RO 2 Maps

[red army]

I think everyone that has played the game can agree that maps like Vossenack, Berlin Beta, Foy, and almost all the maps on DH and the RO maps Gorlitz, Dzerzhinsky and Pariser Platz were some of the best maps ever. They were also of the same kind of design, linear so there is combat concentrated but also allowing for lots of tactical flanking. Therefore, i think for urban maps TW should follow those examples, and maybe even hire some of those mapmakers 'cause those maps saw the most epic battles ever. I don't speak for the tank maps, but for urban/infantry this example should be followed. To be honest, I didn't enjoy too many of RO's original maps like Lyes Krovy, Baksan Valley, Kaukasus and etc because the design was simply bad, and the battles weren't as fun. Now keep in mind that this is just my opinion but the reason why i request TW to take a different approach to mapmaking is because many others also agree with me, and some of the original maps and the officially adopted community maps arent even being played at all anymore, and instead the unofficial modded maps are the most popular. So yeah just my 2 cents. State whether you agree or disagree and why. Thanks

 

[Nicholas]

I think you like the more open ended maps, I would like a mixture of different maps, anything from travelling for 500 miles like DH to up close fighting like Danzig, but most maps I would want something in between.

I also like maps where teams get unique advantages and disadvantages, like maybe one team has more reinforcements and has to attack in waves while another team has less reinforcements but gets a good defensive position.

I hate being evenly matched all the time, it feels wierd and sterile.

 

[Fedorov]

The best map ever made was Jucha =(

 

[OneBloodyHero]

To be honest, I didn't enjoy too many of RO's original maps like Lyes Krovy, Baksan Valley, Kaukasus and etc because the design was simply bad, and the battles weren't as fun. Now keep in mind that this is just my opinion but the reason why i request TW to take a different approach to mapmaking is because many others also agree with me, and some of the original maps and the officially adopted community maps arent even being played at all anymore, and instead the unofficial modded maps are the most popular. Thanks

Your preference for RO maps is fine.

But I think you are way off in which maps are most popular or not. The stock RO maps are by far the most popular. They are well designed and are incredibly fun. Many of those custom maps are terribly designed, and many servers that try to run a swath of them usually are quickly de-populated. Some of the custom maps you listed, like Berlin-Beta, is really good, but many of the other one's, like Beach Assualt, EnemyattheGates, etc. kill the server. Many that are "linear" tend to favor one side over the other, where the defenders tend to slaughter the attackers, or vice versa. Occasionally you will have a balanced and engaging battle, at least from my experience (4 years worth ) from RO.

 

[Zetsumei]

I personally hate one way lineair maps. I like the DH maps like foy as you atleast have 2 capzones and can spawn at outer flanks allowing for tactical diversity.

But personally I hope we won't get too many maps that are super lineair meatgrinder pushmaps like koningsplatz. As in push maps any form of flanking or tactical diversity isn't possible and the map always plays the same as the first time you play that map.

So when twi decides to go with lineair maps like for instance koningsplatz, I hope that they somewhat take the dh approach of having multiple capzones open however with multiple different spaws. (Koningsplats got only one capzone open for the attackers at the same time although the defenders can recap a previous zone).

 

[hockeywarrior]

I personally hate one way lineair maps. I like the DH maps like foy as you atleast have 2 capzones and can spawn at outer flanks allowing for tactical diversity.

But personally I hope we won't get too many maps that are super lineair meatgrinder pushmaps like koningsplatz. As in push maps any form of flanking or tactical diversity isn't possible and the map always plays the same as the first time you play that map.

So when twi decides to go with lineair maps like for instance koningsplatz, I hope that they somewhat take the dh approach of having multiple capzones open however with multiple different spaws. (Koningsplats got only one capzone open for the attackers at the same time although the defenders can recap a previous zone).

I hear ya ... though I honestly think that the vast majority of DH's maps are mindless meatgrinders. Seriously, you hop on a server and its one frontal assault map after another where one team defends from an extremely well set up position and the other team has to charge across an open field. I'm not exaggerating -- it's basically every single map in DH.

I want map variety -- a couple frontal assault maps are OK, but I really like to see well-balanced maps that involve at least 2 capzones in contention at a time, and more importantly, maps where BOTH teams are attacking a set of objectives.

I don't care how good your game's mechanics are -- if you are stuck in that spawn-die-spawn-die-spawn die cycle because of the nature of the map, the game ceases to be fun.

