[WIP] DE_COPPER

[esspho]

 

Copper is about a mining facility in africa. Terrorists try to destroy crucial machinery to sabotage the operation.

I've been working on it for some time now and this contest is a great opportunity to finally get it finished.

The initial name of the map was de_twinstar. I changed it because of the feedback I've got on the original thread.

 

Workshop - WIP

COPPER ON THE WORKSHOP

 

GLHF to all contestants!

Edited September 2, 2015 by esspho
added screenshot and radar

[esspho]

There will be a reddit-playtest on tuesday (06/16th - 7.30 CEST) and I'm really exited to see copper being played in multiple 5v5 matches.

To raise some more interest I made a little chart showing the map's main routes and areas:

on imgur

please let me know what you think.

cheers!

Edited June 15, 2015 by esspho

[Simpajo]

Man, I love the brushwork and color theme you have here, it's clean and simple, yet doesn't look bland. Even in this early state. Keep up the good work. Will playtest it and maybe I can give some comments on the layout.

 

 

 

[jackophant]

Regarding Area 6 you have to the left side of bombsite A, I haven't seen how it plays but I would imagine it just creates a really easy flanking route for CTs? It's a path that takes you away from the bombsite, so surely this would just disturb the flow of the map?

[Simpajo]

Ï think the bomb site on B, should change. Firstly, the actual bomb-area is really small, which means that it doesn't offer a lot room for strategy in where you plant the bomb. The second thing, is that it is in a corner, further limiting the possibilities of ninja-defuses and things like that. I'd put the bomb site straight from where the T-s enter the site. or right on the far-right 'encounter point' on your last picture.

On A site there is a small window looking over one of the entrances. I think it's really too small for an CS map, it's not fun to play against, as you cannot smoke it without being in vision by it and it is at the same time a really good holding position  without an clear weak point. Super easy for the CT to hold, and unsatisfying for the attacking team.

I also think the map would play better in an deffuse map, if the Ts cannot jump up to the CT-mid area. Maybe if it required boosting. but as it is now, I would bet most games on this map would just be the t-s rushing mid every game, as it is easy to take, and offeres alot of opportunities on attacking both sites.

I will come back with more things, but this is what immediately struck me.

 

 

 

[esspho]

Today's playtest leaves me with a good feeling since I've got some nice feedback and suggestions to work with. As far as I can see most people liked the map's style and atmosphere. There were also positive remarks about the layout and the rotations. But most importantly there were comments on things to improve. I'll list the ones that I got so far in no specific order:

• Right now there are to many tiny corners and angles in general.
• The bombtarget in Bombsite B is too small. Maybe the nearby truck (and the area around it) should become the bombtarget.
• Bombsite A has too many spots to check. That makes it especially hard to retake.
• The timings are not right yet. Moving the t-spawn a few seconds back could help.
• The upper traverse from the t-spawn area to bombsite B [Area 7 from the chart above] should be closed off so that terrorists can pass to the conveyor unnoticed.
• The Sun tends to blind players in some areas.

As soon as I get my hands on the demos/ heatmaps I will propably be able to add some more to the list. If you've got something else please let me know.

Regarding Area 6 you have to the left side of bombsite A, I haven't seen how it plays but I would imagine it just creates a really easy flanking route for CTs? It's a path that takes you away from the bombsite, so surely this would just disturb the flow of the map?

​The idea for this area was to have a longer path that is risky but gives you a good chance to take bombsite A. I added a little split up situation (manhole) in the middle to try to make it a little more unpredictable for both teams. I'll check the heatmaps to see if people really used it.

 

Ï think the bomb site on B, should change. Firstly, the actual bomb-area is really small, which means that it doesn't offer a lot room for strategy in where you plant the bomb. The second thing, is that it is in a corner, further limiting the possibilities of ninja-defuses and things like that. I'd put the bomb site straight from where the T-s enter the site. or right on the far-right 'encounter point' on your last picture.

On A site there is a small window looking over one of the entrances. I think it's really too small for an CS map, it's not fun to play against, as you cannot smoke it without being in vision by it and it is at the same time a really good holding position  without an clear weak point. Super easy for the CT to hold, and unsatisfying for the attacking team.

I also think the map would play better in an deffuse map, if the Ts cannot jump up to the CT-mid area. Maybe if it required boosting. but as it is now, I would bet most games on this map would just be the t-s rushing mid every game, as it is easy to take, and offeres alot of opportunities on attacking both sites.

I will come back with more things, but this is what immediately struck me.

​That pretty much matches the first feedback from the playtest. You're absolutely right about bombsite B.

My intention with that window above A was to give a possibility to throw flashes / smokes. But I see that it's propably op. I think I'll get rid of it (or make it wider).

The boost in the middle area sounds really interesting. I'll definitely look into that.

 

Thank you for taking the time to look at my map. Finally getting some feedback sure is great!

[catfood]

awesome reminds me a bit of red faction

[esspho]

After watching 5 hours of replays from the playtest and reading through quite a few comments by playtesters I've got a few more things to add to my list:

• maybe bombsite B should move (back again) toward the warehouse / depot
• when players exit the conveyor they should not have to worry about campers that stand in the corners right behind them
• the ledge at bombsite A (above the tunnel that leads to the jungle) should be closed off
• there are some unfair sightlines that need to be blocked (in bombsite A  / in the warehouse - looking down to the depot)

The outcome of that playtest is quite impressive. 90 people showed up and I'd like to thank every one of them - I know who you are.

