+- One Man Left Studios Community Forums (http://www.onemanleft.com/forums)
+-- Forum: General (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Outwitters (/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+--- Thread: Which Maps to Retire? (/showthread.php?tid=1637)
RE: Which Maps to Retire? - TheGoldenGriffin - 02-05-2013 08:06 AM
Lets add aggressive maps that have more spawn and wit spaces, units are 1 wit cheaper except for specials, and base hp of 8. Maybe even strategic maps with no wit spaces and no specials allowed.
RE: Which Maps to Retire? - Coolio - 02-05-2013 08:18 AM
(02-05-2013 08:06 AM)TheGoldenGriffin Wrote: Lets add aggressive maps that have more spawn and wit spaces, units are 1 wit cheaper except for specials, and base hp of 8. Maybe even strategic maps with no wit spaces and no specials allowed.
I feel like these are different game modes. I want different game modes implemented because i feel like they would be so much fun even though i understand they could be hard to make.
Search and Destroy - no spawning new units, win by killing all of your opponents units or base
Capture the Flag - instead of bases, both players have a flag. Win by taking your opponents flag back to your flag
Back to the Basics (GoldenGriffin's idea) - no wit spaces or specials, win by normal conditions
Hardpoint - capture a neutral area in the middle and hold it for points, get x amount of points to win
RE: Which Maps to Retire? - wonderpug - 02-05-2013 08:23 AM
I share the same grievances about the 4 maps that are leading the polls, but I voted "Don't remove any maps!" because I'd rather see them get modified and rebalanced than to see them removed entirely.
RE: Which Maps to Retire? - laYahooz - 02-05-2013 08:33 AM
I voted to remove all of them except the veggie ones. I think just a completely new lineup would be cool.
Also what about 2v2 maps?
RE: Which Maps to Retire? - RandyDogz - 02-05-2013 09:15 AM
I love the diversity in outwitters and wouldn't want to see any go (although if we loose any I'm glad to see peekaboo is in the lead cause that's the one map I just can't seem to get comfortable with lol).
As a more casual player, I don't like to see maps pigeonholed with set strong strategies - I like a more free for all approach and the mystery of wondering how each game will develop. Just my 2 cents.
RE: Which Maps to Retire? - Alvendor - 02-05-2013 09:40 AM
(02-05-2013 04:51 AM)aaronINdayton Wrote: I voted for SFI, even though I love playing it as P1 or P2 as adorables, I don't think Veggies have a chance against non veggies on it. Bramble is useless on SFI in my experience, but I could just be an ignorant Adorables player, maybe a pro Vegg could show me the light.
I've spent a lot of time with veggies and even in the light of the so called "buff" for veggies I don't think they are viable at high level play vs adorables or scallywags on any map except Acrospire.
I'm leaning towards the camp of keeping all the levels as they all play different from each other. I'd rather see some imbalances fixed on a few.
RE: Which Maps to Retire? - TheGreatErenan - 02-05-2013 09:46 AM
They said 2v2 maps aren't being retired in the upcoming update. They could still add new ones, though!
RE: Which Maps to Retire? - ImperialSun - 02-05-2013 10:22 AM
(02-05-2013 09:15 AM)RandyDogz Wrote: I love the diversity in outwitters and wouldn't want to see any go (although if we loose any I'm glad to see peekaboo is in the lead cause that's the one map I just can't seem to get comfortable with lol).
As a more casual player, I don't like to see maps pigeonholed with set strong strategies - I like a more free for all approach and the mystery of wondering how each game will develop. Just my 2 cents.
Which will only happen from rotating maps out and replacing with new ones instead of just keeping them all and continually adding new ones. I agree with alvendor though that there should also be some focus on fixing maps and not just removing them. Maybe have 10 maps be the standard (or 8) and then just rotate maps in and out to maintain this fixed number?
