, cav should get a lot less viable. With putting flags up on towers and adding new chokepoints I am hoping too help that. Also moving the spawns closer so there is less running for inf. You can actually see how few kills cav gets at the later stages of the rounds on this map. But people still choose them cause they dont want to walk that far.

Still price increases will definetly help yes.
 

Mushbeast

Knight
I mean cav charging out is gonna be a problem on any siege map. Unless you trap them inside or make the attacker approaches super narrow, both I think arent great solutions.

I do think as the round goes on, cav should get a lot less viable. With putting flags up on towers and adding new chokepoints I am hoping too help that. Also moving the spawns closer so there is less running for inf. You can actually see how few kills cav gets at the later stages of the rounds on this map. But people still choose them cause they dont want to walk that far.

Still price increases will definetly help yes.
You should place spikes around the Siege maps that damage cav that run into them. They could be destroyed by the attackers to open up areas for cavalry charges, and would be of more value than the current barricades.

One person in another thread even suggested a sapper class that can place them around, which would be cool, but I can understand if it's too much work or doesn't fit.
 
Top Bottom