Forged Alliance Forever

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-09T13:39:42+02:00

I have three suggestions:
1 - make the land-bridge wider, i.e. remove the final narrowing section in mid. I think this would make the mid position more interesting, without fundamentally altering the map dynamics.
2 - make access to hydros equi-distant for all mirror locations
3 - move the island farther from the rock location (out of TML distance say) and possibly enlarge the island a bit. I'd say keep it on the edge of the map.

Statistics: Posted by Kof — 09 Nov 2013, 13:39

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-08T20:32:45+02:00

The name of the map is just for testing.
I can not change the logic of all the key points of this map, I can only do a few points that make the difference, in a few spots to others.

The front player has every possibility, if you know how to press the wings of the opposing team,by sell fear to front player, where opposing seas will wast, some time try to stop the front player , and that leave some time for the wings of his team to do a good eco,and free them to other options.
And are several ways,but depends the game too.

I cant change too much the structure of this map, many love it like it is now, but these minor adjustments in my view make this fabulous map even more attractive.

Statistics: Posted by LittleInferno — 08 Nov 2013, 20:32

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-08T14:51:06+02:00

If you don't want to change the map to much so actual Seton player gets it as a new standard, i recommend to don't edit heightmaps at all except for spots-evening purposes.

Thoughts :

1. ACU placement for reclaiming. About evening mass for both teams, north ACU is faster to get into the wreck field, but south ACU directly gets the best reclaim placement when he arrives (= amount of mass you can reclaim without having to move your acu again). So keep that aspect in mind too when you even it. If you want symetry, just put the exact same units on each side and mirror them. Dont use different factions units or random wreck placement on each side.

2. If there is only one thing to do, really it is to even hydro & mexes locations. Especially hydros which actual positions differences among spot are not justified or balanced at all, unless i'm missing something deep about overall balance of the map. But who blindly trust GPG work on perfect balance ?

3. Mex/Fac adjacency. South front can place his first factory so it gets 2 mexes adjacency bonuses. North can't. East island allow this too with the 2 eastern mexes, you can put a factory between them for dual adj. bonus. West island does not have this. In my opinion you should place all starting mexes so that : a) an acu can build them 4 without having to move & b) you can put a factory in the middle getting 4 mex adjacency. Or 2facs x 2 mex. There aren't enough maps (and players) allowing to use this feature imo.

4. Islands. It is very personnal, but the only major terrain change i'd like to see is to get the 2 islands on the unused map corners instead of near rock spot. That would make both navy players able to compete for it which is fun. Rock already has dedicated reclaimable rocks, a closer hydro and a somewhat safer base due to cliffs. I don't see why rock spot should get 5 more mexes on top of that. Look at what good players such as iliketa can put on this spot with good BOs (especially south rock), its "too much, too fast" imo. But i must say i actually like how useless & remote the top-left / bottom-right corners are. It allows you to (re) build secret navy there sometimes, without it popping on radar/sonar.

6. Ocean depth. On some shores of the map, you can send a tall XP like a GC or Chicken somewhat far into the ocean, with the top of it not being underwater, thus allowing it to shot at ships. You should check that, and make it even for all spots (dunno how it is now). A cool feature might be to have a different texture for the ocean ground depending on its depth, thus allowing players to see how far they can send defending GCs against navy sieging them.

7. Tree groups near starting locations. The tree that come in groups are very nice reclaiming spots, if you know/micro them you can do amazing things early on (like getting hundreds of energy without building pgens). Maybe it is worth checking those are evenly spread around spots too.

8. Annoying trees near starting locations. Especially (only ?) for beach, the trees are too close to spawn location, and you dont have much of a choice to place your factory if you dont want your ACU to move. I dislike it, i wish there was a cleared spot when i spawn.

9. Multiple ACUs to middle. Walking time from navy spot to middle spot. Again i'm not sure of the actual state for this, but you may want to even the walking time for an ACU from his starting spot to the front guy spawn location. I know not much people send their ACU to middle in FA but that would be an other sign of a balanced map.

