Forum

cp_well changes?

Created 10th September 2009 @ 08:56

Add A Reply Pages: 1 2 3 Next »

Garm3n

SdX BLU
sdx

Hi :)

I just got an idea of changes to, imo, improve cp_well. (Please don’t let my extreme Photoshop skills affect, in any way, negative on my seriousness)

1. Remove gates, and setup time (It’s also possible to keep them. Both versions would be great to try)

2. Add stairs in front of / outside / up to middle cap: http://img143.imageshack.us/i/cpwell0001.jpg/

3. Remove parts of 2nd and 4th cap cw, to improve the visibility for the attacking team, and make it little harder defending: http://img4.imageshack.us/i/cpwell0004.jpg/ and http://img9.imageshack.us/i/cpwell0003z.jpg/

I hope you can see what i’m after here? :D I also hope someone with interest wants to make these changes so we can try them out :)

Thx <3

.____________.

Could be interesting to try out, but whether or not these changes are for the better i’m not so sure of. Someone edit the map and make people playtest it >:(

howdeh

Perilous
WUL

I think well is fine how it is, we need atleast one map with setup time as it makes things more interesting. Removing the train jumping rule would certainly add more fun to the map.

ambra

they are too busy designing new hats

compton

cvx|

Looks like changes that are worth trying.

Removing the train jumping rule would certainly add more fun to the map.

+1

eX

[j]\\\'
[j]'

What howdeh said. Allthough I still would like the rule where a team must stay on it’s side ’till the timer reached 5 seconds left. Removing setuptime on the only map being an ordinary cpmap, but with setup, wouldn’t add variety to the game. It’s something unique for the map, and it should stay like that. From a competative perspective, I see no reason to remove/modify a map from the old pool. You can’t obviously like all maps, but nonetheless you have to play them cause your opponent wants to. Why else would we actually be competing. Whenever a DECENT argument would show up regarding removing the map or modify it, that would probably be taken into consideration. But unless there are any disadvantages or advantages for either team, it shouldn’t be modified at all. By claiming it’s a booring map without actually giving reasonable arguments just makes you look silly. I’m not saying you did garm3n, but there are some players who do. You’ve actually brought an idea for SOME reason, I just dont know what reason. I do really hope that no action will be taken regarding cp_well. It’s a fine map, just as any other map in the pool. Just not as ordinary as dust2 and granary.

Skyride

DUCS

Hmm…

This stuff all looks pretty simple to do, I might have a bash at it later, im on my laptop and I don’t have SDK on it (free period so could have did atm too). Personally I think that either way, we need to keep the setup time.

my version won’t look too pretty but atm, all we’ll need to test is the gameplay.

I do really hope that no action will be taken regarding cp_well. It’s a fine map.

I never understood why people have such problems with it, it’s really fun if you don’t drag it out…which most people do since they don’t have any BALLS.
And feck off with no setup time, there will be no getting onto the point for anyone but scoots without gates.

.____________.

What howdeh said. Allthough I still would like the rule where a team must stay on it’s side ’till the timer reached 5 seconds left. Removing setuptime on the only map being an ordinary cpmap wouldn’t add variety to the game. It’s something unique for the map, and it should stay like that. From a competative perspective, I see no reason to remove/modify a map from the old pool. You can’t obviously like all maps, but nonetheless you have to play them cause your opponent wants to. Why else would we actually be competing. Whenever a DECENT argument would show up regarding removing the map or modify it, that would probably be taken into consideration. But unless there are any disadvantages or advantages for either team, it shouldn’t be modified at all. By claiming it’s a booring map without actually giving reasonable arguments just makes you look silly. I’m not saying you did garm3n, but there are some players who do. You’ve actually brought an idea for SOME reason, I just dont know what reason. I do really hope that no action will be taken regarding cp_well. It’s a fine map, just as any other map in the pool. Just not as ordinary as dust2 and granary.

I don’t see the problem with modifying the map and trying it out?

Garm’s ideas can contribute to making cp_well a better map. Modify the map, playtest it and then comment on it. I myself rather like the setup-time with the gates, and agree that we should have atleast one map with this setup in the primary map-pool. But saying the changes can impossibly be for the better is opinions you don’t get to have until you’ve actually tried it out and played it.

There are alot of people that dislike this map for several reasons, though that is ofc not a good enough reason to run around demanding a remake of the map. Its a good map and doesn’t _need_ a remake, but i’m simply asking “why the hell not?”. Screaming NO to this idea without testing it is pointless.

eX

[j]\\\'
[j]'

I’d play the map whatever the outcome would be. But yet from my pov, I see no reason in changing/modifying/”improving” the map since I believe it’s an already balanced map for both sides. That’s still my oppinion and that I stand for. Garm should have creds for doing this. People whos actually trying to make something for the community in any way by proving something will always have my respect. Nonetheless, I still disagree with the fact and ideas that cp_well should be remade, modified or even removed. With that said, I’ll stop discussing it in garms thread, as it’s his suggestion and this probably shouldn’t be discussed in here.

/done

GangsterAlgot

I really do think that removing the gates and setup would take away alot from this map. Then you would just have another fast rush map that isn’t granlands. Please don’t remove the only thing that makes this map different.

As I’ve said in another thread, the middle isn’t the problem with cp_well. Actually i think the middle is awsome. The problem is the stalemate that inevitably comes when attacking/defending 2/4:th.

I think as fragga said in the cp_pro_well thread that the 2/4:th cp needs a third entry. Perhaps move the stairs outside the building could be a solution.

garm’s changes to the 2:nd sounds great though, it would be nice to open it up some more.

dunc

infs
dp.

swetur stfu you mongtard, well is fucking dire

F2

Danmark

cp_well is virtually never voted on pickups and I can’t remember the last time that someone wanted to play cp_well in a pcw without having to play it due to an upcoming cw.
So people should stop arguing that cp_well is fine as it is.
Obviously it needs changes to get people to enjoy it.

jgmaster

BM

cp_well is virtually never voted on pickups and I can’t remember the last time that someone wanted to play cp_well in a pcw without having to play it due to an upcoming cw.
So people should stop arguing that cp_well is fine as it is.
Obviously it needs changes to get people to enjoy it.

Same could be said for gpit?

Memento Mori

Perhaps, but the difference is

well – dire map with 2 doors as chokepoint, huge stalemates

gravelpit – too hard to play with smacktards on pickup because it requires coordination

Add A Reply Pages: 1 2 3 Next »