CommunityFortress

Folks, I love competitive TF2.  I love it to death.  I give it great big, lung-crushing hugs, and when I feel something needs to be said about competitive TF2--be it a player, a team, or a league--I come right out and say it.  Today, I want to talk about something near and dear to my heart, something that touches on one of the cornerstones of competitive TF2: maps.

You see, by and large, 6s has maps figured out.  CEVO, ESEA, and TWL have more or less sorted the bad from the good, the good from the great.  More importantly, admins and players of those leagues--particularly the top-level players--have been vocal about about discrimination against bad maps.  That makes me happy.  That tickles my happy glands.

Highlander, however, needs to get that sorted ASAP.

Over on the UGC forums, I posted about a recent match on pl_swiftwater.  My post wasn't about the team we played (Axl Ffu, who are swell, lovely people).  The focus of my post was about the map itself.  It took over two hours to resolve the match on that map.  2 hours! Outrage. Here's the meat and potatoes of my post with some additional commentary at the end.

One of the rebuttals that keeps popping up when "X map is terrible" gets mentioned is some mutation of: but it's good to have lots of different maps/variety.

Let's talk seriously about that for a second.

No, it's not good to have lots of different maps.  The simple fact is that not many maps are balanced in a way that promotes fair, punctual competitive play.  This is obvious when you look at the established 6s leagues (CEVO, TWL, ESEA).  It's obvious when you look at tournaments (CommFT, TF2 Expo).  Sure-bet maps such as Badlands and Granary aren't sure-bets because they have nice scenery; rather, they are tightly balanced maps that, in a timed tournament config, result in balanced and punctual play.

Things get very messy with Highlander.  You have 18 people instead of 12, and the confines of a map--both in physical space and time per point or objective--are quickly tested to their limits. Badlands and Granary, despite the space limitations of their choke points, still hold up.  Upwards and Badwater holds up extremely well due to the variety in elevation and flanking routes available on nearly every point.  Even Warmfront/Coldfront, often criticized for stalemating on the last point, runs at a relatively smooth clip until two evenly matched teams are crunched into the last point (and, it is my belief, that many teams have yet to really figure out that map).  Gullywash, by the way, also holds up well.

Swiftwater, however, does not, and not simply because the timer works different than on other PL maps(Schwa can clarify that point).  It was designed for pub play and has suffered massive problems with its spawns, choke points, and sight lines from inception to final version in a competitive format.  For example: point 3 rests solidly between RED and BLU spawns, and RED players spawning just before a CAP exit on top of BLU spawn.  In addition, many of the Sniper sight lines extend across more than one capture point (points four and five come to mind), allowing snipers and wrangled sentries a frustrating and absurd level of control of territory and enemy movement.  In the end, Swiftwater isn't a bad map.  It's just bad for competitive play.

The notion that there are tons and tons of good competitive maps out there has never and remains bunko: there are, at best, a handful or two of balanced maps suitable for competitive play.  Consider: we never see 2 Fort in serious competitive play.  Though balanced, it doesn't promote dynamic, balanced competitive play.  Even in 6s, the map is a chore--a stressful, ridiculous exercise in frustration.  Maps such as Haarp and Swiftwater suffer the same problem.

Within UGC there are many players--teams included--and perhaps some admins who aren't thinking of Highlander as a serious companion to competitive 6s--a sister mode, if you will, that requires the same kind of careful balancing and well thought-out map and weapon discrimination. This line of thinking keeps Highlander from the same competitive legitimacy that 6s has enjoyed for some time and ultimately damages the competitive spirit of the game mode.  A league that caters to a pub mentality is bound to be popular at the expense of alienating (eventually) its most skilled player base.  Leave the pubs to the pubs.

Variety in maps and weapons is not the key component in successful, thriving competitive play.  A desire for variety based on not wanting to play the same few maps over and over is a mistaken desire: either you don't understand competitive play or you don't understand the legitimate maps. New and unique strategies are still coming out of Badlands play--maps don't get tired or boring--players get bored when they stop trying to master the best of what's out there.

Balanced and careful selection of maps and weapons is the key.  Such careful maintenance promotes the long-term vitality of the competitive format; 6s, for example, has never been more alive than at present.  One might argue that competitive TF2 as a whole has never been more alive--there are more leagues, expos, tournaments, and community events happening now than ever before.  If you're a league or a community site representing legitimate competitive play, it's your responsibility to do this burgeoning scene justice.  Aim for quality, not quantity.

My goal is simple: I love 6s and I love Highlander, but 6s has a storied history and a veteran, vocal player base to help keep it in line.  Highlander has--?  Well, Highlander doesn't have much right now.  At present, UGC, a league I love dearly, is the sole torch bearer for league-organized Highlander play.  Who, then, is the Platinum of Highlander?  The YZ50, the Carnage, the Killing in the Name, the K-Nut?  Highlander needs that kind of scrutiny and input that 6s gets in order to refine and polish itself as a legitimate competitive format.

But Free, you ask.  Why post this here?

Because I turn now to the good people of CommFT: what say you about bad maps?  Map selection by league?  The fine line between invested competitive players and casual pubbers-on-holiday?