NA2

[Tydeus]

The easiest solution would to let NA admins control the NA2 map rotation, and they would mostly pick smaller maps suitable for our low population. Right now, the rotation is controlled by people that don't even play on the server.

The position was offered to all NA administrators, no one wanted it.

[Phew]

^ This is why I have been GTXing NA2. Get on attacker team and win or waste your time...

Most people have discovered that your only hope when on defense is to ignore the flag, stand near the top of a ladder, and hope for valor. Which of course only makes it less likely that defense will win.

Valor made a bad situation worse on NA2.

[Phew]

The position was offered to all NA administrators, no one wanted it.

I could have sworn I saw Para complaining that he had all kinds of suggestions for NA2 map rotation, but they wouldn't let him touch it.

[Elindor]

This is why I suggested to Fips (and therefore to Jacko) that we make a separate rotation for NA2 that removes some of the larger maps - I am not sure but I think it is on the table.

It is also why I have suggested a spawn timer for defense that adjusts to population thresholds.

-----

And no, game admins have no control over map rotations....
Except that they can vote to skip to the next map.

The map rotations were set by Jacko/Mustikki and are not set by Fips/Teeth.  However, any changes that are made are reliant on patches in order to go LIVE - so it requires action by chadz or cmp or someone like that.

[Fips]

Small maps have the same balance problems on siege. 30 seconds to spawn as defenders is way too much on small castles when there are like 15v15 people. At least that's what happens on EU. Attackers win anyway. I can think of like 3 maps where defenders actually win with low population and those are the big castles with lots of walking. Fixed conquest might change all of that.

No, teeth and myself are responsible for the rotations, and to update them it needs a server restart.

[Elindor]

Small maps have the same balance problems on siege. 30 seconds to spawn as defenders is way too much on small castles when there are like 15v15 people. At least that's what happens on EU. Attackers win anyway. I can think of like 3 maps where defenders actually win with low population and those are the big castles with lots of walking. Fixed conquest might change all of that.

No, teeth and myself are responsible for the rotations, and to update them it needs a server restart.

I do agree that fixing the small pop defense spawn time is the thing that would have the biggest impact for sure.

As for small maps, they have similar balance issues but with a small pop people get to do more fighting - on the bigger maps its just running around by yourself most of the time.

[Jacko]

What Fips said. Rotation changes requires a server restart, it's adding/updating scenes that requires a patch.

[Fips]

I do agree that fixing the small pop defense spawn time is the thing that would have the biggest impact for sure.

As for small maps, they have similar balance issues but with a small pop people get to do more fighting - on the bigger maps its just running around by yourself most of the time.

Yes i know and i will probably get rid of the big ones for NA, but i just wanted to let you guys know that it will definitely not change the balance issue.

[Phew]

I do agree that fixing the small pop defense spawn time is the thing that would have the biggest impact for sure.

As for small maps, they have similar balance issues but with a small pop people get to do more fighting - on the bigger maps its just running around by yourself most of the time.

Yes, these are two separate issues that conspire to kill NA2:
1. The huge maps are boring with <20 people, so players quit when they come up in the rotation
2. The long defender respawn means that attackers usually win when there are <30 people, so people rage when they spend a few rounds as a defender with x1 and quit

#1 and #2 are related, since a large map usually means defenders spawn miles from the flag (sometimes farther than even the attackers).

There are other annoyances, like maps where the defenders can't even open their own doors to the flag, so they have to watch helplessly through the doors while the flag is captured.

[CrazyCracka420]

Or you could sally out, come over to NA1, stop playing an inferior game mode with less players, and stop splitting up the already very small NA community.

[Phew]

Or you could sally out, come over to NA1, stop playing an inferior game mode with less players, and stop splitting up the already very small NA community.

After like 10 gens avoiding battle, I hopped over for a couple rounds a few months ago, just to see what I've been missing. Several players had found a "hole" on that map, and used it to delay. Everyone just got couched/shot while trying to pursue them through the "hole".
I haven't been back since. 

"Battle: The game mode for people that want to spend as little time as possible actually fighting."

[Tojo]

Or you could sally out, come over to NA1, stop playing an inferior game mode with less players, and stop splitting up the already very small NA community.

na1 has like 80+ players every night. Siege fluctuatesbut has maybe 35-40 players at primetime.
also the noobs come to na2 so they can play more without waiting for a new round.
the thing is cracka, we love(d) playing siege with castles and respawn so i dont have to alt tab everytime i die. It used to be great and i could keep my multi for a couple rounds even on defense. Now its attackers or bust.

[Canuck]

I wouldn't exactly blame others for "splitting up the community" when they enjoy a different game mode than you do Huseby. I've been playing battle more than siege since that conquest update and I have to say that I generally had more fun on siege. Lots of the guys who I used to see almost exclusively in NA2 have either just stopped playing or are only coming on at peak population times. It sucks. Making people play battle won't make them enjoy it.

[CrazyCracka420]

Well for me it's disappointing when I see NA1 has 75 players, and NA2 has 25 players.  When we could instead be fighting with 100 players in the same server.  Especially considering the Siege game mode has been terrible for at least a couple years (even with ladders it was terrible, mainly due to the maps, which is the same problem it suffers from now).

I don't like playing a game mode where one side is winning the round 90% of the time (maps are always one sided where there's a clear advantage for either the attackers or defenders).   At least in battle, you have a semblance of balance in the maps and can get on some very long x5's (if you get some lucky valor).

[Fips]

Well, obviously you guys have been doing siege wrong then for a very long time, even when it was populated enough. EU siege has a very good balance since i started playing cRPG, except for the newest maps that still need reworking, which is always the case. Balanced maps on first version is almost impossible to do on siege. Battle is much easier when it comes to balance.