Mordhau
 JoelTarnabene
  • Likes received 9
  • Date joined 11 Jun
  • Last seen 14 Jun

Private Message

7 9

Red actually have an easier time retaking mid as the map is now. Their natural path from spawn leads directly into mid, while Blue easily get distracted on their way by cavalry, archers and ladders. I'm sure the map would be awesome in organized play, but in a pug it's just a frustration when you yourself are objective-oriented.

7 9

@Nauht said:

@JoelTarnabene said:

@smug said:
The horses are a big reason the map is garbage in the first place. One of it's saving graces is that there are parts of the map where you can AVOID that cancer gameplay. If horses could actually help cap the center point anymore than they already can there would be no reason to ever vote crossroads ever again.

Removing horses altogether probably would of made crossroads a lot more bearable and less hated tbh.

Your thesis is correct but it's not just true for crossroads, it's true for EVERY front line map, the team that has cav dominance usually ends up winning because of how overpowered they are as a force multiplier. That is why you will see horses banned for comp frontline.

My thesis for crossroads was the opposite though. That the team with the most riders loses the map. Have you really played Crossroads? The horses don't contribute at all to the objective of the map and are laughably easy to pick off from the balista.

Last game I had on it I just stayed at the ballista and racked up like 25-0 before it was over.

So yeah, you want a focus for cavalry, something for horses to do and contribute to the map right? So what was wrong in my first reply? Infantry have their focus - the middle. You should rename the title to "Crossroads needs something for horses to do other than spawn camp".

You basically reinforced what I said in my original reply too - play to win (hold the middle) or play for fun (go horse). Up to you.

No, I had 3 suggestions and one of them was to remove most of the horses. My concern was with fixing the map, not promoting cavalry. If that doesn't go hand in hand for most people - so be it. Remove the horses then, but don't keep the map as it is.

It seems you are very passionate about the horses being bad for the game. I can respect that, but don't let that blind you when reading the forums. So much hostility here anyway, no need to add to that with misunderstandings like this.

7 9

@SoRoofless said:
I think they should go full retard with crossroads and add trampolines and rope swings.

That's actually not a very bad idea. Make it a gimmicky, fun map. But releasing that as a 5th map in the pool is questionable. We need more proper Frontline maps.

7 9

@smug said:
The horses are a big reason the map is garbage in the first place. One of it's saving graces is that there are parts of the map where you can AVOID that cancer gameplay. If horses could actually help cap the center point anymore than they already can there would be no reason to ever vote crossroads ever again.

Removing horses altogether probably would of made crossroads a lot more bearable and less hated tbh.

Your thesis is correct but it's not just true for crossroads, it's true for EVERY front line map, the team that has cav dominance usually ends up winning because of how overpowered they are as a force multiplier. That is why you will see horses banned for comp frontline.

My thesis for crossroads was the opposite though. That the team with the most riders loses the map. Have you really played Crossroads? The horses don't contribute at all to the objective of the map and are laughably easy to pick off from the balista.

Last game I had on it I just stayed at the ballista and racked up like 25-0 before it was over.

7 9

@smug said:
Yes 2/3 of your suggestions were bad because they involved horses

3 of my suggestions involved horses. What were you trying to contribute here?

7 9

No, then it's apparent you didn't read my post. I suggested to either make cavalry useful for the map objective or remove most of them. I didn't advocate for more cavalry, just for a better map. You do realize you can make maps where play to win and play for fun aligns, don't you?

7 9

It feels like the new map has some design issues. How it plays now is: the team which focuses the least on cavalry wins. The goal of the map is to control the mid point, King of the hill style. The more of your team is focused on riding and countering enemy riders the less bodies there are left to contend the same mid point.

It feels like the designer had two good ideas and tried to mesh them together, but it fails.

Suggestions to remedy the situation

· Make a new objective to the side of the keep and walls. A huge objective circle where cavalry can fight and contest a point
· Remove most of the horses reducing their impact on the map
· Open up the lower floor of the mid point so that cavalry can attack and run or cap if needed

Either of these would work, but I feel the first one is the way to go to keep the map different from the others in the pool.