I know how to balance de_nuke

Why do you want to balance nuke?, so it can become dust 3?

I love nuke too, its my favourite map, and frankly its designed to be favor'd to one side. Thats why its so fun, its difficult and requires team work to push spots, peak areas and gain advantages. The reason everyone complains in competitive about Dust 2 is that its too simple and balanced, theres no challenge. Its why its the most popular casual map, cause its not hard to play.

I think the map is fine the way it was, if anything its dissapointing that they removed the other side of door from B.

Quote from Gambit

how does adding what I suggest ruin the map and make it dust3? I've played it competively at the highest level against teams like mibr and others in 1.6 and any competitive player knows whoever gets CT first is at an extreme advantage.

Just have an open mind about the suggestion/idea because I feel ANY suggestion about changing nuke would garner than the same reaction you just gave. In 1.6 it was a LOT better because of the wallbanging, but without that in csgo, it makes it a really stale map.

Im not trying to absolutely shut down the idea, but it just wasnt a very practical idea. Ive played at top tier games, bordering between LEM and SM depending on my dedication to competitive and have been playing cs since 1.3. I've played at Lans all over Australia since source and have racked up enough hours to basically call it pathetic. Dont get me wrong however, I am not the best and there are plenty of better players above me, i just know a fair deal of pointless intel.

Nuke has always been the map I've loved, and although you bring up ideas such as an access route to rafters for T's, it then goes as far as completely destroying the whole defense for CT's. That rafters is designed as a defensive counter to an aggressive A push through hut and squeeky. If you were to add the access from Lobby Ladder, you would then add another access point. The map already has 4 Access routes for T's. Hut, Squeeky, Anex, Heaven. All these depending on strategy can be used as a way of accessing and taking control of the site. Sure it may seem difficult, but if you are able to communicate and have enough skill, it pays off.

Sure maps have prejudice, cache for example, on release and even now, its argued as a heavy CT map, its timings and map layout heavily favor CT holds. However i have seen countless games where T's are able to completely annihilate and punish CT's, It's difficult, but it feels really fun and rewarding when you make a successful play.

If CT's are a heavy side, than getting that team first is a strategy in itself, it allows you to aquire rounds early and try to secure a lead. However, just because you have a lead at half time, doesnt mean you arent going to get absolutely rooted T half when the tables turn.

As far as your opinion on the map change go, they are interesting idea's and i respect the new approach to it, but personally i think it would destroy the playstyle that nuke stands for.

TLDR:

As far as fairness goes, everyone gets a turn on CT and T, its what you make of the situation that decides the outcome, not the map.

Quote from Gambit

Just have an open mind about the suggestion/idea because I feel ANY suggestion about changing nuke would garner than the same reaction you just gave. In 1.6 it was a LOT better because of the wallbanging, but without that in csgo, it makes it a really stale map.

Everyone on reddit wants to change nuke in some way, and I think Valve will change it at some point. Sure, it makes succesful T strats interesting to watch, but of course when most other rounds end in a slaughter I don't see the point.

To be honest I think it's just a matter of changing chokepoints and a few positions. Make the entrance to hut taller so you can peek rafters, change the geometry of radio to give more room for terrorists. Remove a half of rafters (the one over main and squeaky/hut), add a ladder rather than a trickjump to silo, etc. I think outside is fine, you could make garage brighter and remove a few crates on CT side but that's it.

Then of course wallbangs should be a lot more powerful.

I dislike your idea because it change the map too much. But I wonder if you really have to make these huge changes to make a map more T sided. Do we have data (round outcomes) on the new train?

Also check this http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/fi…s/?id=385634872

Quote from Guni

The reason everyone complains in competitive about Dust 2 is that its too simple and balanced, theres no challenge. Its why its the most popular casual map, cause its not hard to play.

The reason everyone complains when they play dust2 is because the map is balanced? What kind of reasonning is that? Or I didn't understand you properly. I see more whining during T side nuke. Unbalanced map are more challenging only one half of the time.

