Sleepwalker

[Propkid]

I like Sleepwalker. What Heartsong seems to consider the quality of a map is its curvates and the resulting skiing-friendliness. While I have to admit these are the map features that make them fun to be on, I also have to admit that sometimes in competitive gaming we just have to suck it up and get over that one map which everyone finds hard/unpleasant. IMO a map is only broken if it doesn't accomplish its purpose by promoting non-objective gameplay style or by being imbalanced. I won't go into the features of a bad map just because of the vagueness of the term 'bad'.

Sleepwalker is a good TDM map as far as I've seen: it doesn't promote fast skiing full of escapes and re-positioning. Instead it promotes a more 'tactical' approach to the game; not due to slower movement/less maneuverability per say, but to the fact that once you get somewhere and lose speed, you're stuck for a while in that position. This makes people think more before they take a very offensive stance as making a positioning mistake is much more penalizing on that map.

The first game I've played on Sleepwalker has ended completely differently than it started and I was completely delighted: at first everyone took the almost-classical approach of taking Gunners/Rocketeers and just trying to almost mindlessly rush into and kill the enemy. Then a couple of people realized that the map is split in half, across the middle tower and that it's not so easy to maneuver on; these people started D-sniping from areas near to their spawn. They couldn't reach the enemy at their D-positions, but the enemy was still 'almost mindlessly rushing' into O. They got burnt :]. The enemy picked up the sniper too and soon the game turned into an almost entrenched warfare, with the dead man's zone being the middle tower. But then people once again realized they could come up with a counter-tactic and there was a rapid increase in the number of Defenders and clusters being used on both teams. Soon the game became really really balanced, with both teams looking almost exactly the same and team members performing actions that nearly resembled the archetypical (can't come up with a better word) actions of their loadouts: snipers were constantly trying to position themselves to support the O and prevent the enemy O from getting near. Raiders were constantly on the move, trying to stop the enemy Sentinels from reaching their Snipers and trying to take out the more offensive and better placed snipers on the enemy team. Sentinels were picking out lonely targets and were themselves trying to lonely raid the enemy D-snipe. All of the map between the spawns was being used; people were trying to flank, sneak in from the back or just gain speed and break through the dead man's zone. I discovered new Legions.

That was the most varied Legions game that I've ever played, it was a ~7v7 and at one point there were 5 snipers, 3 sentinels and 2 hornets on the map. THAT'S how good [edit: public] TDM should look like. I was genuinely happy for Legions as most of the people that I've played with that round seemed new and were adapting insanely quickly, learning new gameplay styles and tactics. So PLEASE, let that map be. You can make it less frequent on the rotation/ get a vote system in place but just let the map be.

 

[Application-1]

That was the most varied Legions game that I've ever played, it was a ~7v7 and at one point there were 5 snipers, 3 sentinels and 2 hornets on the map. THAT'S how good [edit: public] TDM should look like. I was genuinely happy for Legions as most of the people that I've played with that round seemed new and were adapting insanely quickly, learning new gameplay styles and tactics. So PLEASE, let that map be.

My frustration captured by one man.

 

[MightyDeath]

That was the most varied Legions game that I've ever played, it was a ~7v7 and at one point there were 5 snipers, 3 sentinels and 2 hornets on the map.THAT'S how good [edit: public] TDM should look like. I was genuinely happy for Legions as most of the people that I've played with that round seemed new and were adapting insanely quickly, learning new gameplay styles and tactics. So PLEASE, let that map be. You can make it less frequent on the rotation/ get a vote system in place but just let the map be.

 

[Strife]

post

It's good that people can make the map work, and I'm all for people using the sniper, but not a lot of people like it and I can postulate that even less would like being forced to use it to win a map. While I'm not defending people who refuse to counter the other team's strategy and complain about losing, there should be more than one viable strategy. Making the terrain leading to the middle and the middle itself more fluid would allow people who aren't sniping to cross the map faster and try to deal with the enemy snipers, which would work if they could move as a group at a decent pace. As it stands, though, they'll just get picked off as they traverse the planar landscape unless the sniper is not very good.

The towers could serve as sniper cover while crossing the map, but if there's more than one person sniping you're going to be spending more time behind one than fighting, since ammo is so readily available. If they removed some of the ammo stations there would be moments where snipers are disadvantaged and the enemy could attempt to close in on them, instead of getting wrecked as they attempt to chase a sniper who's running tower to tower with the ability to replenish their ammo indefinitely. The removal of certain ammo stations would force more movement and control from teams as well because, assuming they realize the importance of dominating a tower and the attached ammo station, they'd be more inclined to fight on objects and not a patch of ground in the middle of nowhere. I think I can speak for most of Omni when I say that vying for control of a tower or particular area (that is, of course, elevated or clearly advantageous in some other way) and defending it was one of the most entertaining aspects of competitive/organized TDM.