---

PS : i have replays proving that you can win the game by invading front even if the 3 other spots are still competing or even if some are lost. It just depends how good each player is, how much navy/air there is, what the composition of the land force is, etc... We're not here to make general assumptions about the gameplay, even if i understand how this is related to editing the map, its based on your personnal experiences, and all games are different, with players of different levels. Actually if you won air and both navy, game is 90% won already, you just send land forces to finish the stuff hidden in the backspot.

PS 2 : no, TMDs can't defend you against cruiser spam, there is always a point where there is more missiles due to TMD not shooting in a smart way. Saying that you need T3 battleships to wreck bases is untrue.

PS 3: i think navy can shoot deep enough inland already, and i like how beach is close to front, and the flatness of the map between them. (again its personnal); so i kinda dislike the inland sea laguna idea between the spots.

PS 4 : "Seton's Clutch Balanced" might be a better name than "Seton's Clutch Elite" to get people to try it ?

Statistics: Posted by Poch — 08 Nov 2013, 14:51

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-08T07:31:09+02:00

Cantor wrote:
In order for a mid attack to be viable, BOTH navies and air need to be already won. If any other side is lost, it's not possible. If all 3 other spots are already won then well...the game is already over so why bother.

Indeed, that is how most games usually go. There have been rare occasions where, with the air player support, I have managed to push into the other side of the land bridge. Even without full naval superiority. However, doing so usually requires some sort of tech rush. Followed by a forward turtling position. Because, streams of T1 spam will be intercepted on the land bridge by opposing navy. So the best approach consists of pushing past the land bridge with higher tech build capacity and cause "merry hell" with a forward defensive position/firebase.

Sending the ACU into this position is a sure way of getting ejected from the game. So usually, my preference is to go UEF and rush with a Sparky, Pillar, Flak and Mobile Shield combo. The great thing about the Sparky is that it is the fastest way to get T2 build power into position.

I wouldn't say that a land assault requires naval and air dominance. But it does require all of your allies to effectively contest their mirrors (aka. "dominance denial"). For instance, a successful submarine spam may not be effective for bombardment, but it does force the enemy bombardment to be more cautious. Similarly, an inferior air force might still cause your opponent's air force to continue building ASF, rather than gunships or bombers. Which makes their air force impotent against your ground position.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 08 Nov 2013, 07:31

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-08T21:15:11+02:00

This are just pictures off old map ,that where never fix,the new map its already done,i only have change mexes placement,power plant,water coulor, 1 moore mexes to sea guy(that i can take out iff players want) and 1 moore wreck assault boat t3(that i can take out iff players want) to the up team,to be the same to both teams.

Try the new map , and say what you think.
Iff you like the old coulor ,i will fix.

Im also make onother to 1v1 players but its diferent,and a bit smaller map.

Statistics: Posted by LittleInferno — 08 Nov 2013, 02:34

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-08T02:31:02+02:00

Did you make this map from scratch?

Statistics: Posted by Ato0theJ — 08 Nov 2013, 02:31

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-08T02:27:15+02:00

One moore not alowed 4 :)

Statistics: Posted by LittleInferno — 08 Nov 2013, 02:27

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-08T02:30:36+02:00

This are some things from old seton map,that on new map i have fix.

See the diferences between down and up teams,and how mexes,power plant, are totaly diference placement, from 1 team to the other.

The power player from front players are fix too.

Statistics: Posted by LittleInferno — 08 Nov 2013, 02:25

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-07T14:38:19+02:00

In order for a mid attack to be viable, BOTH navies and air need to be already won. If any other side is lost, it's not possible. If all 3 other spots are already won then well...the game is already over so why bother.

Statistics: Posted by Cantor — 07 Nov 2013, 14:38

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-07T14:22:33+02:00

Firewall wrote:
But love it or hate it, that is what Seatons Clutch is all about. His job is to take one for the team.

Naval bombardment of mid is certainly a map feature, but I don't really think it makes for interesting play in the same way that any other 2 vs 1 situation generally doesn't make for interesting play. The end result is turtle play unless one side has a significant naval advantage in which case it's probably just a matter of time anyway.

If the goal is to mix up Setons a bit, encouraging land pushes with protective terrain in the middle would probably make games more dynamic. I don't think meta would change much aside from requiring a naval win for bombardment to be effective but, again, that game is probably already won. If the goal is to change Setons as little as possible then obviously it's not a change you want to make... But in that case there's no reason to change anything?

