Played a few sessions earlier and its quite promising. The layout is easy to follow and its hard to get confused due to the simplicity of how the caps flow from one another. Also it looks rather nice considering its your first map.

A couple of points I did notice that were a bit off were the borders for out of bounds and the spawns. B seems to be very restrictive in how far the US can move forward, so much so they have to sit back in the cap and wait for the NVA to come over the ridge. This may be as intended, but it does feel a little off as I think parts of the cap zone are in the restricted area.

Also you seem to be able to spawn on the far side of some caps after taken. With D (I think it was D) the Viets can spawn behind the cap once taken and that means any Americans behind are either A) cut off from retreating or B) in the perfect possition for some spawn killing. Earlier I was in the middle of the cap when it was taken and was not killed by the advancing attackers. I flanked to the jungle and started capping them from behind as they spawned, ending with a silly melee spree as nobody was looking behind them.

Other issues I have are mainly visual. Maybe the grass / plants could have occational open patches or some taller plants to break the visial uniformity. Its nice, but because UE3 and RS2's horrid draw distances with such things it causes the old issue of hiding in cover that people at a distance cannot see. Also, perhaps there could be a burnt out bunker of possition in B to show how messed up napalm can be, complete with chared bodies ;)

Well, I'm glad you like it so far. The thing you mentioned with B is intentional, though I made very sure not to let the spawn protection zone overlap with the objective itself. It's a hard objective to attack, and it may feel unnatural, but the PAVN could use some help.

About the defender spawning behind the cap zones, there is a 10-second delay after each objective is captured, which is designed to help the defenders retreat before the attackers start spawning right there. However, the fact that spawn protection doesn't affect you until you leave it and re-enter it -- that's just a stupid game design choice that I have no control over.

Sadly the visual stuff is not something I can change easily, because my computer refuses to build lighting, and I don't want to bother other people too much, but I'll certainly consider adding something like that to B in the future. It could give me an excuse to put a radio in B, even.

The B thing is understandable. I can see it peeving some people off mainly because it's not too well communicated, but I guess people will have to learn the map.

The jumping spawn on D however I can see people exploiting at some point. The issue being they spawn further forward than the point actualy is possitioned once capped so that can result in some mild confusion at best (people spawning next to the retreating US forces) and exploitation at worst (people not moving forward clearing the area, just running at the next point and being sniped from behind). I can just forsee this becoming a problem when other people start to notice they can do this, and as the newer RO players are a fickle bunch, people will just likely ignore the map.

Did notice the water in some of the irrigation channels can be ducked under. Not a horrific problem, just looks a little weird ;)

Yeah, I'm still trying to think of ways to fix the D spawns, really, because the PAVE have a fair ways to run up to E. Maybe I could have the spawns and protection volumes move in increments every five seconds or so.

About crouching beneath the water, I'm still trying to figure out how to stop people from crouching beneath it. Maybe I'll have to lower the level after all, which I'd be sad to do, but it may be necessary.

Moving the spawns up slowly may work as I think that is how Red Oktober factory works.

Alternatively one thing I notice custom mappers never using well is the viet tunnels. Since the map looks like the US patroling over former NVA grounds there may well be tunnels still there. Maybe not connecting every point to each other as that would be absurdly powerful, but maybe have some tunnels that lead from the spawn points to the flanks?

That said I have no idea how hard tunnels are to implement in the SDK. May be worth looking into.

Tunnels are theoretically not very difficult to make, but you're right, I haven't bother with them yet since I was afraid of not handling them correctly in terms of balance. However, I think that, if I take your suggestion for B and include a destroyed bunker or cellar somewhere in it, I could theoretically run a tunnel from B to somwehere near C. The one issue is that, at the moment, I don't feel getting close to C is the problem -- it's getting those last few meters from just outside the point into the point, and getting the US off the roof. But I'll certainly consider a tunnel if C is still hard to take, which I suspect it will be.

there is way too much room for the attackers to manuever into points, couple with about only two points having any form of actual defensive cover(E and F) and it means it's easy as ♥♥♥♥ for the attackers to cap

I originally thought, actually, that the amount of space that the attackers have would be a disadvantage because it provides the defenders with so much space to fire into. However, I'm getting the impression that I was wrong. In the next update, I'm planning to add more cover to A and B. The cover on A will likely be less substantial, in the form of bushes and thin trees, and I'll add more thick trees and maybe even a destroyed storage hut or bunker in B. I also expect to redesign C slightly, to make it easier for the attackers to hold part but not all of the objective, as, at the moment, taking C is a bit of an all-or-nothing proposition. D I will not change, because it's stupid and I like how it's stupid.

Well, guys, take a look at the changelog, because I just put out a new update, and I hope it managed to address what you wanted. Thanks for the feedback. Constructive criticism really does help.

I was playing the latest version of the map for the Tripwire contest, But I noticed the spawn protection for control point Bravo (Moonscape/Burned Zone) goes right up to the point, making it difficult for the US team to fight on its own front lines if they're right at the southern end of the point. I personally think the spawn protect should be pushed back about 5-10 meters south so that the US team players don't risk getting crippled because they moved to the wrong side of a crater.

I also miss AFVNFM, but I understand why it had to go. :(

Well, see, I really want to give the US more space to fight in there at the south side of B as well. My problem is that if I do, there is basically no way for the NVA to get close to B, because they can be shot at basically anywhere they try to go apart from the woods on either side. Now, maybe I should fix that by just making obscuring the sight line from B to A, but I don't really like that idea. It just doesn't feel right to me. I know the combat zone solution doesn't feel very good either, but it feels better than the alternative as I see it.

I absolutely love this map! Although I rarely (if ever) play the centre. I always get a squad on the left or right, in the trees & grass in an attempt to gain the flank.

It's actually spooky quiet most of the time, with the rumble of guns & artillery in the distance. Stealth is the key here. Softly footsteps, listening intently & visually screening for the enemy. One time I circled a tree twice prone, convinced VC were on top of me. Then I noticed him, standing, in the shadow of the tree, completely camoflaged in the dark PAVN uniform, & I got the kill.

Amazing!

It's a good map but the tall grass is only helping the defenders, because it doesn't render from far away.

I've been getting that complaint a lot recently, actually. My problem is that I can't simply make it stop rendering further away, because as it is the amount of grass is a bit taxing for some people. I also can't lower the density of the grass, because for some inexplicable reason that value is locked by the engine to an integer, not a float. No clue why.

What I think I'll do is make the grass a bit shorter, so that it isn't as large and therefore detailed and performance-intensive, and so it doesn't make it so hard to acquire targets while crouching or maybe even proning in it. I'm also planning to decrease the maximum render distance, and then add a second foliage type that's much lower-detail and stops rendering farther away. Hopefully that'll at least give defenders some cover at long distance, and If I can pull it off, make the map run better.

Gameplaywise it's already a classic and now it needs just visual polishing up. I know it may sound dumb but it just looks and feels too custom map and not like a real location, especially the first cap zones feel artificial and unnatural with too sharp area edges and not enough detail.