These changes, in conjunction, would make it less painful for people on the receiving end of the sniper rifle (or rifles) and a bit more difficult for the snipers. Though, unless the sniper is tactically inept, it shouldn't be a big deal. There should be at least one distinct disadvantage (in this case it would be the hazard of being picked off while moving to get ammo and the increased chance of being overwhelmed on/around a tower with no ammo station.Of course, I'm aware the risk of being overwhelmed is already present but with a little awareness and foresight it's too easy to predict the movement of your enemies, especially when they're hovering along the ground at like 50 m/s, and run or combo jump away and to the next tower. ) to sniping, even if it is situational. Just my thoughts on the map and things, though.

 

[Propkid]

It's good that people can make the map work, and I'm all for people using the sniper, but not a lot of people like it and I can postulate that even less would like being forced to use it to win a map. While I'm not defending people who refuse to counter the other team's strategy and complain about losing, there should be more than one viable strategy. Making the terrain leading to the middle and the middle itself more fluid would allow people who aren't sniping to cross the map faster and try to deal with the enemy snipers, which would work if they could move as a group at a decent pace. As it stands, though, they'll just get picked off as they traverse the planar landscape unless the sniper is not very good.

I like the changes you've suggested, though the terrain change would be a risky one. What I want to say is that although yes, "there should be more than one viable strategy" but also there shouldn't be one loadout that fills all the requirements posed in a match (ie. Gunner/Rocketeer). This is what happens if the map doesn't enforce any revisions in a team's strategy (Stygian).

Snipers are just about as disadvantaged as any other class when moving around the map or even getting attacked. A sniper on an elevated O spot is a sitting duck for other snipers or any loadout wishing to flank. People just need time to see that it's D sniping (meaning near-spawn positioned sniping) that's overly buffed.

Also, it's possible to gain speed on SW. Maybe not from any starting point, but it's possible for one to "cross the map faster and try to deal with the enemy snipers". Just look in the outward direction of the map and also note some of the ledges near the towers. Fast enough for a flanking ambush party; the middle-centric team effort will quite often lead to the very sides of the map not receiving enough attention from the enemy team.

 

[Heartsong]

I like the changes you've suggested, though the terrain change would be a risky one. What I want to say is that although yes, "there should be more than one viable strategy" but also there shouldn't be one loadout that fills all the requirements posed in a match (ie. Gunner/Rocketeer). This is what happens if the map doesn't enforce any revisions in a team's strategy (Stygian).

A Gunner loadout has 75% of the available weapons in the game. The only thing that they're missing is a sniper rifle. The problem is that, when you go into a match on Sleepwalker, more than half of the people are using a sniper loadout. Unless the game's landscape has change DRASTICALLY since the last time I played, this is the only map where this kind of sniper use can be seen. It is also, as many people have noted, far and away the most powerful weapon to use on this map. This is the case because 1.) The map is a shooting gallery. It's flat. You can see for miles (and miles and miles and miles) which exacerbates the "map control" problems plaguing the current sniper balance and 2.) It's terribly difficult to gain speed on the map without taking yourself out of the match to go to the outskirts (at which point you can, of course, be sniped anyway). It's pretty easy to hit a target that's moving quickly with a sniper rifle. Hitting someone going 50 units/time is a joke.

Snipers are just about as disadvantaged as any other class when moving around the map or even getting attacked. A sniper on an elevated O spot is a sitting duck for other snipers or any loadout wishing to flank. People just need time to see that it's D sniping (meaning near-spawn positioned sniping) that's overly buffed.

On a map like Sleepwalker where there is no real avenue for gaining speed, D sniping is simply anything behind the "lines" as it were. You can be sitting in the middle of the map, secure in the knowledge that you can pick off anybody who comes after you, because you'll be able to see them leaving the base at a scorching 40 units/time. So the best way of countering a sniper? Of course! More snipers. Don't get me wrong, the first thing I was told to learn when I started playing Legions was the sniper. My "position" during Omni practice matches was D sniping. I've thoroughly enjoyed the sniper, but having 50% of the people on a map using the sniper rifle is just awful for game play. It'd be different if we could approach the snipers to attack them, but we have to deal with the flat that is Sleepwalker while being picked off by what seems like the entire enemy team.

