Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

de_kami
Feedback from a competitive game
Same 10man as the handsome ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ in the last comment.

There are several things in the layout of the map that makes it a very different experience compared to the expected 5v5 competitive gameplay people are used to.
First of all on a very global scale, there are too many chokepoints. On most maps there are 3 to 4 chokepoints. These are the spots that Ts have to go through no matter what to reach a bombsite (classic map is : 1 to A, 1 to B, 1 mid, and a secondary entry to one of the site, generaly more narrow and hard to get out of).
Your map has 5, very big entrances that Ts can use, and that's counting mid as only one chokepoint, when in reality it's not as simple a a doorway.
This creates an issue that will happen every round : once a CT dies, his team will have to worry about an open gap in their defense, and now matter how they setup, they can't never really be safe. This is greatly accentuated by the fast that mid is really messy, with lots of cover and heigh variance, on an ideal scenario you'd probably want to assign two players to cover such an area. This puts a lot of pressure on the CT defense that constantly has to move around and try to patch gaps as the round goes.

Another thing I noticed, that affects both sides this time, CTs when they defend and Ts in afterplant. There is a lot of cover on the sites. Both sites contain quite a lot of boxes (compared to standard maps) AND are complemented by a "safe fallback option" at the back of the sites (the L shape walls behind B site and the big wall leading to A heaven). These two spots are very close to the CTs actual backup path, and it makes it very hard to clear for Ts. Once that is cleared, and bomb is planted tho, the problem is even bigger for the CTs that have to retake those areas, usually in a 3v3, 2v2 situation, where they have limited time and utility to clear all these spots.

A common thing you'll hear mappers say when giving feedback after playtest is "there's too much map". I think this is very true for Kami. As of now it's too big, and too complex for a 5v5 game.

I don't want to tell you what to do because only you know what you want. But I advise you to simplify it. Try to go to the essential. Usualy the best maps are very simple. Players will always find creative ways to use the tools you give them, even the simplest ones, but if you give them too many tools they will just be confused. At the moment there is too many path, too much cover, for people to organise a strategy around what you give them. Try to see if you can merge ideas together, if an area has too many features, it's hard to comprehend and to navigate. CS players like to know what they can expect whether it's in attack of defense.

I gotta say, the theme of the map is really pretty.

Here is a mapping discord : https://discord.gg/XM2C6U4
You can schedule a playtest and get you map played by experienced people and get really valuable feedback.
< >
Showing 1-2 of 2 comments
jS  [developer] 7 Sep, 2021 @ 2:23am 
Hey @linkin_,
I really appreciate the detailed feedback!
The size of the map was always an issue, especially the rotation times from one bombsite to the other. I will resize it appropriately to reduce walking distance and rotation times in the next update.

I will try to make the mid more flat, less complex, maybe leaving an elevated window for CT mid and get rid of unnecessary cover. Simplifying mid is definitely one of my top priorities, always has been the hardest part to fix on this map. Same goes for the bombsites.
I will take your feedback to heart and make the changes. I will schedule an playtest as soon as I have a playable version. Thanks again for the feedback, means a lot!

Peace
linkinblakQaQ 7 Sep, 2021 @ 4:14am 
That's great to see you're so active !
When I talked about size, it's not necessarily about the actual size of the map but more about how many path/different areas there are to navigate. Maybe volume is a better word. Now you say it, the map could use a bit shorter rotation times, but I was thinking more in term of "potential accessible areas" rather than "time it takes to go from A to B".

Keep up the good work ♥
< >
Showing 1-2 of 2 comments
Per page: 1530 50