tmp's maps

[tmp500]

rotated the map vertically, this link made of red tiles and concrete tiles.

i can only guess that the textures make a seam on 2.x? ill brush over it, but cant test it in 2.x cause i dont keep old ancient deprecated software versions around.... !vote to kill 2.x - the current map version is anyway not playable, i have to change the oil positions/ amount.... the 3 players in the center right now are f^*%ed..

[Reg312]

the 3 players in the center right now are f^*%ed..

may be you need adjust your tactics? more defensive and more research?

in many cases it is impossible to make "balanced" teams so than kind of maps can be better in games "vs rest"

[tmp500]

may be you need adjust your tactics? more defensive and more research?

ehhe

i still need to go over the math tough....was thinking of giving the 4 players 7 oil each (3 in base) = 28 oil spread on the first two levels and 12 derricks to the lonesome players in the center = 36.... which sounds like quite allot of derricks when u count them together... but the map size is medium to large... 180x140... what do you guys think?

or....
5*4(players)=20
8*3=24

might be more reasonable....

[Iluvalar]

The 3 players on the middle have a aggressive frontier with 18 tiles width for p4 and p6 and 12 T-shaped tiles frontier for player 5 which only count only half for a total of 42 tiles. If you want to follow the 21 tile per power ratio rule, they gonna need twice the power of the lower players to be even.

However, that frontier is extremely aggressive. Some points seem at more than 50% of the path. I'm afraid aware players gonna mg rush that frontier (4x) Knowing that it would cause a domino effect, slowly leading the top players to lose the middle ground. Which is highly tactical (even if low oiled).

There is no other checkpoints to defend... The frontier for the inner bases for the top player is 44 tiles wide. Which is a major flaw... However you could "try" to give the top player a better chance...

Last thing, you need to remove one of the opening in the cliff between top and mid ground. So at least the frontier do not expand if you lose the mid ground ^^.

Edit: removed a chapter about "suggestions" i was completly out...

[Iluvalar]

Ok tmp... you made me realize that a map need a 21 tile wide frontier or less. Any idea about giving a team more than half the power and expect them to turtle instead of bashing the remaining of the resistance is useless. Unless, the opposition HAVE a less than 21 tiles frontier to defend on...

Your map have no such thing that could make sens, so the best you could do is to spread the oil evenly at equidistant positions for both team. 24 oil vs 24 oil.

[Giani]

Your map have no such thing that could make sens, so the best you could do is to spread the oil evenly at equidistant positions for both team. 24 oil vs 24 oil.

Eh? Not everything is pure maths...
The players of the middle have better territory advantage so that doesn't mean derricks is the only thing important in balance.

[Iluvalar]

Can you please define "territory advantage" then ?

[Reg312]

players of the middle can easy and fast join their armies and attack each other player 1v2 or 1v3
(40 tanks vs 15 tanks)

[tmp500]

map layout changed, also the derrick count.
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=9404&start=30#p103846

turns out that the longer way, that the lowest players have to travel, need more oil then the top players. besides that the top players have a easy to defend base, they also have easy access to the derricks to the mid layer plus they travel downwards... ill try to play a few more on it... lets see what comes out of it

[Iluvalar]

players of the middle can easy and fast join their armies and attack each other player 1v2 or 1v3
(40 tanks vs 15 tanks)

And being instantly attacked by the 3 others together ? Doesn't sound like an advantage .

[tmp500]

quick update on moisture viewtopic.php?f=10&t=9404&start=15#p103690

water base has access to water

[Reg312]

players of the middle can easy and fast join their armies and attack each other player 1v2 or 1v3
(40 tanks vs 15 tanks)

And being instantly attacked by the 3 others together ? Doesn't sound like an advantage .

gathered team always have advantage.
and i did not said about 3v4 map.

[Iluvalar]

But there is one thing stronger than a team put together (3v1) : a player with no enemy resistance (1v0). The 3 players can't afford to send all their force in the same corner...

I believe you played the map with uneven skills teams. You probably instinctively place better players in the smaller team. On equal skill, equal oil distribution should give decent result in that map.

[Berg]

You probably instinctively place better players in the smaller team.

No Iluvalar your wrong again.
Its is interesting map I don't think it needs changing.
Backdate Topic
(The other map moisture I don't know why but the NoQ scav mod dont produce choppers on that map..Can this be fixed or I know this is not a map problem But I'm guessing the amount of scav soldiers is very high and stopping units being built?)

[Reg312]

@Iluvalar

player with no enemy resistance is player vs base. that player need enough time to kill enemy base + derricks

center team have: 3vs(1 base)
Edge team (another team) 2vs(3 bases)
(example 3v3)


goal is good time management.. so center team should be fast enough in deadly unexpected attack to 1 player
.. even if another (edge) players have same skill - they need 2 things
- time to change tactics from careful attack TO crushing attack
- kill enemy oil and base buildings
even if center team start losing bases - they can save trucks (because they still have their initiative)

Next move: armies of center team returning to base and fight 3vs2....
its just one perspective.. in my experience gathered team always have advantage