Also, it's possible to gain speed on SW. Maybe not from any starting point, but it's possible for one to "cross the map faster and try to deal with the enemy snipers". Just look in the outward direction of the map and also note some of the ledges near the towers. Fast enough for a flanking ambush party; the middle-centric team effort will quite often lead to the very sides of the map not receiving enough attention from the enemy team.

I'm curious to see if this would actually work. I'm having trouble, however, figuring out a way in which running further away from a sniper's nest in order to gain speed to approach them would not just end in them laughing as they picked you out of the sky. I suppose, were you fighting a group of people who are only sniping because sniping on Sleepwalker is dreadfully straightforward, you may be able to rush in and kill one before the other two or three brought you down. Of course, does that really accomplish anything? Of course, you could try taking a group of people out to the edges to get up some speed to go attack the snipers, but that will hardly go unnoticed and you'll soon have to deal with the team's Roosters and, the unicorn of loadouts on Sleepwalker, Gunners.

It seems to me that the main appeal of Sleepwalker to those who like it is that it necessitates slower game play. Like normal, the advocates of slower game play believe that it increases the amount of "strategy" involved, but I would direct those people to Nept's "bullshit wall of text" (very nice, Greaper) where he discusses the incorrectness of asserting that more maneuverability and faster game play leads to less strategy.

 

[Strife]

Snipers are just about as disadvantaged as any other class when moving around the map or even getting attacked. A sniper on an elevated O spot is a sitting duck for other snipers or any loadout wishing to flank. People just need time to see that it's D sniping (meaning near-spawn positioned sniping) that's overly buffed.

To an extent. They've the convenience of fitting a long range and high damage role (obv.), though, so anyone with awareness and decent aim is going to be able to quell a flank of one to two people, especially if they're in a tower on a map like Sleepwalker where you can't obscure yourself behind much on your approach (e.g., hills). The closer you get to the sniper the higher your risk of getting shot is and, if they're adept at maneuvering around towers and obstacles to avoid splash, a good sniper will win unless you manage to MA him into a bad spot. The disparity of d-sniping and o-sniping is mainly positioning (map-wise) and almost strictly limited to CTF. Aside from team presence there's no other advantage "d-sniping" has on Sleepwalker that "o-sniping" has, simply because you do not need to leave to get ammo and you're in an elevated position, much like you would be if you were sitting at your base sniping. The line that differentiates between o-sniping and d-sniping becomes blurred in TDM, as offense and defense are completely relative to how you, your team, an enemy player or the enemy team moves and plays on open maps with no objectives (per se).

Also, it's possible to gain speed on SW. Maybe not from any starting point, but it's possible for one to "cross the map faster and try to deal with the enemy snipers". Just look in the outward direction of the map and also note some of the ledges near the towers. Fast enough for a flanking ambush party; the middle-centric team effort will quite often lead to the very sides of the map not receiving enough attention from the enemy team.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but there are awkward spawn points where you need to waddle along to get to an area that will give you speed. I was going to say more but Heartsong pretty much covered everything. What a jerk.

 

[57thRomance]

I just don't like how friggin' long it takes me to get back into the center of the action after I spawn. It's no problem on Stygian because of the hills on which I can get good enough speed, but even for a small map like Sleepwaker I really feel like I'm sleepwalking... and I can't tell if that's the developers' intended purpose for the map or not.

 

[OmniNept]

Less bullshit walls of text, just focus on the map itself. Thanks.

Sometimes, learning involves reading for 5 minutes instead of 30 seconds; and sometimes, good discussions arise from tangentially-related topics.

Anyway, I need to drive 10 hours to a funeral, so I've not the time to deal with your complaints. When I get back, though, I'll start a new thread with that post; it does, after all, veer from this thread's overwhelming consensus (that "Sleepwalker is the single worst map I have ever played in the 10 years during which I have been playing video games").

I'll even include cole's notes, for the attention impaired.

You're welcome.

 

[Aki]

[wall of text]

I'll be sure to specify "in my experience" next time so I don't give you carpal tunnel .

Anyway, as for terrain changes, I would hope for only minor tweaks to the middle. VERY minor. I feel that SW just needs a way for Beta guys to get out of their base a little faster. That will eliminate 40% of complaints right there. The other 60% is nothing new: people hating snipers (I do, too). Solutions to sniper abuse have been kicked around this forum since L:O launched . My favorite is class ceilings, but that has obvious drawbacks in CTF. In TDM, it might not be such a risk?

