Custom Map #805: Quartet. By: Pusillanimous

[AutoPost]

This topic is for discussion of map #805: Quartet


Author: Pusillanimous
Size: 255x255

Desc:
Four-part harmonies.

[GoodMorning]

Thanks to Sorrontis and stdout for feedback and testing.

[Sorrontis]

Our pleasure!

[Stickman]

This maps is weird.

The beginning was fine, a bit of a curve ball with almost indestructible particles. Grabbed what I could, mired bottom-right corner with omnis and had about five mines captured. Everything looked kinda good, with every ship built I could sway particles to one side, so I decided to go for the kill.

Spoiler

After that, total chaos and destruction. If not for onmis, who managed single-handedly (twelve-lathely?) hold out bottom-right isalnd, would be a ragequit. No safezones, hard particles everywhere,  unforgivably short delay of respawing enemies. I was somewhat unsurprised to see just five names on completion list, unfortunately.

[close]

[GoodMorning]

Thanks for your opinion, I need to learn this lesson. Perhaps it was a mistake to ask Sorrontis for feedback (meaning no offence, just recalling some CW3 maps). Certainly I do not expect any map I make to be popular.

This map rewards some ... unconventional ... tech choices.

Spoiler

Hiding behind islands works well, and stdout mentioned (after testing an earlier, harder, version) that hollowing one or more islands out or cutting off a "shell"/"shield" layer of land is very effective. Mine cannons can protect the top-right mines singlehandedly.

If you like, I can make a retuned version, with rather more generous delays on spawning, and more power.

[close]

Is there anything else I should learn from?

[svartmes]

Wow I was really impressed with this map! It made me think and play unlike any other! Careful planning, preparation and some unconventional tactics that seemed to pay off. I only wish that you had made the win condition to kill all instead of "just" 32 :)
Rage factor is high and it's certainly not a map for everyone but I really like it and think it's great that we have a couple of designers making both "normal" maps and these more unconventional maps to keep the game fresh for veterans.

Personally I don't like to see revisions of already posted maps, unless there's some fatal bug or flaw. Difficulty will always be "unbalanced". Sure you could post an easier version that might satisfy some, but then others would find it too easy. Trust yourself, I think you are a great mapdesigner! :)

[GoodMorning]

I'm glad you enjoyed yourself. I trimmed the endgame because I felt it began to drag on at around the third quarter of the map. If it's difficulty you like, I can send you an in-testing version.

I do like the counterattacking element, but I should, I think, have provided warning. I like surprises, it keeps the narrative feeling; but from a gameplay perspective it is less than enjoyable.

Thanks for the feedback, it really does help.

[Stickman]

Thanks for your opinion, I need to learn this lesson. Perhaps it was a mistake to ask Sorrontis for feedback (meaning no offence, just recalling some CW3 maps). Certainly I do not expect any map I make to be popular.

This map rewards some ... unconventional ... tech choices.

Spoiler

Hiding behind islands works well, and stdout mentioned (after testing an earlier, harder, version) that hollowing one or more islands out or cutting off a "shell"/"shield" layer of land is very effective. Mine cannons can protect the top-right mines singlehandedly.

If you like, I can make a retuned version, with rather more generous delays on spawning, and more power.

[close]

Is there anything else I should learn from?

That's quite unconventional, but a nice twist. I guess I just don't use this tech too much or not inventive enough. And I think that wasting your time on a retuned version is counterproductive.

Spoiler

Honestly, I dislike the land burner tech. This game is very lax with all the resources except land. Mines can be retaken, ships can be rebuilt and even loss of HQ is not an automatic fail (sometimes), amp gems can be swaped around and reclaimed if lost, but land, once burned, cannot be created. And land is so nice - it gives energy, it gives shelter, it gives you space for omnidrops, land is a friend, why would I burn my friend?

Nevertheless, if you thought that hollowing out island was a good idea, it would be nice to nudge (heavily, probably) player into the idea by, for example, giving a player one hollowed out island from the beginning, or, if possible, having some pre-built lathes finishing the job.

I think that victory was premature, I would prefer to clear the whole map, even if it's grindy. And I feel that my main problem with this victory is unexpectedness, the feeling of no control. While I was notified that I need to kill off 32 enemies, there was no ingame counter, no messages (preferably in event tag form) to help me with this. I was not the early end that disappointed me, it was a surprise of an early end.

I also feel that the whole inevitability of spawning enemies unsettled me more than enemies themselves. There is no interaction with the spawning and that is quite against the core of the game. It would be cool if I could prevent spawning by some method, for example, by destroying stationary stunner, that marks the spawn point (and lore-wise is a representation of a rift opening).

(This is probably a very disjointed post)

[close]

[GoodMorning]

Thanks for that, you raise some very good points.

I didn't think of or use that technique, having a similar attitude to you, but thought it might help some people.

I agree that I need to work on progress indicators. As I said, I had actively trimmed the endgame, but it seems this was a mistake.

As to inevitability - I think I disagree, but I definitely need to label it better. An Emitter inevitably spawns particles, which can be fought thereafter. But you know exactly what it will do.

You raise a good point about attackable markers, I'll see if that fits with a future concept.