Competitive Map Pack: CoMP

[Zaffa]

The problem of camping is not a problem with having a lot of structures on a map. It is a problem of poor map design.

You can add 1000 structures that can be used to camp but that doesn't mean that they have to be camped on. It's the teams that decide to camp them, and it's when they choose to camp the same advantageous spot over and over again that it gets very boring.

You can continue your moral crusade on the playing style of the warband community, but the simple fact is that in this game (or any other game out there for that matter), people are going to do what seems the most practical to them. Sure you can blame the players all you want, but the players aren't going to change anytime soon and the truth is that map makers who don't design their maps with this in mind are at the best lazy and at the worst incompetent.

Maps in warband, just like any other game on the market, need to be designed on the basis that players will be as self serving, exploit participating as they can get away with. The solution lies not in changing the community, but in making better maps.

 

[Lagstro]

I've always liked random plains and felt that it should be....well..random. Hell I even made an alt called "cliff texture" One problem with random plains, is that the current rules lean towards having players play the same map for four rounds then swap factions. On plains, the map is totally different once you swap factions. That makes random plains not fit into the current scheme.

Napoleonic Wars has a "Reset" button in the administration panel that allows you to reset everything on the map... faction scores, player scores... everything, and you get to keep the map an continue, and it does it instantly... it doesn't even reload the map.  Not sure why that hasn't been implemented into native yet.

Edit: OMG, Cradoc already beat me to it. 

 

[MrNomNom]

The only balanced map is a completely open map that allow both sides to live or die based on movement, not how much cover you have and how long you're willing to sit and camp and bore the other team to come out of camping themselves.

nah

Maybe it's time to play on flat maps with nothing but a few trees and rocks for a while until we get in the habit of actually fighting each other instead of waiting out every round to the end.

nah

Look, cav skill =/= team skill. If it's a completely flat map with no cover I see positives in going infantry or archer. Rhade, I understand that BkS detests camping because it's a bore, but it's a completely viable option and strategy with both downsides and upsides. If a team thinks waiting it out to the end is the best way for them to win it, I think they should have that option. Every team has their own strengths and their own style. They shouldn't be forced to conform to BkS's.

 

[Zaffa]

The problem of camping is not a problem with having a lot of structures on a map. It is a problem of poor map design.

That's what I always loved about Random Plains... you never knew what to expect.... you need a new strategies and you can use different objects different ways.  If it turns out to be a completely flat map... then by all means... have an all out cav battle... every team should be ready fr such a situation... and if the map ends up being hilly and rugged... then have an all out archer and inf battle.... every team should be ready for such a situation as well.

By your own words, random plains doesn't fix the camping/no tactics approach at all. At the very best, the map allows for tactics. However, generally speaking, the map will always go to flag, unless the map is stupidly balanced, one of the teams doesn't know what they are doing, or the map is incredibly flat. As the name implies, you have absolutely no idea what you are going to get, something that serves as an additional problem in itself. While it is nice forcing captains to have to come up with new strategies on the fly, the same thing could be done if people created maps with a higher versatility of play (Like reveran). As a quick side point, it is possible that you will replay with something along the lines of (But Random Plains has an infinite number of possibilities thanks to rerolls while maps have a hard set number). While this is partially true with respect to premade maps, the same can be said for Random Plains. Honestly speaking, there are only so many tactics that can be used on a map full of hills and trees. Though the location you send your players may change (left hill, right hill), the strategies remain the same.

Also, thanks to the maps being randomly generated, it is almost impossible for random Plains to end up balanced. Even with the whole swapping sides, the inability to play the same map seed twice throws whole balance aspect of competitive play is thrown out the window.

In other words, Random Plains has a whole lot of problems of its own and is no means an exception to the closed/open map complaints expressed above.

 

[Snoop]

While I love random plains, honestly, it should be removed from tourney play considering the current ruleset. It's the the only map that doesn't make sense. More's the pity.

 

[usnavy30]

Can we see some pics please? :3

 

[ClockWise]

While I love random plains, honestly, it should be removed from tourney play considering the current ruleset. It's the the only map that doesn't make sense. More's the pity.

When has sense ever come into the equation? 

I hate random plains, but I feel like it should be included somehow. I don't know why. I don't know anything anymore. 