The other thing to try is make some kind of fog (sandstorm?) to obscure snipers' view after a shorter distance than 2/3 the map. May have to tweak IFF to make that work, and suddenly the whole idea sounds like too much effort . I dunno, just throwing *chocolate cookies* out there o_o .

 

[anak]

any good battle has two fronts from which enemies can consistently approach each other from. oh, and the terrain usually compliments the flow of battle and has features in between the two fronts that encourages the enemies to fight there.
it obviously took a lot of effort (or maybe just the terraform tool) to go through an entire terrain mission and make the surgical adjustments that you did. but your many designs and terrain features lack cohesion, and therefore games played on the map lack direction and momentum (as do the legionnaires - the map is freakin' flat)
the game does not need fixing, the map is the problem here.

 

[Dacil]

Sometimes, learning involves reading for 5 minutes instead of 30 seconds; and sometimes, good discussions arise from tangentially-related topics.

Anyway, I need to drive 10 hours to a funeral, so I've not the time to deal with your complaints. When I get back, though, I'll start a new thread with that post; it does, after all, veer from this thread's overwhelming consensus (that "Sleepwalker is the single worst map I have ever played in the 10 years during which I have been playing video games").

I'll even include cole's notes, for the attention impaired.

You're welcome.

HAHAHAH ....oh goody

 

[OmniFilt3r]

I'll be sure to specify "in my experience" next time so I don't give you carpal tunnel .

Anyway, as for terrain changes, I would hope for only minor tweaks to the middle. VERY minor. I feel that SW just needs a way for Beta guys to get out of their base a little faster. That will eliminate 40% of complaints right there. The other 60% is nothing new: people hating snipers (I do, too). Solutions to sniper abuse have been kicked around this forum since L:O launched . My favorite is class ceilings, but that has obvious drawbacks in CTF. In TDM, it might not be such a risk?

The other thing to try is make some kind of fog (sandstorm?) to obscure snipers' view after a shorter distance than 2/3 the map. May have to tweak IFF to make that work, and suddenly the whole idea sounds like too much effort . I dunno, just throwing *chocolate cookies* out there o_o .

Class Ceillings: I assume by this you mean limiting the amount of snipers per side. If that`s the case, when Nept ran the TDM ladders he did have a 1 sniper / 1 sentinel rule. There`s a very good reason for this, so when you call for class ceillings you aren`t wrong.

As for the sandstorm, that`s a good idea. It would fit the theme of the map and help with the above mentioned problems.

However, I have to disagree when you say only minor terrain tweaks are needed. I`m not saying make it like Stygian, but think Zenith Cauldron`s terrain divided in half. Having flatter maps does help imrpove diversity, but the current version is way too flat - IMO.

 

[Propkid]

A Gunner loadout has 75% of the available weapons in the game. The only thing that they're missing is a sniper rifle.

Let's assume that this won't be the case for long; that Gunner won't be the class to play for much longer. *looks at the devs :]*

The disparity of d-sniping and o-sniping is mainly positioning [...]

AND

The problem is that, when you go into a match on Sleepwalker, more than half of the people are using a sniper loadout. Unless the game's landscape has change DRASTICALLY since the last time I played, this is the only map where this kind of sniper use can be seen. It is also, as many people have noted, far and away the most powerful weapon to use on this map. This is the case because 1.) The map is a shooting gallery. It's flat. You can see for miles (and miles and miles and miles) which exacerbates the "map control" problems plaguing the current sniper balance and 2.) It's terribly difficult to gain speed on the map without taking yourself out of the match to go to the outskirts (at which point you can, of course, be sniped anyway). It's pretty easy to hit a target that's moving quickly with a sniper rifle. Hitting someone going 50 units/time is a joke.

On a map like Sleepwalker where there is no real avenue for gaining speed, D sniping is simply anything behind the "lines" as it were. You can be sitting in the middle of the map, secure in the knowledge that you can pick off anybody who comes after you, because you'll be able to see them leaving the base at a scorching 40 units/time. So the best way of countering a sniper? Of course! More snipers. Don't get me wrong, the first thing I was told to learn when I started playing Legions was the sniper. My "position" during Omni practice matches was D sniping. I've thoroughly enjoyed the sniper, but having 50% of the people on a map using the sniper rifle is just awful for game play. It'd be different if we could approach the snipers to attack them, but we have to deal with the flat that is Sleepwalker while being picked off by what seems like the entire enemy team.