 

[Sensemann]

The best map ever made was Jucha =(

I totally agree with you Fedorov. This map was still fun after playing it 1000 times. Just so many buildings to enter and places to hide, while always being right in the battlezone! No round was played like the one before and I really can not understand why this map has never been converted into Ro Ostfront. If I could make maps, I would've done so, that's for sure... I think I still remember the whole map by hard as I was always searching for servers where the map is on...

 

[Fedorov]

I totally agree with you Fedorov. This map was still fun after playing it 1000 times. Just so many buildings to enter and places to hide, while always being right in the battlezone! No round was played like the one before and I really can not understand why this map has never been converted into Ro Ostfront. If I could make maps, I would've done so, that's for sure... I think I still remember the whole map by hard as I was always searching for servers where the map is on...

The original maker didn't let TWI include it in Ostfront, god knows why.

 

[dogbadger]

sorry i don't agree - some of the maps you mentioned didn't play particularly well Imo.
You haven't really mentioned any of the maps i considered the greatest - which, outside the mod and the retail, would include tcherkassy, kolno, festung kurland wateveroko berezina and lazur - which was the most professional 3rd party map i ever played.
However, road to hill combined played well without being particularly 'polished'

tractor works and lenningrad were brilliant achievements but didn't quite play as well as they looked for me anyway.
but i still enjoyed them and rate them highly.

ardon in CC and tobruck in MN were fantastic maps.

And it's a shame riga docks didn't get finished - if anyone remembers that.
Because of the strength of the ro maps i pretty much trust in what will be released for hos. as for customs - ppl making maps will create whatever they deem to be good so short of beta advice and small details it's hard to influence ppl who are putting in the work themselves.

 

[SiC-Disaster]

I liked Riga Docks, i never see it around unfortunately

 

[Dwin]

I hear ya ... though I honestly think that the vast majority of DH's maps are mindless meatgrinders. Seriously, you hop on a server and its one frontal assault map after another where one team defends from an extremely well set up position and the other team has to charge across an open field. I'm not exaggerating -- it's basically every single map in DH.

I never took notice of this before, but you're right. A vast majority of Darkest Hour maps involve some part of the map (usually the beginning) where you have to charge across an open field with little or no cover. They definitely aren't meatgrinders though, not if you're doing it right. Those open field crossings require at least a minimal amount of team effort. Officers need to use smoke and artillery wisely, tanks need to cover infantry and suppress defenders, etc.

The problem is the more complex the maps become, the harder they are to play. Those Darkest Hour maps become meatgrinders when a team isn't able to muster either the coordination or the skill to be successful. It's difficult to find a balance between making the map challenging, complex, and dynamic, but easy. E.g. Berezina: Depending on how well your team plays, it can be awesome, or awful.

Hopefully RO2's maps will be more open ended than in Ost, but based on what we've seen so far, I don't feel like TW will be pushing any boundaries in terms of map design, at least not for the first release.

One of the things I would like to see that I don't think has been done before, are multiple objective paths. Instead of having to capture all objectives to win, you would only be required to capture a certain number of objectives, maybe in a certain order. This allows teams to be flexible in how they choose to fight over the map, rather than going down the same paths over and over again.

 

[red army]

I think you like the more open ended maps, I would like a mixture of different maps, anything from travelling for 500 miles like DH to up close fighting like Danzig, but most maps I would want something in between.

I also like maps where teams get unique advantages and disadvantages, like maybe one team has more reinforcements and has to attack in waves while another team has less reinforcements but gets a good defensive position.

I hate being evenly matched all the time, it feels wierd and sterile.

Yeah, TW did well with the cqc maps, Danzig, Stalingrad Kessel, and Odessa were all pretty good. But for medium scale infantry maps i think the DH wide but linear maps should be an example to follow. As for maps with unique teams and disadvantges, you should go play doggreen on DH. Germans are dug in many bunkers and buildings with mgs while the american team just dies over and over again on the beach(coupled with the random arty shells that give negative points)... Maybe if it's a good map, but i hate those maps where all one team is supposed to do is charge into enemy fire to capture a capzone and the other gets all the fun mowing them down.

 

[red army]

Well, judging from the posts, i guess not everyone agrees. In-game however some people agreed with me. I guess TW should just make a variety of maps, but the kind of maps that me and some other people like, the ones i suggested, should also be included as RO didn't have anything like those maps in the retail version.