 

[KissMyAxe]

Can we see some pics please? :3

Pics of the maps? I'll have screenies for all the maps in the github repository at the end of the week. You can browse the thread -- there are a few pics here and there.

 

[usnavy30]

Ok thank you and awesome work to compile this pack 

 

[Snoop]

While I love random plains, honestly, it should be removed from tourney play considering the current ruleset. It's the the only map that doesn't make sense. More's the pity.

When has sense ever come into the equation? 

I hate random plains, but I feel like it should be included somehow. I don't know why. I don't know anything anymore. 

If it is to be included. It should be "random." period. Otherwise let's not call it "random" plains. Perhaps reroll plains would be a better name?

 

[Catholic]

If it is to be included. It should be "random." period. Otherwise let's not call it "random" plains. Perhaps reroll plains would be a better name?

As cool and trendy as it may be to hate on rerolling Random Plains, the new ruleset already fixes that issue.

- Random Plains can be played, but the map cannot be re-rolled unless both team captains agree. Agreement must be explicit: the team captain (or an appointed representative) must type "reroll" or a similar phrase in the global chat to express his/her agreement with re-rolling the map. Re-rolling the map without the explicit agreement of both captains will result in a warning issued to the team hosting the match.

If that's not enough for you, then have a tournament where rerolls aren't allowed and enjoy playing on Random Cliffs. Perhaps on such a map Lord Rhade would reconsider his idea that Random Plains prohibit camping. 

 

[Lagstro]

Making a cool balanced map is near impossible... the only way to make a truly balanced map would be to make both teams spawn the same distance from the middle of the map... and add the same objects symmetrically from the middle of the map so that the same exact strategies can be used by both teams.. other than that... there is no way to make a balanced map.  In other words... a totally flat map with no objects on it would in fact be balanced. Once you add a single object closer to one spawn, the balance is gone. You may be able to create a decent enjoyable map, but it will never meet the requirements to be truly balanced. Balance is not the only important thing, in fact... if everything were 100% balanced, this would be a terrible game.  A great lance makes swadian cav more powerful than other cav, the vaegir archers' weapons and proficiencies make it superior to it's counterparts, things like those are what create an imbalance that makes the game interesting and fun. If balance were the only thing cared about... then we might as well use the same factions and same load outs for both teams. And **** why not just clone the players so that the skill level between them is exactly the same as well.

 

[Mok the International]

I always wondered why NAs argued so much on the forums over, "balance", and map amount. Just play the game. We don't need new maps, the game is so fun for so many people because it is the way it is.Innovation is good, a lot of things have changed since the latest battle tournaments, but lets not fix what is not broken.  Imo the only thing in NA which needs to be improved on is the skill. To be brutally honest.

 

[KissMyAxe]

Map balance is largely irrelevant with swaps.

 

[ClockWise]

I always wondered why NAs argued so much on the forums over, "balance", and map amount. Just play the game. We don't need new maps, the game is so fun for so many people because it is the way it is.Innovation is good, a lot of things have changed since the latest battle tournaments, but lets not fix what is not broken.  Imo the only thing in NA which needs to be improved on is the skill. To be brutally honest.

you don't help the situation much.

隐藏

O SNAP GUURRLLL

 

[Rhade]

I always wondered why NAs argued so much on the forums over, "balance", and map amount. Just play the game. We don't need new maps, the game is so fun for so many people because it is the way it is.Innovation is good, a lot of things have changed since the latest battle tournaments, but lets not fix what is not broken.  Imo the only thing in NA which needs to be improved on is the skill. To be brutally honest.

Out of the averages of all of the Nation's Cups, the USA has one of the best results overall out of every nation.

Yet our skill is lacking.

Right.

 

[BlackTide]

Map balance is largely irrelevant with swaps.

I disagree. There's very not much contest if you have a match where each side is guaranteed to win all of the rounds in the set because of the map's unbalance. That would simply lead to that map becoming irrelevant as both sides will have an assured full set win on each spawn, skill and strategy effectively being useless. Furthermore, two unbalanced maps would see the match end as a draw, greatly reducing the competitive element.

Map balance is relevant. 