RE: Which Maps to Retire? - CombatEX - 02-05-2013 10:52 AM
(02-05-2013 08:01 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote: I see that side of the argument. But the other side is more play variety. I'm sure I'm not the only one who was most excited for the two new maps to be in league cirulation with the veggienaut update. I guess 50 is too much, you're right. But I also think we could have more than 8. I'd love 16!
But you're definitely right about not feeling like you know what you're doing on a new map. I may be ST, but I only started to feel like I "understood" this game relatively recently.
I agree that only 6 maps was too few and I was excited for the two new Veggienauts 1v1 maps. So yes, you weren't the only one. ^^ But as you concede, 50 is excessive. I would be fine with a compromise like 16, though really I'd prefer fewer (12?). I suppose I would be fine with just keeping all the maps this time (and perhaps modifying Peekaboo). My initial enthusiasm for removing maps was more to set a good precedent with limiting the number of league maps than a strong desire to remove them. I just want to be clear that if we do keep them all this time, it is only because we do not yet have too many.
Like you, I have only recently felt that I've started understanding some of the finer points of the game. I only have ~70 league wins in 1v1 (though admittedly I have some friendly wins). I'd say I've probably played ~100 games against Super-Titans and top 200 masters players including friendlies. This means that even ignoring the two most recent maps and Veggienauts, I've averaged around 5 games on each map for each match-up. As a result, on maps where special usage is common I'm sorely lacking in experience. Fortunately that doesn't seem to sway my win/loss very much so far, but that means that we have yet to reach the skill ceiling for these maps let alone the ones coming in the next update. If I can get to the top 50 without having a good understanding of match-ups on most of the maps, then there must be a lot more for us to learn even at the highest level with just these current 8.
Long story short, I don't mind what we choose this time, but looking forward let us make sure not to overdo the number of concurrent league maps.
(02-05-2013 09:15 AM)RandyDogz Wrote: As a more casual player, I don't like to see maps pigeonholed with set strong strategies - I like a more free for all approach and the mystery of wondering how each game will develop. Just my 2 cents.
I don't know if that is in response to me, but when I say I want players to acquire a deeper understanding of match-ups on particular maps, I don't find that mutually exclusive with set strategies that you cannot deviate from (which is what you seem to be concerned about). Rather, I expect more interesting tactics to evolve and the development of an actual meta-game. By this I mean where people become aware of potential powerful strategies that their opponent may employ on particular maps in particular match-ups and play to counter those strategies. Only, their opponent may then anticipate that counter-strategy and then do something entirely different. Only with a deep understanding will we move from simple turn by turn tactics to the next level, mind-games/meta-gaming/bluffing. Of course, this is a reason to keep the present maps so we have more time to develop these strategies. Perhaps we shouldn't remove any this time. As stated above though, I'd rather not go over 12 maps total.
EDIT: Ah k, I just saw your new post. Looks like we agree. Cheers. ^^
RE: Which Maps to Retire? - RandyDogz - 02-05-2013 10:58 AM
(02-05-2013 10:22 AM)ImperialSun Wrote:(02-05-2013 09:15 AM)RandyDogz Wrote: I love the diversity in outwitters and wouldn't want to see any go (although if we loose any I'm glad to see peekaboo is in the lead cause that's the one map I just can't seem to get comfortable with lol).
As a more casual player, I don't like to see maps pigeonholed with set strong strategies - I like a more free for all approach and the mystery of wondering how each game will develop. Just my 2 cents.
Which will only happen from rotating maps out and replacing with new ones instead of just keeping them all and continually adding new ones. I agree with alvendor though that there should also be some focus on fixing maps and not just removing them. Maybe have 10 maps be the standard (or 8) and then just rotate maps in and out to maintain this fixed number?
Good point. I'll amend my position to be
I wouldn't want to see any go right now as I'd like a base of more than 8 maps
3 or 4 per team sounds good to me. And combatEX, no I wasn't disagreeing with ya - your comment about broken maps captures my concern better than my ramblings lol I'm hungry, I gotta eat something before forming any more opinions...