Author Topic: Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps  (Read 1325 times)

Offline Wyrdstone

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps
« on: 19-04-2014, 21:04:02 »
This seems to be the recent trend of FH2. Both sides have a very similar number of tickets but the attacker has to capture EVERY SINGLE FLAG to stop the bleed.

It seems to more often than not result in a loss for the attacker.

I just played Giarabub and the Australians held 3 flags most of the game yet they lost because they couldn't push the Italians off that last flag. It was clear that the Australians were a better team but it didn't matter because it's so much harder to capture everything.

I can't say what % of maps have this system but it seems far too many IMO.
I play as Dansolo online. I am also a FHT player.
You will often see me typing questions/crap/exclamations/obscenities.

Offline Matthew_Baker

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.759
    • View Profile
Re: Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps
« Reply #1 on: 20-04-2014, 03:04:30 »
I don't mind maps where the attacker has to cap out the enemy to stop the bleed, but I agree that there are a few maps that aren't balanced correctly for this. (Giarabub being one of them)

I like the trend that FH has put on some maps when they introduced sector push; the idea that the defender has to conduct a fighting retreat and just hold out long enough for the attackers to bleed out. However, I think there are a few factors that a 'cap-out' map has to have in order to work properly.

1. The attacker needs to have an advantage in assets (tanks, arty, tickets, planes, whatever); the attackers should be given the means to push from flag to flag. The attacker has to always have the advantage to cap any given flag.   
AND
2. It needs to be a push map; if an attacker needs to cap someone out in order to win, they can't relegate half their team to defend other flags and still expect to cap a flag that 'in theory' has the entire enemy team defending it.   

Some maps that, imo, are balanced well for 'cap-out':
Siege of Tobruk; Germans have air power advantage, tank advantage, ticket advantage. Also a push map that only needs 2 flags to be defended while the Germans attack the last flag.

Alam Halfa; Germans get huge tank advantage from the start. Also sector push so the Germans only ever have to defend one flag at a time.

Ramelle Neuville; Germans obviously get huge tank advantage and sector push to cap out Americans. (I've seen this map go both ways, yes)

Hurtgen Forrest; Americans get tanks & tickets to push to Katzenhardt from the start. Still get tanks advantage and don't have to defend any flags while they attack Germeter.

Not so well:
Bardia; Aussies get a slight tank advantage but they have to defend 3 more flags before capping the last one.

Giarabub; Aussies barely have an advantage, maybe in arty, but it doesn't help too much on the last flag. Not to mention they have to defend 3 flags before capping out the last, after losing a good chunk of tickets just trying to get through the S-Mine ridden walls.

Tunis; (last I checked this was a cap out) Sector push is in this map which is good, but the British have no other real advantage except in tickets. Not to mention they have to move through a select few bottlenecks that give the defenders a HUGE advantage.

These aren't all the 'cap-out' maps but some examples of good and bad ones imo.

[/2 cents]
« Last Edit: 20-04-2014, 04:04:43 by Matthew_Baker »

Offline Surfbird

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.101
    • View Profile
Re: Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps
« Reply #2 on: 20-04-2014, 13:04:44 »
Nice post Matt. I agree about the maps that work well and don't work so well in your opinion, Falaise Pocket works good as well.

Another one that does not work so well is Port En Bessin. And afaik it has even become harder after the patch, because the Allies were sometimes winning without capping too many flags before0. Now they need to push until the last flag for real in order to win. Works with 40-60 people on the server, with more it is hard to achieve and usually does not happen.

Anyway, I would not remove the feature from any of these maps,

Offline Mr.IAmHere

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps
« Reply #3 on: 20-04-2014, 19:04:42 »
Can't someone make a sub-mod or something to remove this? I tried using the BFEditor but the changes I made never showed up ingame  :(

Offline Mudzin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 692
    • View Profile
Re: Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps
« Reply #4 on: 21-04-2014, 03:04:52 »
Those changes relating push are done in mapdata file which you can edit using notepad.

Offline Oberst

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 854
    • View Profile
Re: Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps
« Reply #5 on: 21-04-2014, 14:04:23 »
The real question is: What is a balanced map? A map, which is won 50 percent of the time? Can this really be achieved by a map with one defending and one attacking team, especially on a public server?

The next question is: Are tickets really a good cetegory for winning or loosing a map? Especially on the cap-it-out maps, this is not the case! I see the whole idea of the cap-it-out maps different, they HAVE to be hard for the attackers. The actually win them, a lot teamwork has to come together. And if they are won, it really feels like achieving something, which is not done everyday. This is what makes the core of this game. Viewed from that perspective a lot of these maps work quite well. The first sector is overwhelmed very easily with superior assets, after that a second sector open, where the game usually flows very nicely. But the very last sector/flag can only be taken with a lot of teamwork.

