13 replies to this topic

[Appuagab]

This map will always be a garbage as long as it has this Throne of Rеtardation.

[Alienized]

Appuagab, on 30 July 2016 - 08:06 PM, said:

This map will always be a garbage as long as it has this Throne of Rеtardation.

last games i played on river city never happened around citadel.
in fact, they been all over the place.

[Cy Mitchell]

Appuagab, on 30 July 2016 - 08:06 PM, said:

This map will always be a garbage as long as it has this Throne of Rеtardation.

Next time you play the map, take command of your team and lead them some place else to engage the enemy. Problem solved.

[ImperialKnight]

Citadel is not the problem, dumb players are. Do people not notice the rock formations to one side, or the structures to the other?

Instead they choose to charge straight into open water to get shot at

[Appuagab]

I guess that one of the goals of good leveldesign is to prevent people from burying themselves into positional grave even if they are not very smart. As long as map has some compositional center people head there over and over again just because it's the most obvious place to take fight.
And RC's compositional center is a gameplay abomination. Another goal of good leveldesign is to achieve a synergy with gameplay mechanics. Like lanes with towers in MOBA, hills in Tribes, huge tiles with open space for parkour in Warframe, symmetrical arenas with jumppads and deadly abysses in Quake/UT-like games, you name it. And now take a look at the picture below. Places to hit with your head while trying to jump on a key spot of the map is definitely a crucial thing for a game about big stompy robots, right?

[Supersmacky]

It's a great map. It always comes down to the better, more adaptable team (which is what matches should be about..skill and teamwork, not terrain quirks and blind luck). Battles can happen at all different points around the map and don't just devolve to fights over one piece of terrain. The only criticism I have is the positions of the bases in Assault, but that's not a deal breaker. River City is great.

[Noodle Pryde]

This map encourages brawlers and snipers to work apart from each other instead of in support of one another. Thus, the sniper warriors sit back and call their brawly brethen idiots for flanking or charging unsupported while the brawlers call the snipers cowards for sitting back and letting them get mauled. This is a problem in pretty much all MWO maps, however, it is really bad in this map because the river (even with the rocks) offers no real cover while the city gives so much cover it is hard for snipers to properly support any push by the brawlers.

This makes it hard for any side to press an attack until one or the other loses the "poke out from cover shoot and hide, rinse repeat" phase of the battle. Although it is possible to attack across the river, this is ONLY POSSIBLY successful with a WELL coordinated team and all but unheard of outside of the group queue.

For the single player PUG matches it is almost not worth playing if you happen to bring a brawly build because of the long wait for the snipers to finish playing poke war before you can do anything. The alternative is to call an advance over coms and then die alone charging the other team because no one followed you, thus ensuring a win for the opposite team. There is really no middle ground between these two choices because the river is such a killing ground.

Supersmacky, on 30 August 2016 - 09:29 AM, said:

It's a great map. It always comes down to the better, more adaptable team (which is what matches should be about..skill and teamwork, not terrain quirks and blind luck). Battles can happen at all different points around the map and don't just devolve to fights over one piece of terrain. The only criticism I have is the positions of the bases in Assault, but that's not a deal breaker. River City is great.

I can agree with this view for 12 or even 8 man drop teams, but in the PUG queue it is incredibly rare to get anything like this going. I would suggest removing this map from single player queue and leaving it in the team queue.

[General Solo]

Citadels an institution, even a map change couldn't kill it.
Thing about it, is you can attack either side , left or right.
If the enemy is strong one side, flank and attack the other.

Edited by OZHomerOZ, 03 October 2017 - 02:29 AM.

[Cugel]

Get rid of that citadell! Burn it to the ground! Nuke it! The only thing I do when playing that map is shooting at that building. Have not seen any scratches or burns on it as yet, but I wont let that stop me... What happened to all the nice upper city brawls, or the cool fights in the tunnel? There is several nice spots on the map that you just pass by (lemmeling to the citadell). In my opinion it would serve that map better with a big stretch of open water where the citadell is.

[Amatsukaze]

This map usually works out well for me. My battles happen as often as not in other places. I typically play brawler builds so flank the lemmings that stack up behind the citadel or call a general push & overrun them. Many players seem to have the hidey/pokey mentality in MWO & completely ignore the strength that lies in their mobility.

[Black Ivan]

Also mine opinion. Get rid of the Citadel and make something other

[latinisator]

Black Ivan, on 30 October 2017 - 12:22 AM, said:

Also mine opinion. Get rid of the Citadel and make something other

Y tho? The players choose a point to fight. It is NOT flawed map design here, it is lemmings. The last matches I have played on RC were almost never around the Citadel (starting on the other side): we went upper city and crossed the bridge, fighting at the airfield or the city underneath.

[PocketYoda]

I love how everyone blames dumb customers and not bad mechanics, this map is beyond one sided..

[Spare Parts Bin]

By and large I like this map. So many new game modes need created just to maximise the usage of this map.

Edited by Spare Parts Bin, 01 February 2018 - 04:26 PM.