 

[sotamursu123]

I think the best possible maps for competitive are:

1. Maps where the other team is forced to attack the defender and gain map control, but it's possible to counter any camping place defender might have to keep it balanced enough.

2. Maps which are pretty much completely balanced for both sides, but in which there's no camping places where you can't attack without a serious disadvantage.

3. All classes have a proper use. Examples of bad maps: Village (cav almost useless except for scouting), Open Plains (crossbows have no cover, 8 sarranid cavs beat anything you throw up against them lel)

Also, both maps should ofc meet these conditions:

隐藏

• Ensure a reasonable level of balance. Symmetry is not essential and infact may be rather boring. Just make sure there are enough options for both teams, to ensure competitive play. A map with imbalances like Port Assault or Village should be avoided.
• Modifications (including but not limited to alternate spawn points) to Native maps will be considered. However, try to make sure that the modifications you make give a very different feel to the map.
• See this guide for information about spawn points: http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,89831.0.html . Try to include as many of those as possible, to make the map viable on all game modes. Obviously, the essential ones are battle and master of the field entry points.
• Use only Native scene props. That should be clear but these maps must be Native compatible.
• No ugly **** or weird use of scene props. This is a little vague but I don't want to see props stretched out halfway across the map or a bunch of tables put together to make a hut (just random examples). The maps should have good aesthetics.
• No excess detail. This ties in with the last point but I don't want to see a market place with 100 apples on each stall or anything like that. Keep performance in mind and try to find a balance.
• Don't include credits or plugs. Don't spell out your name with scene props. This isn't appropriate.
• Try to make your map clearly open, mixed or closed. To fit in with the ENL rules, the distinction here is quite important. Don't have a castle interior next to a massive field.
• On that note, no castle interiors. I don't think they're suitable for competitive play.
• Think about what ought to be possible on your maps. Test for "glitches" yourself and place "barriers" appropriately. Although, by the same token, don't just put invisible walls in places that look like they could or should be accessible. Try to plan for these things and create your map to limit issues like this.
• Try to keep them interesting. The maps don't need to be works of art but as Alex said, preferably avoid making a bunch of "Ruins" clones.
• Avoid a clear, direct line of vision between spawns. The only map, in the ENL, that has this is "Ruins". It's not the end of the world but it reveals information about opposition classes and allows for missiles to be directly exchanged.
• Don't make them too big. This is a common mistake.
• Try not to include Flora as an essential feature. There are ways to remove it visually and it's best to avoid allowing cheaters, who would do such things, too much of an advantage. The same applies for piles of hay. Either avoid using them or place them lower, so that people can't "Hay Shark".
• Don't bother with an AI mesh. Infact, it's better not to include one.
• Don't use giant cliffs to signal the edge of your map. Be more inventive and create something that's believable. See Native maps for reference and how to handle the edge of maps.

 

[WilySly]

BIT didn't address the Random Plains issue at all. It basically just inserted an artificial rule that was so unpalatable, that no one wanted to play Random Plains anymore. To my knowledge, Random Plains was not played even once during BIT. Taking the most played map from previous tournaments and shelving it doesn't sound like a successful solution to me.

As far as map design-- I'll leave most of that to the forum theory craters. I just wanted to add that, to Zaffa's point, we're not going to change the community's camping mentality unless we can render that strategy ineffective. While I think it would be very difficult for a map maker to completely eliminate any opportunity for camping, it is possible to provide attackers with multiple angles for moving on these fortified positions, spreading the MOTF spawns out, etc. Reveran Village, Desert Town, and Verloren all do this very well. 

IMO, designing maps around aggressive, mobile play seems the ideal solution.

 

[T]

I always wondered why NAs argued so much on the forums over, "balance", and map amount. Just play the game. We don't need new maps, the game is so fun for so many people because it is the way it is.Innovation is good, a lot of things have changed since the latest battle tournaments, but lets not fix what is not broken.  Imo the only thing in NA which needs to be improved on is the skill. To be brutally honest.

So I had a motivational speech for everyone and then after about a page of writing was hit with a massive wave of futility so I just backspaced to the first line...


"To be brutally honest, NA was ALL about skill before the whole scene started to get EUrotized."

                                                      ~Tyrian the Barbarian of the Black Shields