|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
A couple of suggestions for the official map list...
* Offworld Docking Port should be moved from Illegal/Not Rated to "Open". I'm not sure if it's currently Illegal or Not Rated, but I think it belongs in Open. Too many doors and constricted movement to be considered Standard, but it shouldn't be Illegal.
* The rare maps should land in the Illegal category: Sith Temple (rare map from a few years ago), Blue Squadron HQ, Wilderness Bunker (limited release from Map Pack 5). They should be Illegal since they didn't get a wide enough release, but it's worth having their images on the list if posible.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/28/2009
Posts: 414
|
I'd have to see the image of ODP, but I don't believe it's illegal.
The other names, I don't recognize, so they are likely already illegal.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
Offworld Docking Port is under "Illegal and Not Rated" in the 2014 version of kezzamachine's visual guide. The rare maps currently are not even in the visual guide. They're 'not rated' as opposed to 'illegal'. (Although not being rated does in fact mean they are not legal, which I guess makes them illegal.) I just mentioned them as something worth adding to the visual guide. They don't even need to be mentioned in the floor rules, though. Incidentally, here are images of the rare maps. Sith Temple:  Blud Squadron HQ:  Wilderness Bunker: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_I5XQe9M99c/UlhY3GhbD5I/AAAAAAAAANc/aYln1AAcryg/s1600/Communications+Bunker.jpg
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/28/2009
Posts: 414
|
Where is this visual guide?
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
Kezzamachine announced the latest version of the visual map guide in this thread. The link to his dropbox is here. His direct link to the file is here. For easier reference (since the announcement thread is buried in the forums somewhere), swinefeld posted a link to Echo's rules references as the first link under Community > Links. Echo's drop box has several rules references there, including kez's visual map guide. Echo's direct link to the visual map guide is here. (Extra links just in case one or the other is broken at some point in the future.)
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/28/2009
Posts: 414
|
That is a mistake, but it may have been an oversight on my part as I may not have included it on one of the updates. Often times, I list Restricted or Open with an update and categorize the rest as standard. It's quite possible it got overlooked in that regard if I left it off the list.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 9/23/2008
Posts: 1,487
Location: Lower the Hutt, New Zealand
|
Happy to do an update! I'm all for getting it right. Except if it needs to be left.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
|
Tomb of the Acolytes might need to be bumped down to standard. With the diplomat abuse it really turns into melee hate in all the 1 wide hallways. Especially consider the fact that we have a whole subset called "diplomacy" headed down the pipe.
|
|
Rank: Vornskr
Groups: Member
Joined: 12/25/2009
Posts: 27
|
TimmerB123 wrote:Tomb of the Acolytes might need to be bumped down to standard. With the diplomat abuse it really turns into melee hate in all the 1 wide hallways. Especially consider the fact that we have a whole subset called "diplomacy" headed down the pipe. Really its a great melee map just wish the middle sides were more open and yes Diplomat can be annoying on that map. Kind of feel its too melee friendly. I had a hard time in sealed keeping my stealth guys back. I never felt it was that bad before because I had movement breaks to get around. That being said I am not sure.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/29/2008
Posts: 1,783
Location: Canada
|
TimmerB123 wrote:Tomb of the Acolytes might need to be bumped down to standard. With the diplomat abuse it really turns into melee hate in all the 1 wide hallways. Especially consider the fact that we have a whole subset called "diplomacy" headed down the pipe. That's interesting: the best melee map can be turned into a melee-hate map with the careful placement of a couple of 5pt pieces....grrr
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
|
thereisnotry wrote:TimmerB123 wrote:Tomb of the Acolytes might need to be bumped down to standard. With the diplomat abuse it really turns into melee hate in all the 1 wide hallways. Especially consider the fact that we have a whole subset called "diplomacy" headed down the pipe. That's interesting: the best melee map can be turned into a melee-hate map with the careful placement of a couple of 5pt pieces....grrr It is an ironic twist. If only the map weren't changed (subtle but significant for gameplay) from it's original blueprint. It was designed to play well with Melee, but those little changes made it abusable with diplomats. Regardless, it's the map we have now. I've always felt like smart map/squad synergy should give you a slight edge, never turn it into a near auto-win (or near auto-loss) against any competitive squad. I'm afraid as is that this map can create unfairly bad match-ups against top tier squads, so I think it needs to get bumped.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/30/2008
Posts: 2,093
|
Until it has been played and abused to the top tables, I think we should leave it alone. I dislike the map for other reasons, but as with all map discussions (and card errata), I think we should have more data that it is an actual issue. I mean how many players used it to make T8? or win regionals? or do well in the NZ tournies?
Also, unless your squad is 100% melee, it is actually pretty easy to kill diplomats as there are a lot of twists and turns so you can find good LOS to kill diplomats.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
|
urbanjedi wrote:Until it has been played and abused to the top tables, I think we should leave it alone. I dislike the map for other reasons, but as with all map discussions (and card errata), I think we should have more data that it is an actual issue. I mean how many players used it to make T8? or win regionals? or do well in the NZ tournies?
Also, unless your squad is 100% melee, it is actually pretty easy to kill diplomats as there are a lot of twists and turns so you can find good LOS to kill diplomats. You used it to get to the finals match at Chicago, with cloaked aggressive negotiations. Ettiene used it to end up first after Swiss in the Championship using diplomats to trap Yodabuck in the final match of Swiss. You have also talked about there are no squares (or an extremely low number) safe from strafe on that map. I don't know what more evidence is needed. Waiting until there is an overwhelming number of players abusing something is a bad method to use. Preventing abuse before it becomes widespread is a much better strategy.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/30/2008
Posts: 2,093
|
Some map has to be the winning map. By your argument we should get rid of anchorhead because Weeks used it to win the whole thing and there was a couple squares that he could hide mandalore that you had to be disrupted in order to attack him.
I didn't win in PA when I was playing Lancers on it (which should be the dream matchup). I have played on the map more than most probably, and can def say that it isn't my favorite map, and I don't personally like it, but at this point I don't see a huge problem with it. There are much worse maps on the list that I would rather remove before this one.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
|
I don't personally like Anchorhead, but it should stay.
The reason comes down to this, engagement vs avoidance.
If a map allows you to avoid engagement, it's not good for the game. Diplomat abuse = avoidance.
Anchorhead does the opposite, it forces you to assault the center, which is not bad for the game as a whole. (Perhaps bad if your squad isn't built to handle that, but it's not avoiding engagement)
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
Come to think of it, Diplomats are some of the worst melee-hate there is.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
|
FlyingArrow wrote:Come to think of it, Diplomats are some of the worst melee-hate there is. Which is why a map full of 1 square wide corridors, should not be on the restricted list. Especially with tons of new diplomats/aggressive negotiations figs coming out
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/26/2011
Posts: 951
|
The diplomats just made it so I had a chance against melee. The good thing is they no longer get gambit, also, tombs is one of the easiest to get lines of site to a diplomat and nothing else. Pinning yobuck to luck and skill, but given a second run that would likely not happen. What with r2 and panaka, I was fortunate I was able to kill pancake before he could swap Bucky out. Anywho...
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/26/2011
Posts: 951
|
With that being said I also think tombs should get the axe, the map itself encourages stall tactics and lack of engagement. Never have I had a match where the main fighting happens in gambit. It is always a side hall or corridor. IMO
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
I'll agree about the lack of fighting in gambit, but I haven't run into stall tactics or lack of engagement on the map. The lack of doors generally means that if you aren't attacking you'll be attacked.
|
|
|
Guest |