Aztec or dust1 isn't hard to play when you're CT. Neither when you're T when I think about it, you only have a couple of entrances and all you can do is flash your way in and hope for the best.

Nuke should stay unbalanced, I agree it does make it interesting. But you can't deny there are some issues, especially in A site. It's difficult to flash correctly and when you go through squeaky, hut or main you can be shot from a dozen of different positions.

Although I agree with just about everyone's opinions here, no design is flawless and perfected. CS only got to the place it is now by endless iterations to the maps, hell, look at DOTA'2 map and the amount of iterations it's gone through. To be fair though, I don't see why it's so important to change NUKE, why not make another level, somewhat similar in terms of layout (with the changes you think would benefit) and then put a different visual coating.

CS 1.6 was the end of the changes, because a newer game was in the works, it was not "perfect" by any stretch but the focus was put onto CS:S etc. Changes would of been made to maps if the game was to continue development.

If your Valve or a big developer, you have the chance to test your changes with the top teams before any major commitment is made, there's no need for guesswork these days

Quote from Klems

The reason everyone complains when they play dust2 is because the map is balanced? What kind of reasonning is that? Or I didn't understand you properly. I see more whining during T side nuke. Unbalanced map are more challenging only one half of the time.

Aztec or dust1 isn't hard to play when you're CT. Neither when you're T when I think about it, you only have a couple of entrances and all you can do is flash your way in and hope for the best.

Yeah i wrote that poorly. What i was trying to convey was that the map itself was boring and thats why everyone complains. Its balanced and over played and doesnt really have any interesting plays come out of it, not to mention taking sites is easy. When you take A site on d2, its just like eh lets go see if there at B. You take A site on nuke and I am on a podium giving a acceptance speech and recieving my award.

Just my opinion, maybe others disagree, but dust2 is the most overplayed and mind numbing of the cs maps. I would really love it if they removed it from the map pool for casual and competitive for just one month and see the shitstorm it would cause casual players and lower rank games.

Contest idea: Fix Nuke.

Starting with the VMF that ships with the sdk (or an up to date version of Valve will release it), each contestant makes the changes they think would "fix Nuke" and submits a bsp with working radar etc. as well as a rationale for their redesign.

The mapcore community then choose their favourite 3-5 versions and we invite a bunch of pro/high-ranking players to spend a few hours streaming matches on them.

Much debate and squabbling takes place, and then if a "fixed" version can be settled upon by a majority vote, we submit the new version (or perhaps even a version containing a mixture of the favourite fixes) to Valve for consideration.

Quote from text_fish

Contest idea: Fix Nuke.

Starting with the VMF that ships with the sdk (or an up to date version of Valve will release it), each contestant makes the changes they think would "fix Nuke" and submits a bsp with working radar etc. as well as a rationale for their redesign.

The mapcore community then choose their favourite 3-5 versions and we invite a bunch of pro/high-ranking players to spend a few hours streaming matches on them.

Much debate and squabbling takes place, and then if a "fixed" version can be settled upon by a majority vote, we submit the new version (or perhaps even a version containing a mixture of the favourite fixes) to Valve for consideration.

Not a bad idea at all and I think that people competing professionally would appreciate it if the map could be more balanced. Being a swede, I follow the swedish csgo scene but I also follow other european pro teams and whenever nuke comes into question, 80% if not more say that they dislike the map for being so unbalanced.

I think a contest like the one you are suggesting and assuming Valve picks the best nuke version people can create, will do us all good in the long run. To be honest, the map is not bad and people tend to like playing on it as long as they are begin as CT's. Too many times during cups/tournaments we've seen nuke favoring CT's in a major way, completely dominating T's and even the two best teams in the world have a real hard time coming back in the end if they start as T's.

Nuke has always been a heavily debated topic I don't know how many times I've heard pros whine saying "if we only would have started as CT's"...

Quote from text_fish

Contest idea: Fix Nuke.

Starting with the VMF that ships with the sdk (or an up to date version of Valve will release it), each contestant makes the changes they think would "fix Nuke" and submits a bsp with working radar etc. as well as a rationale for their redesign.