What's missing from the above 'scenario' is the distinction between D and O sniping, and it's quite likely that the teams during the match you've played didn't realize that... INCOOOMIIIIIINGGGG:

Something that is present in L:O eversince and is greatly amplified by SW's lack of appealing curvates is the significance of the spawn locations and the speed with which the player gets to the 'battlezone' aka where most of the fighting is happening. It's true: it takes unusually long for one to go in a relatively straight line from one spawn to the other. But what this does is it draws the line between the D and the O. What it also does is promotes fighting at the sides, just like I've mentioned above. The usual 'tactics' won't work.

Heck, even O sniping doesn't necessarily work. Yes, if one is to sit at the mid tower and snipe away he will get some kills, but then he'll die pretty quickly too due to being literally in the middle of the plate for everyone else. 2 or 3 D snipers should be able to effectively counter ~5 enemy O snipers (and were able in my case: by the 15th minute both of the teams had no snipers in the middle, only one on the flank once in a while). The spawns are just so much better than the tower and it gets extremely dull and predictable (and slow as you've mentioned) when each time after you get sniped off of the main tower you get back on it. Don't forget about the advantage of having your enemy within your sights when you spawn AND of the enemy having to spend, what, ~15 seconds to get back to the O after dying? If you spawn and the enemy is within your sights, why move out before you shoot? Keep on shooting until your side is empty, then move out. Might sound like spawn camping, but all tactics are valid, especially in TDM.

Both teams in the match that I've played have realized this: it's not always worth it to cross the middle line. After all, the enemy can just as well do this, can't they? If taken to an extreme this idea would lead to two teams camping their own spawns, but a)that never happens b) this situation would provide more rewarding O if done smartly. That's why there's D and O in SW: just rushing onto the enemy side and dying due to the enemy's D doesn't work.

It seems to me that the main appeal of Sleepwalker to those who like it is that it necessitates slower game play. Like normal, the advocates of slower game play believe that it increases the amount of "strategy" involved, but I would direct those people to Nept's "bullshit wall of text" (very nice, Greaper) where he discusses the incorrectness of asserting that more maneuverability and faster game play leads to less strategy.

Nept was talking about movement dynamics and was 100% correct in what he said. What I was talking about gets nearer to macro-movement tactics and loadout choice tactics, not what Nept was talking about, micro-movement tactics (BTW: generally tactic=micro, strategy=macro. There's a difference: you can't call hiding behind a rock a strategy). I'll once again say: the reason why people dislike SW is that it penalizes bad choices made within the 'tactics' I've just listed. I also think that Raider and Rocketeer, the bread and butter of this game, suffers the most from Snipers, which is another pain in the butt for the majority of the community playing on SW which doesn't want to adapt. I have to admit it, we have a terrible meta

Sentinels just take too long/ too much attention to get shot. ORs can 'dodge' quite nicely and can move around SW quicker than others (and tend to carry LRs). If you've been in a game where half each team was sniping (~8 snipers) and nobody was trying to counter by 'tanking' (suits well in this situation: either the sent gets shot and the rest of the team makes it to the enemy D or the team gets shot but the senti makes it...) then I can understand why people were *lady-friending*.
Imo SW is a huge step forward in L:O maps and increase in the amount of pre-combat thinking one needs, perhaps too big of a step at once for everyone to adapt.

extra-long space!!

super-exara!!

Also, I'll put out some extra money on the table and hit a more general criticism of the game: weapons balance. LR might become seemingly silly-powerful on SW, but notice how nobody ever ever complains about maps being LR-unfriendly, where there are whole matches played without a single LR beam appearing in the sky. Notice also how there are way more rockets hitting the target than grenades. I seriously doubt that even in the scenarios mentioned in quotes above the number of LR kills exceeds the number or RL kills. I might be only talking about the EU in here, because from what I understand there are way more ORs/ Roosters being used, but we are all terribly used to the game as we know it. This might've come from Tribes. I'll quote you, Strife, in here because I cannot say this better than you've said it in the Maneuverability argument:

What, exactly, is wrong with trying to bring about some change in a game you enjoy? It's entirely possible that it just might be me being biased but it seems as if the general Tribes population (I almost included the Legions community but at least some people are making an effort to get new ideas pushed through. Unfortunately, even though it is to be expected, there is significant influence from Tribes players - the kind that are a prime example of what I'm talking about here.) invariably opposes innovation and change. Why? This is a genuine question that has bothered me for quite some time. The only answer I can give myself is that they're complacent with the "skills" they currently have and have been practicing for years on end and do not wish to learn new things. Perhaps because they don't enjoy challenges? I don't know. The "bottom line" is that some people enjoy challenging themselves in games and exploring new possibilities for the games they play. Granted, they aren't the vast majority (surprise), but, like their close-minded counterparts, will probably always exist.

