Ironically this is one of the worst threads I've ever seen on these forums; hence ban defy please

I've played both Arctic and Flake a little. Both were only in pugs though, so maybe some of the things I observed were due to differences in skill or people being new to the maps. Anyway, here are my thoughts.

The first thing about both maps is that they are supposedly designed for highlander play. Usually a map which is designed for highlander will be larger and have more alternate routes than a map designed for sixes, and the design of these maps bears that out somewhat.

In terms of size, Arctic is a little larger than Viaduct and Flake is about the same size. Additionally, both have more flanking routes than Viaduct - Arctic has two paths across the point as well as a "cliff" like Viaduct and a path underneath, similar to Waste. Flake has several little paths among the various structures, where it is very easy to hide and pass unnoticed. When I played them in 6v6, (especially Flake), what this translated to was constant roamer bombs and scout flanks. In highlander, I would expect much the same with a lot of spy and roaming pyro action.

The key feature of Arctic is probably the crates at middle. I don't think such a large height advantage at mid is present on any other KOTH map. Soldiers spamming from the top of the crates are very powerful, as it's almost impossible to approach mid without taking significant damage. Even more annoying, though, are minisentries placed atop the crates - an engineer can put a dispenser in the upper room and control a large portion of the map with infinite wrangled minis. That alone is probably my biggest gripe about this map in highlander play.

As demoman, Flake was an extremely frustrating map for me to play. Already mentioned was how easy flanking is - though whether you consider that an upside or not probably depends which class you play. Also annoying is how strong heavy can be on this map. Since the map is small and there are many enclosed spaces, you're almost always fighting at close range. And constant small height differences make it easier for the heavy to neutralize your soldier than it would be on other maps. Maybe flanking scouts can beat 450 hp heavies, but personally I'd rather not deal with either. Also Flake has a cliff on the edge, so of course you're going to get one scout who thinks it's hilarious to FaN you off - whether you like that or not, again, probably depends which class you play.

"How best to win highlander games".

I think that's fine, Lunacide. Obviously if people are going to transition into comp play there will be a period when they don't know what they're doing. If we want this community to grow, new players will have to be a part of it.

Besides, I doubt anyone here would use this system. Like you said, it would be lower-skill than TF2lobby, which most of us already don't use. That's fine though - again, the goal is getting new players into competitive play.

Solid player, positive and intelligent. Definitely give him a try.

I have a lot more difficulty with the stair jump, actually

Those rules seem fairly lenient. I don't see this being an issue for anyone who isn't a massive douchebag.

You can play lobbies even if you're bad. Yes, you will do badly at first and probably drag down your team. But you don't have to be "skilled" or "highly motivated" to get over it - just accept that it's impossible to be good at something when you're just starting out, accept defeat and learn from it. It is not a character flaw to be a newbie, it's a natural state which everyone goes through, and anyone who gives you a hard time over it is just refusing to acknowledge that they were that newbie at some point themselves.

Croissant is a decent map. I honestly don't know what everyone is bitching about. Arnold is here, so if you have actual issues with Croissant maybe you should voice them instead of vaguely complaining about nothing in particular.

I've played a few pugs on this map. In my opinion, it's not on the same level as other new comp maps like process or even ashville, but is not a hopeless case either.

The first thing you'll probably notice upon loading this map is that it's fairly ugly. That's because the entire map, from one spawn to the other, is composed of pretty much nothing but wooden boxes and walkways. There's no variation of theme and there's nothing interesting to catch your eye and stand out.

The ugliness issue sort of plays into my second point, which is that a lot of the map is composed of small rooms or corridors. In particular the area between spawn and second is just a bunch of semiconnected little rooms. Explosive damage classes will love these little chokes, as they render scouts completely useless in those areas.

The abundance of small areas also makes the map a lot more confusing than it needs to be. With so many possible routes, it's difficult to know where one should be going to get somewhere or watching to prevent a flank. More importantly, possible routes are often not obvious. It's also difficult to comm positions on this map, meaning teamwork tends to go out the window.

Re: concerns about scale, that is not a big issue in my opinion. It takes about as long to walk between points as it does on granary. However, it does take longer than average to rollout to mid, because so much of the map is indoors.

In summary, evergreen has potential as a competitive map. It should be cleaned up, with some small areas replaced by larger, more visible routes, and other vestigial features removed entirely. In addition, the map should be restyled significantly to remove excessive structures and make it actually fit its name.