Layout idea: Both a central tech point as well as dual RT?

Pandademic

Forward: Just floating this idea because I'm new to the game (as of x-mas), and not very advanced in NS2 strategy yet. I've made maps for TF2 before, but Spark is a new ballgame and I'd love some input on this as I begin my descent into the Spark editor.

Here's a quick sketch of the kind of layout I have in mind. http://i.imgur.com/ZqWPCcW.png

<img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/5019629/uploads/FileUpload/44/ded6f40b286d15c6355dbd616b01f2.png&quot; />

4 random spawns on the exterior, plus 4 expansions, then 2 separate rooms in the center: one with a tech point but no RT, the other with dual RTs. The idea is to give teams a choice: extra RTs or a 3rd tech center. I expect Aliens will want the 3rd hive, and Marines will want all the RT they can get. But what other kind of gameplay would you expect on a map like this?

xtcmen

We were going to try that with Jambi, but it made the central location too powerful.

dragonmith

Could you have a map like that, say with marines in a stronghold of two res and tech point, and make it a better alien map overall?

It would be a fine line, but you have the boost from the one room offset by a map of vents or something...

EDIT: Nice map layout too, got any plans/dreams for the theme?

Howser

Hey man welcome to the forums! The ideas seem pretty solid, but I have some pretty strong PERSONAL OPINIONS about what works in NS2 and what doesn't.
In no official maps is there a tech point without a res node, I'm not saying It cannot be done, just that it seems to be a convention of the game and that there's probably reasons why they don't.
I see the maps aren't perfect symmetrical but they're close and a map designed around both X and Y symmetry might be easy to balance but its not going to be quite samey each game.
Through my experiences I'm not a huge fan of double res points, not for pub games anyway. You get a much nicer spread of action and more varied tactics if no one point has a huge value attached to it.
That said I'm going on the Veil style double res point, central to the map, close together and fairly easy to hold both at the same time. Mine shaft or Refinery make the nodes so vulnerable and spread out that its actually easier to spend your effort holding the single res nodes elsewhere in the map.
Also two 'free' res nodes for both teams seems a bit much and is something that has been removed from a lot of the official maps (Docking and refinery to a certain extent). stagger the distances, spread them out and force the teams into interesting engagements and give the commanders important choices to make.

Edit: spell-check!

DarkSeraph

Howser wrote: »

In no official maps is their a tech point without a res node, I'm not saying It cannot be done, just that it seems to be a convention of the game and that there's probably reasons why they don't.

The reason is simple: if this is your last tech point and you hold nothing else on the map, you have already lost the game because you have no income and will likely be res-locked. Tech points always have resource points to avoid resource lock.

Pandademic

Thanks Howser! The mapping guidlines suggest techs without res are possible, but as you say they haven't used it, and I think Darkseraph has found the answer why.

Dragon, I think that's a really interesting idea. I'm not a fan of fixed starts for teams, but I also love the idea of setting the teams up to max out upgrades and get endgame going ASAP.

Not much in the way of plans or themes yet. Just dipping my toes atm. I'd like to include far more plants and natural setting (green house, or overgrown station perhaps) but might need to wait on modelers to fill in the prop collection. I like big outdoor areas, with fenced in or glass protected passages so that the playable area is still confined, but the feeling of openness remains. Another idea that I like is a research station centered around an open area (unaccessible to players) with some kind of massive alien artifact. Think the moon scene in 2001, where they have their station/excavation built around the obelisk. http://i.imgur.com/pVfrWZx.jpg

Evil_bOb1

You should probably stay away from the mapping guidelines in terms of layout development. This document was released with the tools in 2009 on a hypothetical idea of what NS2 would be. It has been updated since but not enough to make it relevant with the state of the game.

xtcmen

In terms of balance, your map should be as symmetrical as possible. A general theme of what works is the RT>TP>RT>TP structure. Although this system is not original, people want to play balanced maps. Keeping that in mind, jambi is pretty balanced and its layout is not very symmetrical. However, according to NS2 stats the win rate for aliens is very close to 50%.

In sum, symmetrical maps are not necessary but they are best for creating balanced maps. The double res TP simply does not fit in with what works in NS2. Feel free to try it though, I am interested to see how it plays out.

AurOn2

sometimes asymmetry is more balanced than symmetry. look at ns1 over ns2. ns1 is far more asymmetrical, yet because it's like that, it's far more balanced.
in mapping, it gives you a choice, is this better for me, or is this better for me? namely strategy.
When symmetry is in place, strategy is null and void, because no matter what you do, every strategy has the same base.
that's why summit could never work. and it never did.

Joseppe

DarkSeraph wrote: »

Tech points always have resource points to avoid resource lock.

Are you sure ?

I am doing a map with 2 central techpoints (without a ressource tower + no start at match beginning) and 1 rt between them. These are 3 different powernode locations.
If this is really true (each techpoint NEEDS own rt), then i have to change to layout.

DarkSeraph

Well understand, I only say always referring to current maps. You are welcome to test it out - it's what this whole thread is about! But I think that is the reason why maps thus far have avoided it.

xtcmen

AuroN2 wrote: »

sometimes asymmetry is more balanced than symmetry. look at ns1 over ns2. ns1 is far more asymmetrical, yet because it's like that, it's far more balanced.
in mapping, it gives you a choice, is this better for me, or is this better for me? namely strategy.
When symmetry is in place, strategy is null and void, because no matter what you do, every strategy has the same base.
that's why summit could never work. and it never did.

You are comparing apples to oranges. The only reason why Assymetry worked in NS2 was because there was only 4 tech points (1 marine, 3 Alien).

In NS2 you have 5 tech points, and both teams are required to expand. In NS1 only the aliens needed to expand, but in NS2 both teams have to. Which is why symmetrical maps are more common, and more balanced in NS2.

I once drew Jambi's layout. It doesn't look symmetrical on its face, but nonetheless is still very symmetrical. I'll post it soon.