 

[Nicholas]

Yeah, TW did well with the cqc maps, Danzig, Stalingrad Kessel, and Odessa were all pretty good. But for medium scale infantry maps i think the DH wide but linear maps should be an example to follow. As for maps with unique teams and disadvantges, you should go play doggreen on DH. Germans are dug in many bunkers and buildings with mgs while the american team just dies over and over again on the beach(coupled with the random arty shells that give negative points)... Maybe if it's a good map, but i hate those maps where all one team is supposed to do is charge into enemy fire to capture a capzone and the other gets all the fun mowing them down.

But thats one of the things I love about RO is that its not perfectly evenly balanced. But when you triumph against those odds you feel like a badass.

You should play that one map Gorlitz where the Russians have lots of tanks and the Germans only have panzerfousts, the Germans always get slaughtered but every kill you get is sweet.... Or when arced the Panzerfoust across the river and hit the tracks of a tank....

So some maps should be evenly balanced, some maps should be a slaughter for one team, but most maps should be somewhere in between.

 

[Nimsky]

The bigger the better. But not too big. I like big 1:1 scale maps with freedom of movement in all three directions.

Custom maps like PariserPlatz, Zoo-Berlin and Kriegstadt are all amazing and IMO better than a lot of RO:O stock maps. I'd like to see such maps in RO2. Stock RO maps are very CQB-focused. So I hope they'll kinda shift away from that with RO2, though I haven't seen evidence of that just yet.

 

[PilotPirx]

.. those maps where all one team is supposed to do is charge into enemy fire to capture a capzone and the other gets all the fun mowing them down.

As multiplayer maps, yes, that isn't so good for long term playing. But for Coop maps maybe pass good. Someone know how many can be players on one side in Coop map? With random AI and a little bit more imagination this can be candy..imho.

 

[dogbadger]

I liked Riga Docks, i never see it around unfortunately

well there were some issues with spawning but it otherwise was pretty nearly done i thought but then lruce said he was abandoning the project for whatever reason and that was that - no final.
I thought it was going to be entered for the mapping contest, but there you go.
shame

 

[hockeywarrior]

The best map ever made was Jucha =(

Really? I couldn't stand that map. It was definitely of the RO mod's prettiest maps, but I thought the gameplay was weak and the fighting overly claustrophobic. But hey, to each his own I suppose.

 

[Zetsumei]

I hear ya ... though I honestly think that the vast majority of DH's maps are mindless meatgrinders. Seriously, you hop on a server and its one frontal assault map after another where one team defends from an extremely well set up position and the other team has to charge across an open field. I'm not exaggerating -- it's basically every single map in DH.

I want map variety -- a couple frontal assault maps are OK, but I really like to see well-balanced maps that involve at least 2 capzones in contention at a time, and more importantly, maps where BOTH teams are attacking a set of objectives.

I don't care how good your game's mechanics are -- if you are stuck in that spawn-die-spawn-die-spawn die cycle because of the nature of the map, the game ceases to be fun.

The reason why I used it as an example was that even though I hate lineair maps in general. DH's method offers more freedom with push maps than ostfront with for instance Koningsplatz.

It says nothing about general map design in general DH maps have about 30 capzones. But it allows for freedom of movement. You're never forced to go through one street you can always move through multiple ways and paths.

In koningsplatz you always know exactly where the enemy is coming from making every time you play the game act out tactically the same.

Ideally I'd have maps that have a more dynamic battlefield less governed with a certain direction. But while that often is great for clanmatches in public games you need some guidance.

 

[hockeywarrior]

The reason why I used it as an example was that even though I hate lineair maps in general. DH's method offers more freedom than ostfront.

It says nothing about general map design in general DH maps have about 30 capzones. But it allows for freedom of movement. You're never forced to go through one street you can always move through multiple ways and paths.

In koningsplatz you always know exactly where the enemy is coming from making every time you play the game act out tactically the same.

Ideally I'd have maps that have a more dynamic battlefield less governed with a certain direction. But while that often is great for clanmatches in public games you need some guidance.

True. I also was in no way saying that all DH maps are created equal -- of course there are some that are great and others that are pure meatgrinders. Really all I was saying is that push maps get really boring if that is all that is offered, which is basically the case in DH.