perhaps we should look into encouraging more viewer friendly maps in the pool if gpit is considered a very important map for that and people don't like playing it much at all.
on a side note i think any new map would probably encourage quite a bit of viewership for anyone who watches casually now not that any pool map is really that bad.
perhaps we should look into encouraging more viewer friendly maps in the pool if gpit is considered a very important map for that and people don't like playing it much at all.
on a side note i think any new map would probably encourage quite a bit of viewership for anyone who watches casually now not that any pool map is really that bad.
Extend the season by another week and add a new map.
Extend the season by another week and add a new map.
Fuck gpit, I really wish we would hurry edifice along
Fuck gpit, I really wish we would hurry edifice along
Maps were fine. Don't replace Gpit.
Maps were fine. Don't replace Gpit.
I'd like to see someone design an A/D or a KOTH map that are good enough to knock out a 5cp.
I'd like to see someone design an A/D or a KOTH map that are good enough to knock out a 5cp.
MY RANKING OF THE 5CP MAPS AND WHY.
1. gullywash and badlands: plenty of space between every single point.
2. granary and process: plenty of space between second and mid. little space between second and last.
3. snakewater: last is fuckin' awful.
metalworks: not enough space between second and mid but plenty of space between second and last.
good maps have plenty of "stages" of attacking/defending each point. for example, when defending badlands spire, you have the choke, then the yard, then grey bridge, then trash or battlements. on metalworks, you have the hallway, then the choke, then the two doors you can back out of. but even those three things are way too close to each other.
you have to think about the "stages".
while most people think yukon has a terrible last, the second-mid is great. why? see paragraph above.
MY RANKING OF THE 5CP MAPS AND [b]WHY[/b].
1. gullywash and badlands: plenty of space between every single point.
2. granary and process: plenty of space between second and mid. little space between second and last.
3. snakewater: last is fuckin' awful.
metalworks: not enough space between second and mid but plenty of space between second and last.
good maps have plenty of "stages" of attacking/defending each point. for example, when defending badlands spire, you have the choke, then the yard, then grey bridge, then trash or battlements. on metalworks, you have the hallway, then the choke, then the two doors you can back out of. but even those three things are way too close to each other.
you have to think about the "stages".
while most people think yukon has a terrible last, the second-mid is great. why? see paragraph above.
2sy_morphiendWhen a map is objectively more conducive to upsets by virtue of its design then it is necessarily more random than any other map in the rotation.
This is not true.
If the map is less DM-heavy and more focused on strats, then it has a higher chance of upset.
Randomness will lead to a map that has a higher chance of upset, yes. However, just because a map has a higher chance of upset, it isn't necessarily based on randomness.
[quote=2sy_morphiend]When a map is objectively more conducive to upsets by virtue of its design then it is necessarily more random than any other map in the rotation.[/quote]
This is not true.
If the map is less DM-heavy and more focused on strats, then it has a higher chance of upset.
Randomness will lead to a map that has a higher chance of upset, yes. However, just because a map has a higher chance of upset, it isn't necessarily based on randomness.
No change won the vote, thankfully.
No change won the vote, thankfully.
mage243652sy_morphiendWhen a map is objectively more conducive to upsets by virtue of its design then it is necessarily more random than any other map in the rotation.
This is not true.
If the map is less DM-heavy and more focused on strats, then it has a higher chance of upset.
Randomness will lead to a map that has a higher chance of upset, yes. However, just because a map has a higher chance of upset, it isn't necessarily based on randomness.
There's no point arguing this when it seems to be commonly accepted among players that have been around for 4+ seasons now that there is one strat on gpit and the only thing that changes is if whatever your "get the med" strat is works.
[quote=mage24365][quote=2sy_morphiend]When a map is objectively more conducive to upsets by virtue of its design then it is necessarily more random than any other map in the rotation.[/quote]
This is not true.
If the map is less DM-heavy and more focused on strats, then it has a higher chance of upset.
Randomness will lead to a map that has a higher chance of upset, yes. However, just because a map has a higher chance of upset, it isn't necessarily based on randomness.[/quote]
There's no point arguing this when it seems to be commonly accepted among players that have been around for 4+ seasons now that there is one strat on gpit and the only thing that changes is if whatever your "get the med" strat is works.
BlueberryVillainNo change won the vote, thankfully.
i have to admit, not having to learn a new map this season is pretty nice.
[quote=BlueberryVillain]No change won the vote, thankfully.[/quote]
i have to admit, not having to learn a new map this season is pretty nice.