The same is happening in Legions: people really don't want to drop the RL. Think about a game which is (IMO) perfectly balanced in terms of weaponry: Quake 3 Arena/ Quake Live. Although yes, the RL and and Railgun are preferred other weapons are used too (ask Fireblasto ;p), even if people don't 'like them' they are sometimes necessary.

I write too much... I even CBA to proof-read this... I need to quit doing this

 

[WildFire]

You spend too much time here.

 

[Propkid]

You spend too much time here.

Can't game mate. If I could I'd be playing not writing.

 

[Ucantry2run]

I think he meant the ratio of Forums/Real life, not Forums/Game.

 

[Heartsong]

What's missing from the above 'scenario' is the distinction between D and O sniping, and it's quite likely that the teams during the match you've played didn't realize that... INCOOOMIIIIIINGGGG:

Something that is present in L:O eversince and is greatly amplified by SW's lack of appealing curvates is the significance of the spawn locations and the speed with which the player gets to the 'battlezone' aka where most of the fighting is happening. It's true: it takes unusually long for one to go in a relatively straight line from one spawn to the other. But what this does is it draws the line between the D and the O. What it also does is promotes fighting at the sides, just like I've mentioned above. The usual 'tactics' won't work.

It doesn't promote fighting at the sides, it promotes people sitting back with the sniper. In an idealized situation, it would open up the map, but this is not the case.
I mentioned before the significance of the "lines" that are drawn, but mostly in conjunction with how it promotes more passive sniping. The people dueling go to meet each other and are picked off by their team's respective snipers. Would this change in a PuG or a competitive match? Probably not, unless there was simply a limit placed on snipers in which case it would be a case of the people going to duel and being picked off by their team's respective sniper.

Heck, even O sniping doesn't necessarily work. Yes, if one is to sit at the mid tower and snipe away he will get some kills, but then he'll die pretty quickly too due to being literally in the middle of the plate for everyone else. 2 or 3 D snipers should be able to effectively counter ~5 enemy O snipers (and were able in my case: by the 15th minute both of the teams had no snipers in the middle, only one on the flank once in a while). The spawns are just so much better than the tower and it gets extremely dull and predictable (and slow as you've mentioned) when each time after you get sniped off of the main tower you get back on it. Don't forget about the advantage of having your enemy within your sights when you spawn AND of the enemy having to spend, what, ~15 seconds to get back to the O after dying? If you spawn and the enemy is within your sights, why move out before you shoot? Keep on shooting until your side is empty, then move out. Might sound like spawn camping, but all tactics are valid, especially in TDM.

I really don't understand how you're taking the position that countering an overpowered strategy with the same overpowered strategy means the map is balanced. Once more, you're just asserting that the best way to counter the fact that snipers are horridly overpowered on Sleepwalker (because of the map's shortcomings) is to deploy your own suite of snipers. This is a bad sign. It's not opening up more strategy if you're simply being tunneled into mirroring the other team's strategy.

Both teams in the match that I've played have realized this: it's not always worth it to cross the middle line. After all, the enemy can just as well do this, can't they? If taken to an extreme this idea would lead to two teams camping their own spawns, but a)that never happens b) this situation would provide more rewarding O if done smartly. That's why there's D and O in SW: just rushing onto the enemy side and dying due to the enemy's D doesn't work.

I don't actually understand what you're trying to say here. I read, "The best strategy is to turtle with D snipers, but people generally don't turtle with D snipers so it's okay."

Nept was talking about movement dynamics and was 100% correct in what he said. What I was talking about gets nearer to macro-movement tactics and loadout choice tactics, not what Nept was talking about, micro-movement tactics (BTW: generally tactic=micro, strategy=macro. There's a difference: you can't call hiding behind a rock a strategy). I'll once again say: the reason why people dislike SW is that it penalizes bad choices made within the 'tactics' I've just listed. I also think that Raider and Rocketeer, the bread and butter of this game, suffers the most from Snipers, which is another pain in the butt for the majority of the community playing on SW which doesn't want to adapt. I have to admit it, we have a terrible meta

The problem with this is that, in a game like Unreal Tournament, your micro movements become your macro movements. You dodge and walljump to get to a higher level on the map. In terms of movement, it's clearly "macro" based on the amount of map movement that occurred, but it was made up of what you term"micro" movements. Legions has stunted "micro" movement options (especially on a flat map) and so your "micro" movements are limited to downjat and wiggling in the air. You can't have real "macro" movement on Sleepwalker unless you decide to go on an Odyssey out to the edges of the map. So you're stuck with downjetting into a flat piece of terrain or wiggling. Both of these things are easily countered by sniping or any decent player using one of the other 3 weapons. Sleepwalker penalizes any kind of movement you make. You can downjet, but you'll hit the inconceivably flat ground. You could wiggle, but it'll only drain your jets faster and you'll fall to the ground where there is no cover - because it is flat

Everyone without a sniper rifle suffers while playing on Sleepwalker. It's not the sniper rifle's fault and it is not the community's fault, it is the map's fault.