The mapcore community then choose their favourite 3-5 versions and we invite a bunch of pro/high-ranking players to spend a few hours streaming matches on them.

Much debate and squabbling takes place, and then if a "fixed" version can be settled upon by a majority vote, we submit the new version (or perhaps even a version containing a mixture of the favourite fixes) to Valve for consideration.

> open de_nuke.vmf

>select all

> delete

Fixed!

Quote from Vaya

> open de_nuke.vmf

>select all

> delete

Fixed!

I feel like you might run in to some errors in the compiler.

Tbh, I would maybe.... mess with adding some windows on the rafters by heaven that breach the upper ramp wall.

- You couldn't see through them, but it would allow you to pressure rafters/heaven from ramp once you take it over on T side.

- This would also allow for certain plays on clearing out heaven.

- It would also allow you to potentially help your mates ramp if they get overrun (as ct) but you risk exposing your position (which I love)

I would have to test this and check out the angles + fixing any super OP spots. For example, I wouldn't want the guy in heaven to have a good angle to spam ramp entrance (same for T's).

This is just a quick note, I would really have to think about it.

I've been working on a Nuke remake for some months now, it's mostly a visual upgrade but it's built from scratch so even though it keeps metrics very similar, some parts play very differently.

When I reach Alpha5 (had a bunch of "preAlpha" builds before) I'll start a thread and private testing, because of the nature of the map, feedback is of VERY HIGH regard and even though I can't satisfy everyone I'll try to cater to as many as possible.

some personal history, I'm new to Mapcore (been browsing for some time) but I've been a part of the GameBanana community for 7+ years and been a Super Moderator (Maps, Mips, Textures etc.) for some years and been doing Level Design as a hobby for about 10 years now (time flies...)

The sooner you post your level, the better. Trust me.

We can throw it in our weekly testing nights.

Fix Nuke and its not Nuke anymore :kappa:

I was playing nuke the other night and is it just me or is the roof entrance from T spawn totally useless? It takes ages to get in there and then it's not even a shortcut. I think it would be a more attractive route if it dropped you on the rafters above A instead. Kyrptonight do you think you could test that in your remake?

Quote from Black_Stormy

I was playing nuke the other night and is it just me or is the roof entrance from T spawn totally useless? It takes ages to get in there and then it's not even a shortcut. I think it would be a more attractive route if it dropped you on the rafters above A instead. Kyrptonight do you think you could test that in your remake?

Currently the only purpose it serves it as a hiding place for any terrorists who can't be bothered to suicide using any of the actual routes in the map. It would be an interesting experiment to make the windows around rafters see-through so that T's on the roof can easily counter the camping/sniping CTs and feed information to their team-mates.

Quote from text_fish

Currently the only purpose it serves it as a hiding place for any terrorists who can't be bothered to suicide using any of the actual routes in the map. It would be an interesting experiment to make the windows around rafters see-through so that T's on the roof can easily counter the camping/sniping CTs and feed information to their team-mates.

See-through windows would probably be way to strong and would then cause the Rafters to be pointless. I mean test it, but it would probably be a massive Nerf. The roof's 'actual' purpose is to use the ladder into lobby if you cant access from T-spawn door, boost onto silo, or jump on the vent and flash through skylight so all of A site is blind, then your team can push the site and frag the rafter players who are blind. It actually does serve a purpose and incorporates a good way for taking A but anyone below DMG wouldn't normally run these sort of strats and even then you would need to be premade or a team.

Maybe if a few windows were see through or there was another mechanic that wasn't too strong but still gave balance to both sides, it would be viable.

CT will always get to heaven before T's manage to reach roof so I don't think it would be terribly OP. It would probably be necessary to block access to the rafters on the T side so that really fast CT can't rush there and pick T's off through the windows before they've even had a chance to push, but that wouldn't be such a bad change anyway as I've always thought it ridiculously OP to allow CT to sit directly above the entrances to A.

I like the idea of just a few of the windows being see-through though, that would be a good compromise.