Here are some heatmaps that will be extremely helpful for me in the following steps (best viewed in full size).

imgur

You can see that terrorists are a little bit in favour right now - which matches most of the comments I got so far. I hope to balance the gameplay by working off my list.

Stay tuned for more.

Edited June 21, 2015 by esspho
sorry for long image

[Andre Valera]

Loving the custom content, keep up the good work

[esspho]

Update.
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=221594521

 

I've been working off my list from the last playtest and finished most of my props and textures on the way. I've come critically close to that 200mb BSP Limit so that's one of the next big things. One thing that I did not fix yet is the sun glare that tends to blind people. I'm saving the overall lighting and   cubemaps and all the likes of it for next week.

Here is the full album on imgur

The major changes since version a4 are these (click for fullsize):

There has been a playtest today that leaves me with a bit of mixed feelings. I'll read the chatlog again and watch the demo and come back to this later.

As always please tell me what you think. Thanks for reading.

 

 

[Vaya]

 

you need to 'unconnect'  a lot of the areas- not everything needs to lead to everywhere- give the teams some downtime and make encounters more predictable. Make map control possible and important.

The chokes need a lot of work too. I think if CTs were moved  back and if the new choke areas had decent cover it would play a lot better.

[jackophant]

It's hard to tell from the overview, but there was a real inconsistency between chokepoints and the bombsites.

Ts have 2 entrances into the "main area" of mid, but CTs had 4-5 entrances to camp from, let alone cover to play with making mid an absolute death trap. Opening up the drop route so Ts can actually use it rather than dropping into an area they can't do much from could help...

In all honesty, I felt there was a lot wrong with the flow. I could make a long list picking it all apart, but first I'm more intrigued as to how you got to this stage of the layout. Excuse the image if it's massively out of date, but I'm using it as reference:

You show your encounter points, but how did you get to this stage? I found that CTs were actually getting to position 8 as Ts just got past position 7. You've obviously moved B back to position 4 which felt more like a convoluted walkway out of Doom3 than something from a counter strike map, and if CTs go to 8 from 3, they are faster than going via 4.

The jungle area is really CT aggressive, and there were some funky angles through wooden posts and trees I was being lit up from and had no idea what was going on. The encounter by 6 is about right, but the encounter by 2 literally never happened in the playtest last night.

I think 10v10s are quite good at really highlighting problems that a 5v5 may mask quite well. In fact, I would hazard a guess that there were too many routes to effectively watch as 5 CTs so they were forced to play much more passively for fear of flanking.

I know the layout isn't that complicated, but I think it's too complex for counter strike. There are also some very steep ramps which never play nicely and I would halve the incline on area 8 and the other pile of dirt you climb near mid somewhere.

I appreciate that you've put a lot of work into analysing your layout, or at least suggesting what should be happening, but I think you've missed the mark. The feeling I get is that you may need to work on your understanding of the game for any future changes to work. Sorry for the rather oppressive wall of text, I think you're definitely on to something different, but it needs a nudge in the right direction. I'm happy to oblige if you want that help.

[esspho]

Hey Jack,

thanks for your input. I also felt that the game wasn't flowing right during the playtest. Contrary to that I think the majority of the matches played during the playtest on june 17th where okay. So you're definitely right with the 10v10 / 5v5 statement.

The funny thing is that I intentionaly wanted to build a rather small map that allows for good navigation with clearly diverse areas. Since I was intrigued by the mining setting (which is totally appropriate for counter strike imo) I ended up with a mine, a jungle and a set of adjacent buildings. I guess it became to complex somewhere on the way.

I set that encounter point near 8 that you mentioned based on the timing. In the current version of the map the tspawn was set back so it's not really viable anymore. The point 2 encounter is really rare - I'll propably make a cut here.

I'm gratefull for the help you offered and I'd really like to go over the single aspects that you see need to be worked on. I totally want to improve.

 

Hey Vaja,

disconnecting areas and (re)defining chokepoints is definitely the way to go I think. In the chat you suggested to normalise the layout a bit which propably means the same. Is there a specific connection that you see needs to be cut?

 

On the contrary: are there elements which should not be altered as they are?

Edited August 22, 2015 by esspho

[Vaya]

Hey Vaja,

disconnecting areas and (re)defining chokepoints is definitely the way to go I think. In the chat you suggested to normalise the layout a bit which propably means the same. Is there a specific connection that you see needs to be cut?

 

On the contrary: are there elements which should not be altered as they are?

 The below is off the top of my head..I'd need to review the map again to give an educated answer.

• Jungle doesn't seem that important to the overall design?  The layout could be changed so the bridge itself is the choke area.
• I didn't like the drop at all...and I can't think of a map that has two unique paths onto the mid area that don't add an element of risk/reward to the secondary path. HOWEVER I understand where jack is coming from in the post above. I would suggest working mid so the terrorists have more options when using the main path and there is less places for the CTs to camp. Turn the Drop into a Boost(?)

 

In regards of 'what to keep' you'll probably find a lot of your current structure is fine but cover will need to be amended to work with any changes to the layout. With every change you should be asking yourself what the area is required for and what areas it affects to ensure the map remains a cohesive whole.

[esspho]

I've been busy with rearanging the layout a bit but was since then only able to test it with bots.

If you want to take a look there is a quick compiled prototype on the WORKSHOP

bot_showbattlefront gives me 3 encounterspots:

• jungle / bridge
• road / mid
• conveyor

I must say I like it that way and I'm going to work on from here.

You can find an album with before / after screenshots HERE

good night everybody

Edited September 3, 2015 by esspho
tired...