MapCore CS:GO Playtesting 3.0

Really dig the change from street level to high above ground BTW, can't wait to see it all arted up too~

I haven't read the feedback from the last test so I don't know if it was mentioned, but I kinda miss the corridor that went to the main atrium. Right now the CT's have a really tough fight to get to the T's, and that path felt like it evened the odds a bit. That or perhaps adding some pillars/open rooms next to the long corridor thats sorta part of the atrium.

Anyway, still dig the map, but it feels like there's something missing here~

Smart move to the rooftop setting, but since the outside doesn't get a ton of use it should probably be something a bit more interesting. Rain and thunder anyone? Night time? Who knows.

I think a sunset setting could be really nice. You could get some really nice colours in the skybox! Here are a few ideas:

[Blocked Image: http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6023/6017456994_37e045479f_b.jpg]

[Blocked Image: http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3578/3319280791_b381d1da96_b.jpg]

Yes sunset would be awesome. And count me in for tomorrows test

Agency: Really liked it. I'd like to see more glass inbetween the rooms though, almost ot the point of not having solid walls. What that means for optimization though I'm not sure... either way that's my main complaint. It just seems like a fun map that's not fully taking advantage of a glassy, transparent theme.

I didn't really like Agency last week, but I had a lot of fun on it this time. The balcony, bathroom, and thicker mid wall made all of the CT approaches feel a lot better and less like a meat grinder. I didn't get to to play it on T and I missed the second map completely since my computer crashed on the team switch

cs_agency:

I really like the visuals so far. It gives off the Mirror's Edge vibe of being really bright, clean, and vibrant. I feel now like changing it to sunset might ruin that but we'll see. The ads in mid were also a nice touch =). One thing on gameplay though, I felt like the paper room with the hostage in it was unbalanced. A terrorist could sit in there and watch 2 of the 3 mains paths (stairs and one of the mid walkways) to the hostages while in strong cover. Maybe just change that paper box prop to something taller so they have to leave the room to see out into mid.

de_viper:

Looks like it could be interesting, hard to tell gameplay with just open areas and no real cover besides from the bsp. A seemed like it was too easy to defend and as a T I never felt like I wanted to go there. (this could obv. change being 5v5). A site looked really interesting though. B was a fun site, but seemed a little large.

"Wiggle room" is a great way to put it, much less of a meat grinder for CT.

Also I would like to get overrun a2 tested next time. I'll talk to ornate to get it on the server ahead of time

cs_agency

Really enjoyed playing this level. However it still felt more balanced for T. Not sure why, maybe it was because the T got that huge balcony at mid and CT the small doorway and the long hallway.

de_viper

Love the gameplay in this one. Some of the areas are maybe a bit to big, but on the other hand that made it a lot more fun to use the small side routes. Which already gave me that mysterious Egypt feeling

Someone talked here about classic cs play, which raised a question from me. Why does map need to always promote classic gameplay? I mean, like in starcraft, there are maps which are promoting different styles of play by design. Why dont mapmakers innovate in counter-strike?

I just got an idea of a map, where terrorists have more players than CT's, but CT's have very considerable defenders advantage, roles could be vice versa.

There isn't any reason to, but if you want a map to be played on a lot of servers it helps to follow the rules that everyone already understand.

I'm not sure Starcraft is a great example, at least in the pro scene, they've been playing the same maps since launch - sure, they each tweak the formula a little, but the underlying game doesn't change drastically.

I suppose it comes down to the point of either building a competitive map, or just a fun public map, both are challenging in different ways.

Mapham, it seems like your trying to change things to appear different from everyone else, this is good, usually at that point you are working on a modification and can get assistance proving your ideas. Unfortunately this isn't Starcraft with an advanced script language capable of changing all the game rules, and if there was that possibility you'd be competing against everyone else's changes. You have to work damn hard to get you Starcraft arcade map to stand out, just the same as CS:G

It's all about being creative within the limitations you have, when your great at doing that people will listen and help you achieve bigger better things.

cs_agency: I've missed a few versions in previous playtests, but it plays a lot better since the last one I tested. The balcony in mid could use some cover here and there. I never felt really comfortable entering it. Not too much cover, but just a few things here and there to duck behind when someone's engaging you (it should still feel a little risky ).

I only played a few rounds on it as CT, so I can't comment a lot on it, but it was a lot of fun!

I also like the rooftop setting and the general style. Perhaps could use a bit more color though (like Mirrors Edge, as someone else mentioned?).

de_viper: easy to learn (even without radar and with dev textures), fun layout. A bit too big in some areas (the bombspot with the big ramp coming from mid, not sure what letter it is).
Looking forward to how it's gonna turn out visually a lot!

Well, I wasnt exactly saying that counter-strike should be modded into something entirely different. I meant that maps could promote more diverse styles of gameplay, while still being counter-strike. Like the idea expressed in my last post. Point was not to change game rules themselves, but just making maps differently.

Like Vilham said, you can change things up, but people may not like surprises.

I think (never done this, so I might well be wrong) you can restrict weapon choices, change reward money, etc. within a map. You can have 3 bombsites, or just 1. You can have hostages spawn randomly in one of a dozen locations, etc. As for having intentionally unbalanced players numbers; I think that might be difficult to have such a map in rotation on a server that uses auto-balance.

I think the biggest variation between mainstream maps was between defuse maps and hostage maps. CT's are more or less on the defense on de_ maps, and T's could generally camp their base with cs_ maps. However, with the change in the hostage mechanics, cs_maps have become more like de_maps, because now on maps like cs_italy, the terrorists have to guard 2 quite distinct areas, much like CT's on de_ maps.

Part of the fun of CS, at least for me, comes in coming up with tactics, and adapting those based on enemy play. On many classic CS maps, you can defend with an awp, rush with a smg, camp with a shotgun, run and gun, move stealthy, etc. If you spawn on a tower with a sniper rifle, while CT's try to rush your location, that tends to take away the choice of the player, which many people may not like.

I liked cs_havana in CS:S, which had randomly changing routes, but it not very popular on servers. CS:GO supports custom game modes, and there is an example of a sniper vs T's with the map Rooftop Control, I have no idea how popular that is online.

Hello! I'd like to get my map de_sake up for play testing tomorrow at the normal time (Tuesday, 21 GMT). How soon would you need my current map version? I'm still doing a little work today that I'd like to have done before the playtest.