Offline Mr.IAmHere

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps
« Reply #6 on: 22-04-2014, 23:04:46 »
Those changes relating push are done in mapdata file which you can edit using notepad.

Do you know what bit to edit?

Offline Matthew_Baker

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.759
    • View Profile
Re: Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps
« Reply #7 on: 28-04-2014, 04:04:47 »
This is a minor thing that I was wondering before. But a lot of times on 'cap-out' maps, the ticket result at the end of the round is never as close as the round actually was. (example; Hurtgen Forrest ends with the Germans winning 500-0 but the Americans had just captured Katzenhardt) And in many of these cases, new people who don't know the maps have no idea that you have to cap out a team to win the game. I see a lot of people complaining; "this is ridiculous, we got crushed because the map is unbalanced, look at the tickets!" or a sector gets capped and I see "we're still bleeding?!" so in some cases I feel like the casual player gets discouraged thinking maps are blatantly unbalanced when the round is actually closer than it appears.

So I got to thinking if there was a way to manipulate the tickets in a way that would show how close the round actually is, and maybe help end rounds that are stalemated with a bad attacking team:

Defenders:
On a 'cap-out' map, the only objective for the defending team is to defend the flags and delay the attackers long enough for them to bleed out. The amount of times they die, and the amount vehicles etc.. they lose has no effect on the outcome of the map. (now that PeB is fixed, the defenders will never lose a map by being killed faster than the attackers can bleed) for this reason I think it would be safe to make the tickets only reflect the value of the flags they need to defend.

Falaise for example; The Canadians start with 300 tickets, 100 tickets per sector. The Canadians never lose tickets unless a sector is capped out. When the first sector is capped, the Canadians go down to 200 tickets, after the second sector they're left with 100 tickets. Once they're capped out they still end up with 0 tickets. This way when the round ends after 2 sectors capped, the Germans lose 100-0 instead of say 400-0. Not a big deal, but the ticket result more closely shows how the round actually was.

Attackers:
This one has a little more effect on gameplay. Right now, the attackers get X number of tickets that bleed till they cap everyone out. It's kind of like a time limit for them to finish the map. A lot of the time tho you see an attacking team that just isn't as good as the defending team, and for the next 1000 tickets they just get repeatedly slaughtered against the defensive lines (PdH) This can make a round drag on for both sides. The defending side is bored and the attacking side is frustrated and gives up long before the round ends. (sometimes this leads to a lot of disconnects)

What I propose is to assign a value of tickets that it SHOULD take the attackers to cap a specific sector. Have them bleed so they have to cap that sector before the tickets run out, and they get tickets added on for each sector they cap.

Falaise again; (note: attackers are always bleeding throughout the map) The Germans start with 300 tickets (just a vague number for now) This is the amount of tickets it should take the Germans to cap and hold Church and Destroyed Battery to lock the Sector. Once the Germans cap the sector and lock it, they gain X number of tickets. (X being how many tickets it should take them to cap St. Lambert South and Center)

Every time the Attackers cap a sector, they gain the amount of tickets needed for them to cap the next sector. In this way the attackers are rewarded for capping sectors quickly (they get tickets added on to what they have left). Also, if the attackers are just not good enough. The round ends quickly and painlessly after a short time of attackers getting slaughtered. (my thinking on this example is PdH where I've seen a lot of teams just not able to get past the first sector and then we spend an hour, 1500 tickets, waiting for the round to end)

I kinda wanna know what everyone else would think of this idea. (maybe I should put it in the suggestions forum) A. is it even possible to do this? B. is it even worth the time? C. would it work like intended or make maps more frustrating?

I just figured it would be nice to tailor tickets to the Sector Push gamemode, instead of tweaking them for the conquest modes they were intended for. Also, the same could be done for objective mode assigning values to objectives (much like insurgency in PR) 

Offline LuckyOne

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.706
  • Purple Heart Collector
    • View Profile
Re: Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps
« Reply #8 on: 28-04-2014, 11:04:45 »
^ I guess that could work... Sort of like lockdown time in RO2 (which caused quite an uproar when it was introduced, mind that). But I would still miss those epic rounds when everyone gets slaughtered for 500 tickets, and then suddenly one squad makes a breakthrough and the whole team shifts into high gear, winning a round that seemed lost just a few moments ago...

I feel that FH2 right now has a way of representing an epic struggle against impossible odds sometimes...

We can always try it and see how the people like it. It could be done on one map for a test, and then if people like it, the devs can fix more maps like that.
This sentence is intentionally left unfinished...

Offline Kelmola

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.854
    • View Profile
Re: Too many 'Cap everything to stop bleed' maps
« Reply #9 on: 07-05-2014, 15:05:59 »
More pushmode maps is a good idea, but not so sure about the ticket gains. Last-minute reversals do happen often enough so this would take out a lot of the excitement while shortening the suffering (except that you only know which it would have done if you played the map).