Sentinels just take too long/ too much attention to get shot. ORs can 'dodge' quite nicely and can move around SW quicker than others (and tend to carry LRs). If you've been in a game where half each team was sniping (~8 snipers) and nobody was trying to counter by 'tanking' (suits well in this situation: either the sent gets shot and the rest of the team makes it to the enemy D or the team gets shot but the senti makes it...) then I can understand why people were *lady-friending*.
Imo SW is a huge step forward in L:O maps and increase in the amount of pre-combat thinking one needs, perhaps too big of a step at once for everyone to adapt.

The only thing saving Legions from becoming a terrible flop is the promise of "freedom of movement". Everything good about the movement in this game has been erased on Sleepwalker simply because you can't gain momentum. There is no real "movement" beyond wiggling in the air ineffectual while trying to dodge 4-5 snipers. And apparently the best way we should counter this is by either going into snipers ourselves or by hopping in sentinels and flailing at the wall of lasers until we make it to them? If that is a step forward, I'd rather we go backward.
[/extra-long space!!

super-exara!!

Also, I'll put out some extra money on the table and hit a more general criticism of the game: weapons balance. LR might become seemingly silly-powerful on SW, but notice how nobody ever ever complains about maps being LR-unfriendly, where there are whole matches played without a single LR beam appearing in the sky. Notice also how there are way more rockets hitting the target than grenades. I seriously doubt that even in the scenarios mentioned in quotes above the number of LR kills exceeds the number or RL kills. I might be only talking about the EU in here, because from what I understand there are way more ORs/ Roosters being used, but we are all terribly used to the game as we know it.

I may as well address this while I'm here.
Granted, I haven't played actively in a while, but I usually see 1-2 snipers consistently in every match (what's more, once one person starts sniping, a number of people follow suit). There honestly aren't any maps that I would call LR unfriendly, but I have limited experience (ie none) with sniping on Stygian. I'd point out that the lack of a Grenade based specialist on the Raider is likely the reason why there are fewer people using grenades. On the Outrider (which, as far as I can tell, is mostly used for chasing) people tend to pick the best chasing weapons (RL for RJ and splash and CG for air based damage). I, for one, really enjoy using the grenades, but I understand why others wouldn't or why they wouldn't even have them on their loadout.

As for your doubts, I've nothing but anecdotal evidence to the contrary, but a TDM pug on the US side (Where snipers were limited to 1 per team, mind you) reported over half of the team's kills coming from the sniper. I believe the post was in the Announcement thread for the maps and game type, but I don't really remember.

The same is happening in Legions: people really don't want to drop the RL. Think about a game which is (IMO) perfectly balanced in terms of weaponry: Quake 3 Arena/ Quake Live. Although yes, the RL and and Railgun are preferred other weapons are used too (ask Fireblasto ;p), even if people don't 'like them' they are sometimes necessary.

People don't want to drop the RL because it's meant to be the bread and butter weapon. I've used all four of the game's weapons extensively and I think that, honestly, they are all pretty well balanced in their current iteration. Rockets are meant for MAs and consistent ground damage, the Chain Gun is meant for consistent air damage, the Grenades are for hilarious MAs and heavy ground damage while the LR is meant to be a defensive support weapon. I've seen all of these weapons used frighteningly well and hilariously poorly. They are balanced at both ends.

The problem is not the weapon design, it is - in this case - the map design.

 

[Propkid]

I don't actually understand what you're trying to say here. I read, "The best strategy is to turtle with D snipers, but people generally don't turtle with D snipers so it's okay."

