"Chivalry 2" map design



  • Hey devs,
    I’m a long time player and lover of your games. I put about 900 hours into Age of Chivalry. Now that you are making a new secret game, I want to chime in about your map design choices. I and many others feel that the map design of AOC was vastly superior to the map design of CMW. In AOC there were many paths to the same objective, including paths that the enemy could not easily see your team take. This allowed much greater strategy in TO, unique flanking opportunities, greater map replayability, and the maps were overall much more fun and interesting.

    The maps in CMW are just so damn straightforward. They are seriously dumbed down compared to AOC maps. You can essentially always see the enemy team and know what they are doing in CMW. It’s so much harder to surprise, shock and awe in CMW. And 95% of CMW players will have no idea what I’m talking about or how freaking awesome the maps for CMW could be if they were designed in the same way as the AOC maps. So if anyone hasn’t played Age of Chivalry, it’s free on steam and there are always servers running to this day, so go try it out and ask an admin to switch to one of the maps I list below so you can see for yourself. Then come back here and let the devs know what you think.

    So devs, I’m reaching out to you, begging you, please go back and play your old maps before you settle on the same map design style that you used in CMW. Play siege, dark forest, overlook, monastery, sorrow, invasion, stoneshill, helmsdeep, and ask yourselves why those maps are so different and so much deeper and more complex than the CMW maps. Why did siege just rock so freaking hard? Why was helms so exciting to play? Why does it make things so much more interesting and tactical to be able to take a back route to an objective and do things that the enemy team can’t see you doing?



  • More darkforests, less coldfronts.



  • @Kim:

    More darkforests, less coldfronts.

    YES. THIS.



  • I never played AOC but that sounds to me like playing on attack was even easier there. If anything attacking should be harder. In normal pub server highranks always stack on attack and it’s really making the matches boring because either you decide to do the same and mostly face weak opponents and easily win everytime or you go against it and get completely rekt.



  • @Skl3ros:

    I never played AOC but that sounds to me like playing on attack was even easier there. If anything attacking should be harder. In normal pub server highranks always stack on attack and it’s really making the matches boring because either you decide to do the same and mostly face weak opponents and easily win everytime or you go against it and get completely rekt.

    dude, defending is definitely easier in pubs, especially stones and darkforest man. Should not lose on stones in pubs if you defend, any stacked team is going to win no matter what side they choose to stack on. If coldfront defending is stacked enough the king might escape.



  • @Kim:

    More darkforests, less coldfronts.

    And the occasional stoneshill.

    I’d also suggest different sizes, similar to BF2 where they got the 16 player, 32 player and 64 player sizes.



  • I totally agree with Lava on this and have been preaching this since release when they did not replicate the great AOC maps. What you dont know Skl3os is that while there were alternate routes they usually required one player holding a gate open or was a tight choke point were brilliant battles were fought over inches. It also required brilliant defenses and attack strategies. You would have to have played them to understand. There was also ways to move objects to build make shift barricades out of crates, tables and chairs. So much brilliance in such a simple game. Not to mention crouch jumping to get to elevated locations for further dimensional combat. Catapults and ballistas actually destroyed some buildings. So much WIN.



  • yeah too bad most chiv players cant tolerate hitting the ceiling with overheads because they are in a tight space



  • Who say’s their new project isn’t a 2D mobile scrolling medieval RPG?



  • @AmishInsurgent:

    Who say’s their new project isn’t a 2D mobile scrolling medieval RPG?

    Isn’t it overkill using unreal engine 4 for a 2D project though?



  • @Xylvion:

    Isn’t it overkill using unreal engine 4 for a 2D project though?

    "
    [h=3]Unreal Engine 4 is a complete suite of game development tools made by game developers, for game developers. From 2D mobile games to console blockbusters, Unreal Engine 4 gives you everything you need to start, ship, grow and stand out from the crowd."[/h]



  • Definitely maps could do with more strategy and paths that split up the teams rather than a straight head of mass melee (coldfront, darkforest obj 1 and 2).

    Stoneshill at least on 1st objective there are 3 paths around.

    I dont really like the objectives where the attackers become completely defenseless while doing an objective. So a good objective would be pushing the cart, or standing on a trebuchet pad because you can defend yourself when attacking. Attacking a door leaves you exposed but ramming the gate or firing a ballistae is the worst.

    I do have some mixed feelings about multiple paths, on the one hand you dont want everyone to just crowd around the objective (e.g. hillside bonfire), and you do want the teams to be able to find each other (especially when fewer players).

    I like some of the features that make things a little more fun - like kicking a ladder to make someone fall off is hilarious.

    I think what is needed is to take the positive elements from each map and work on that. With the new maps the spawn killing was a blunderous oversight in design, not to mention things like catapult being able to hit enemies spawn - there is no need for that, there should be a checklist of things to ensure the design is not flawed.



  • Why bother since Chiv 2 will never replicate of Chiv 1.



  • aoc_Sorrow is a visual and technical masterpiece

    aoc_Siege, aoc_Shore, aoc_Monastery



  • @AmishInsurgent:

    "
    Unreal Engine 4 is a complete suite of game development tools made by game developers, for game developers. From 2D mobile games to console blockbusters, Unreal Engine 4 gives you everything you need to start, ship, grow and stand out from the crowd."

    That’s the thing though: OH LETS LEARN UE4 TO MAKE A 2D MOBILE GAME, CUZ UE3 ISN’T SUFFICIENT, HERP DERP.
    I don’t think that’s what they’d do.



  • I just want to remind everyone that we still don’t know whether Chiv 2 is a thing.



  • @Skindiacus:

    I just want to remind everyone that we still don’t know whether Chiv 2 is a thing.

    It can be a 1st person slasher RPG for all I care, I don’t think it’s a 2D Mobile game though.



  • It’s definitely not chiv 2.



  • agreed, the vanilla maps are way better. they are just straight forward, play differently and run flawlessly for the most part. the community maps are all nice to look at but not that solid gameplay wise. if we want better maps we need to need to judge community made maps by gameplay and not just graphics and vote for those instead. changing the default map rotation could help already and make em appear less common maybe this is sth they can change after all even if they drop “main” patches now.
    also i wouldn’t get my hopes too high for chiv2 this is what i had to read few days ago in response to ue4 project



  • @filthypeasant:

    agreed, the vanilla maps are way better. they are just straight forward, play differently and run flawlessly for the most part. the community maps are all nice to look at but not that solid gameplay wise. if we want better maps we need to need to judge community made maps by gameplay and not just graphics and vote for those instead. changing the default map rotation could help already and make em appear less common maybe this is sth they can change after all even if they drop “main” patches now.
    also i wouldn’t get my hopes too high for chiv2 this is what i had to read few days ago in response to ue4 project

    You sure that was an actual Chiv dev? I don’t think they make quite an effort to point out they are a developer. Easiest way to find out is to see if they are a skeleton.

    Edit: My mistake. One of them had made that much of an effort to point out that they are indeed a dev. Still could be fake though. Name length doesn’t seem to match up and it has an extra Torn banner logo.


Log in to reply