• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Beta Map TE-FallenFighters1942

Nice to finally have an approach style map to Fallen like the custom one in Ostfront.

Couple issues:

I noticed barbwire in front and sometimes on top of waist height sandbag placements that can be mounted over and clipped through. If the intent was to have these as alternate paths and mountable traverse, why not remove the barbwire as it is usually placed to depict to the player of non-traversal areas/paths?

Few invisible walls within the playable area around the left-most building facing C from the attacker side. They all look like promising cover and respite from fire but the player just hits an invisible wall just short of it.

Opinions:

I have some concern about the fact that there are two well covered MG nests on the attacking side, almost right on A objective, facing the defenders. With the expanded maneuverability included in the map, it just seems out of place to hand hold the attackers with an incredibly easy way to shut down the sight lines on the first objective without having to earn it.

Also, I don't see the point in implementing half tracks. For the attackers they spawn once B objective is captured and are incredibly close to C objective. They don't have much flanking potential as the combat area red screen covers any opportunity they have to do so. Besides that, it just comes off as cumbersome in such a tight knit first half and negates the effective presence of MG roles as they're just mobile machine guns. Just my two cents.

Opinions aside, I'm interested to see how the map turns out.
 
Upvote 0
thanks for feedback.

Regarding halftracks, I was concerned that attackers and defenders would have a hard time crossing the open spaces near the square and wanted to give them the opportunity to flank if they decided to in areas they would have a hard time going if on foot. I initially planned to have the attackers and defenders cross the square width wise to reach the objective, which means halftracks would make a big impact, but the spawn distances forced me to keep the objectives on the outskirts of the map. I still find them useful in crossing open ground where normally you'd be shot down inbetween the hotel and univermag.
 
Upvote 0
I think the transports can be useful, but I don't know how many players will actually use them. I know I have driven the UC at least across the park and it was difficult, if only for the fact the obstacles and walls along with having to keep my head down so as not to get shot.

I would say leave them in with just a few per side to keep it interesting and change up the gameplay a bit. Worst case scenario, players just don't use them as often as you would like, but at least they will have the option.
 
Upvote 0
Played v2 the other day and thoroughly enjoyed it. There were only 3 players and a load of bots, so I don't have any points about game-play for now.

What I would like to bring up is the square itself. You've clearly made an effort to spruce up the space (which I appreciate), but I feel with the current layout of objectives and spawn protection volumes it is going to waste. As is Allies are running around it and Axis are just running through it; both are rushing for the objective spaces and not utilizing/enjoying the revamped square. I'd suggest bringing the square into play by introducing one of two more objectives to go with the current Objectives C+D. I propose two possible layouts.

First: use one objective space that includes most or all of the square to be active with C following the capture of B (see first attached image). As one big space I would suggest a long capture time such that Allies and Axis will fight over the square as they contest C+D, making advancement to E contingent upon taking the square and D.

Second: use two objectives spaces, the first to be active with C and the second to be active with D (see second attached image).

I would also like to suggest an alternate layout of spawns for Allies for the final objective. With this map being a rather grand counterattack upon the square and its immediate surroundings, I think a broader layout of spawn points for Allies would give a better impression of them converging upon the last corner of the square besieging the hard-pressed Axis in that three-story building (see third attached image). As seen in the third attached image, Spawn 1 would still give the rather close foothold Allies gain with taking E to press across that short distance onto F, enabling Allies to keep pressure upon Axis with that avenue. Spawns 2+3 would provide Allies the chance to move through the square or about its southern and eastern edges to attack F. With the current spawn points for Allies attacking F, it feels rather oddly superfluous to have transport vehicles to cover such a short distance with very few options for approach. If you're keen on providing Allies transport vehicles for the last objective, Spawns 2+3 would be great opportunities to utilize them, allowing for Allies to cover those greater distances with more possible routes to take.
 

Attachments

  • Square Layout 1.jpg
    Square Layout 1.jpg
    48.3 KB · Views: 0
  • Square Layout 2.jpg
    Square Layout 2.jpg
    48.3 KB · Views: 0
  • Allies Spawns for F.jpg
    Allies Spawns for F.jpg
    47.6 KB · Views: 0
Upvote 0
Although I like the idea of traveling longer distances, the issue I bumped into was where to put the Axis spawns. If I used your Allied spawn layout I'd have to give the Axis a similar distance to give the Allies a chance of reaching F and taking it. When having multiple spawns you can't expect people to choose any single one for a specific purpose, most people just click spawn on whatever's selected, this is why on KitaJima I keep open both spawns at the beach objectives even though 1 objective is already taken, it spreads people out even though it makes more strategic sense selecting the spawn behind the active objective. So in your scenario I see people spawning at the very south spawn, some guy takes the half track so your only option is to walk which would mean preparing a similar spawn situation for Axis to even it out.

The double objective layout looks like it could be interesting I'll have to look into it further.
 
Upvote 0
As far as accounting for those proposed Allies spawns on the Axis side: could it be as simple as increasing re-spawn times for Axis? Just spit-balling.

On a related note (this is more to pick your brain than to suggest something for the map): can a mapmaker designate a spawn point to be used only for forced re-spawns? For example, could you set a spawn point in the basement of your final objective on this map for Axis such that it is only used when Axis Commander uses Force Respawn (as a way of simulating entrenched defenders being called up as a last-second, desperate maneuver)?
 
Upvote 0
We just played this map on aus/nz, with a good team both attacking and defending. I was on the attackers, we got stuck on C for about 15 minutes until the end of the round, even with proper use of smoke, co-ordinated use of the bren carriers and a good TL.

I would recommend another way into that cap, perhaps by extending those tunnels that are in between B and C. We can't use the square on the right because it is combat zoned because they spawn there, but they can still flank around with half tracks to the back of our spawn (the back of B IIRC) which caused issues getting out of B and going to the right. I hope this helps, this map is one of my favourite customs. If there are any other aus/nz players feel free to chime in.
 
Upvote 0
Map installed on our hos campaign server. Played today 4-5 times with full or nearly full load. Map received a lot of "thats much better then stock fallen fighters". No problems with running in campaign mode.
Now issues:
- Attackers can be stopped on capzone B - they cant take it. Defenders secured flanks very well so no one could pass. If you are lucky to get behind first wall you have to deal with guys protecting three doors. You cant really hide in that yard
- Attackers can be also stopped on last capzone - 32 people Russian team didnt manage to cap it for 18 mins. Im suggesting spreading out the spawns as they are almost in the same place - it makes the team attack from only one direction. We tried to attack the back of Univermag from the corner of the map but it didnt really help.
I would put one spawn in top right corner of the map and second one in right bottom corner of stock map. Eventually on the square in the tunnels.
Also I heard defenders telling about not being able to escape red zones. Players also want to have tanks on the map.
Map will be available on the server from 4-5 pm to 9pm uk time
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I'll need to spend time creating some flanks for B, maybe a destroyed sewer going directly under B offering attackers another route and more cover on the roads to stop firing across the entire width.

For the final obj I'll most likely expand the terrain and make the defenders walk further from their spawn to the obj while implementing what Safu suggested so I can spread spawns out, but it's at the bottom of my list of things to do, with fixing Streets and Stream and other projects
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0