I mentioned the word 'extreme', which quite well describes the situations you've described when half+ the team is sniping. Snipers will be present on that map just like RL is present elsewhere, just that not friggin everyone will be taking it up >.<

Legions has stunted "micro" movement options (especially on a flat map) and so your "micro" movements are limited to downjat and wiggling in the air. You can't have real "macro" movement on Sleepwalker unless you decide to go on an Odyssey out to the edges of the map. So you're stuck with downjetting into a flat piece of terrain or wiggling. Both of these things are easily countered by sniping or any decent player using one of the other 3 weapons. Sleepwalker penalizes any kind of movement you make. You can downjet, but you'll hit the inconceivably flat ground. You could wiggle, but it'll only drain your jets faster and you'll fall to the ground where there is no cover - because it is flat

How has it stunted micro movements? Basically all of mid-air dodging of any weapon (changing movement directions midair), all of LO's hiding around the base (and the similar style of fighting in TDM), sentinel's iOD and using hillsides+downjet to avoid groundpound is micro. And the more micro you have the less macro you need: note how on a full TDM on Stygian you can wheeze through the groud-zero fights into the enemy spawn, pull down your pants, expose your butt and ski back to your own base without losing more than 30% hp. That's when micro overrides macro, as such 'mistakes' are not penalized. Macro-movement tactics.
Side note: there's a really useful to you/annoying to the sniper micro-tactic which somehow resembles dancing on the ground and makes it harder for the enemy sniper to hit you, provided you are far enough. If you're too close, firing a coupla rockets at his feet also is a micro tactic.

I really don't understand how you're taking the position that countering an overpowered strategy with the same overpowered strategy means the map is balanced. Once more, you're just asserting that the best way to counter the fact that snipers are horridly overpowered on Sleepwalker (because of the map's shortcomings) is to deploy your own suite of snipers. This is a bad sign. It's not opening up more strategy if you're simply being tunneled into mirroring the other team's strategy.

I'm trying hard to write short here, so I'll just say again that ~3 D (macrotactic defensive ) snipers will deal with any amount of O snipers. The only way to break on through to the other side and to deal some O is to use non-snipers smartly. I still don't see why would you engage in a duel in O, knowing the enemy has an excess of snipers (and if you're duelling at D/your half of the map, and still getting sniped then something's wrong with your D snipers):

The people dueling go to meet each other and are picked off by their team's respective snipers. Would this change in a PuG or a competitive match? Probably not, unless there was simply a limit placed on snipers in which case it would be a case of the people going to duel and being picked off by their team's respective sniper.

space

My argument builds on itself. I won't repeat myself and explain why there should be no alive snipers in the O.

 

[Heartsong]

How has it stunted micro movements? Basically all of mid-air dodging of any weapon (changing movement directions midair), all of LO's hiding around the base (and the similar style of fighting in TDM), sentinel's iOD and using hillsides+downjet to avoid groundpound is micro. And the more micro you have the less macro you need: note how on a full TDM on Stygian you can wheeze through the groud-zero fights into the enemy spawn, pull down your pants, expose your butt and ski back to your own base without losing more than 30% hp. That's when micro overrides macro, as such 'mistakes' are not penalized. Macro-movement tactics.
Side note: there's a really useful to you/annoying to the sniper micro-tactic which somehow resembles dancing on the ground and makes it harder for the enemy sniper to hit you, provided you are far enough. If you're too close, firing a coupla rockets at his feet also is a micro tactic.

There are no hillsides to jet down. There is no benefit to wiggling because you hit the ground in the middle of a flat, expansive plane. Upon touchdown, you will either be sniped or ground pounded without any way to avoid it (via downjetting down hills etc). Sure, you can run all over the place on Stygian without taking much damage, but it isn't as though you are being useful as anything but a distraction (which may, in fact, be useful if the enemy team is thick enough to fall for it). I don't understand how Sleepwalker penalizes "mistakes" as much as it takes away freedom to move. Most Legions maps are full of hills, but if you screw up your path and land awkwardly, you can't suddenly be going full speed again. You have to jet up to the top of a hill to gain momentum. If you were dueling and you land awkwardly or on a flat terrain, you get ground pounded into holy hell.

All Sleepwalker does is create a vast area where no graceful landings can be made.

I'm trying hard to write short here, so I'll just say again that ~3 D (macrotactic defensive ) snipers will deal with any amount of O snipers. The only way to break on through to the other side and to deal some O is to use non-snipers smartly. I still don't see why would you engage in a duel in O, knowing the enemy has an excess of snipers (and if you're duelling at D/your half of the map, and still getting sniped then something's wrong with your D snipers):

I'd like to see how the ~5 non snipers on your turtling team do against a team of snipers. I'm assuming they're just there to be cut to ribbons and provide a distraction for the D snipers? I still don't see how what you're saying is anything beyond a suggestion to exploit the poor map design harder than the other team.