Statistics: Posted by Retnut — 07 Nov 2013, 14:22

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-07T13:47:54+02:00

LittleInferno wrote:
The down Team, since the line to is base:
            12 (UEF-T2 Heavy Tank: Mass-198 (Wreckage 178) total = 2136
         + 10 (-UEF T3 Heavy Assault Bot: Mass-480 (Wreckage 432) total = 4320

                 Down team ......... Total mass income = 6456

The Top Team , since the line to is base:
    12 (Cybran T2 Amphibious Tank: Mass-198 (Wreckage 178) total = 3204
   +4 (T3 Cybran Siege Assault Bot: Mass-480 (Wreckage 432) total = 1903
   +1 (UEF T3 Spy Plane: Mass-195 (Wreckage 175) total = 175

                 Up team ......... Total mass income = 5282

SO has you see 1 team got some advantage.

You draw the line wrong, if you would put parallel to the shape of the land bridge and directly in the middle one loyalist and one t2 uef tank would go to the north team and it would be 5892 (north) vs 5846 (south). Perfectly balanced if you look at the numbers. It is hard to say which mid spot is better in terms of mass, south has hydro advantage, though.

I really don't like the idea of making the map symmetrical. As it is now there are advantages and disadvantages making the map balanced, this lack of "perfect" symmetry without making the game one sided or unfair is one of the features that makes Seton's appealing to me.

That said I like the idea of adding a few more hills for a bit better navy protection, especially at front and I also like the idea of putting islands in the ocean corners, although they should not be that big. Maybe they should be somewhat closer to the enemy side (without having mexes on them) so they are strategically important as a place where you can place omni etc.

Actually multiple small, flat islands in the oceans on the way to your enemies base would also be interesting as it would allow some kind of island hoping strategy.

Statistics: Posted by SC-Account — 07 Nov 2013, 13:47

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-07T02:51:28+02:00

rootbeer23 wrote:
do you really believe that ships should be able to target bases with impunity?
a fight of naval forces against land forces and structures is pretty unfair.
this and the fact that an attack with land forces across the center is not a viable strategy are
the biggest faults of the map.

No it is a map feature. In order for an army assault on the land bridge to be successful there needs to be naval and air dominance. You forget that you have 3 rear players who are supposed to be helping the middle player. North and South Navies, and Rear Air Force. All three are required to support the front player.

Naval bombardment is highly effective. But to do so, one must commit their fleet to a position. If they are being threatened in the rear by your allies fleet. This will force them to manoeuvrer and break the siege. Similarly, air attack will be a threat and will ultimately determine the outcome.

The thing is that the front player is the one who cops all the shit till the cavalry get there. But love it or hate it, that is what Seatons Clutch is all about. His job is to take one for the team.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 07 Nov 2013, 02:51

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-07T02:11:33+02:00

do you really believe that ships should be able to target bases with impunity?
a fight of naval forces against land forces and structures is pretty unfair.
this and the fact that an attack with land forces across the center is not a viable strategy are
the biggest faults of the map.

Statistics: Posted by rootbeer23 — 07 Nov 2013, 02:11

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-07T01:37:42+02:00

Yep those things makes it non perfect :/

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 07 Nov 2013, 01:37

Re: The subject only for seton players

2013-11-06T21:26:19+02:00

The down Team, since the line to is base:
            12 (UEF-T2 Heavy Tank: Mass-198 (Wreckage 178) total = 2136
         + 10 (-UEF T3 Heavy Assault Bot: Mass-480 (Wreckage 432) total = 4320

                 Down team ......... Total mass income = 6456

The Top Team , since the line to is base:
    12 (Cybran T2 Amphibious Tank: Mass-198 (Wreckage 178) total = 3204
   +4 (T3 Cybran Siege Assault Bot: Mass-480 (Wreckage 432) total = 1903
   +1 (UEF T3 Spy Plane: Mass-195 (Wreckage 175) total = 175

                 Up team ......... Total mass income = 5282

SO has you see 1 team got some advantage.

Statistics: Posted by LittleInferno — 06 Nov 2013, 21:26