06 Dec 14, 07:41PM
(This post was last modified: 06 Dec 14, 07:53PM by Vanquish.
Edit Reason: fixed a typo
)
(06 Dec 14, 07:27PM)bballn45 Wrote: Everyone that is against it has probably never played it before in a match.
wrong.
http://i.imgur.com/LfkyNKQ.jpg
now am I allowed an opinion?
It is easy to learn, yeah, it's basically like a larger and slower version of ingress (except without cutovers) where you effectively need to kill your enemy twice in order to get through into their base because the distances are ridiculous. The middle engagements are heavily reliant on angles (which wouldn't even be so bad if middle didn't provide such great peripheral awareness and attacking positions on the two other sides and thus it's important to control), and two of the side paths have geometry which is heavily biased towards the CLA side in terms of positional fragging. The bases are also huge and the spawns are too random, and each base has a stupid box at the back of it which just encourages camping and defensive play.
It was okay to play venison once, but in my opinion it's just like ingress but even slower, and could even be compared to depot if it had a third passageway. I would certainly never play it again by choice.
fundog himself also said in his ac_venison thread that the name "venison" was chosen for his map because it comes from the latin word "vēnor", aka to hunt or pursue, and he said somewhere else (can't remember sry but I think it was on the post where people applied to have their maps made official) that he designed the map initially with the focus on HTF, which was FD's favourite mode. This tournament is ctf. :)
I feel like some people really don't take the time to explore and analyse maps in any depth - this has some significant geometry, gameplay and map flow flaws, as well as negatively impacting fps performance (I get under 500 fps in some areas on a card with 6GB of video ram). I've pointed all of this out to Larry (who btw gets under 75 fps in some areas which is unplayable) and he hasn't disagreed with anything. The argument that all maps should be included because they're official is as redundant as the argument that a certain map shouldn't be included just because a team knows it better than others (for instance: w00p with mines, us with werk, etc).
Larry did say that he'd like to add some more 1.2 maps though. Idk if anybody else has seen Undead's rework of ac_cavern but that's actually a very very enjoyable map to play now and in my opinion should be considered, even though Larry did already say the likelihood of that is low due to its lack of official status. Other maps like lainio wouldn't be a bad option, although I don't see why eleven maps aren't enough for a one-day cup that will probably have a maximum of eight teams participating.
EDIT: @Larry: if you're this unsure about including it, I was gonna suggest making a poll for venison's inclusion but that would only work if you made it so that everyone's votes could be seen publicly, and if it's done via the ac forum and not a third party site where people could spam server bots to vote for certain options.