Upvote Upvoted 8 Downvote Downvoted
Gravel Pit discussion
1
#1
0 Frags +

I was reading this thread, and I saw some people talk about Gravel Pit. This has been somewhat discussed before in other threads, but I think making a new thread would be the better option.

So to the discussion in general. Some people want to see Gravel Pit back. The last time this was done was at DHW '15 (a LAN event, which wasn't exactly a good idea). Maybe there can be an online FACEIT cup for new/old maps.

Should Gravel Pit stay the same as it is, or should there be a pro version where changes are made to it? What do you guys think?

I was reading [url=http://www.teamfortress.tv/38932/maps-that-arent-in-map-pools-that-you-want-to-play]this thread[/url], and I saw some people talk about Gravel Pit. This has been somewhat discussed before in other threads, but I think making a new thread would be the better option.

So to the discussion in general. Some people want to see Gravel Pit back. The last time this was done was at DHW '15 (a LAN event, which wasn't exactly a good idea). Maybe there can be an online FACEIT cup for new/old maps.

Should Gravel Pit stay the same as it is, or should there be a pro version where changes are made to it? What do you guys think?
2
#2
3 Frags +

While i think throwing gravel pit into the rotation of an established league might not be the best idea, play testing it with willing teams/pug teams would be great.

Due to TF2's evolving meta, as well as whitelist changes (plz dont make this thread a ban quickfix one lol) it would be interesting to see gpit again. It was pretty fun to watch, and in an organized, controlled environment, it could be tested in a way where willing players can test it. This is mainly to prevent people complaining about the whole "ughhh why did they add gpit." this play testing could also lead to a pro version being fixed for stalemates and other annoying aspects of the map.

#revivegpit

While i think throwing gravel pit into the rotation of an established league might not be the best idea, play testing it with willing teams/pug teams would be great.

Due to TF2's evolving meta, as well as whitelist changes (plz dont make this thread a ban quickfix one lol) it would be interesting to see gpit again. It was pretty fun to watch, and in an organized, controlled environment, it could be tested in a way where willing players can test it. This is mainly to prevent people complaining about the whole "ughhh why did they add gpit." this play testing could also lead to a pro version being fixed for stalemates and other annoying aspects of the map.

#revivegpit
3
#3
5 Frags +

I feel that it isn't necessarily a bad map, but rather people just dislike playing it. It's not like extremely flawed, or anything, from what I remember of it. I think also the community likes just sticking to CP and Koth, so I can see why this might have gotten removed. I Overall think it's not a bad idea, but I also feel there are more fun maps out there to play.

I feel that it isn't necessarily a bad map, but rather people just dislike playing it. It's not like extremely flawed, or anything, from what I remember of it. I think also the community likes just sticking to CP and Koth, so I can see why this might have gotten removed. I Overall think it's not a bad idea, but I also feel there are more fun maps out there to play.
4
#4
-1 Frags +
JDuffDue to TF2's evolving meta, as well as whitelist changes

B would play a lot differently now that we have the Cow Mangler.

[quote=JDuff]Due to TF2's evolving meta, as well as whitelist changes[/quote]
B would play a lot differently now that we have the Cow Mangler.
5
#5
5 Frags +

Gravel Pit is unique in the 6s meta because of its strategist nature (Attack/Defend style), where teams can take the time to understand sightlines and positioning and orchestrate coordinated pushes. The reason it falls out of the interest-pool I feel is because it's just not fun to play in a pick-up-game setting, where it's not something that's easy to have a basic understanding for.

The pug thing aside, I hope gravel pit will get back in the normal rotation and people will look into it as an opportunity to develop their game sense and tactics, something that gpit is unique in enabling for its players compared to more DM-intensive maps.

Its biggest weakness is the capture times. If it were time to try and improve it, the capture time simply needs to be knocked down a few seconds so that defense isn't incentivized to bum-rush B repeatedly, but can still have enough time to prepare to defend C. Also it prob wouldn't kill to have more health packs on the map, as well as ammo. It's spread too thinly to allow a fair amount of fighting on the points.

Gravel Pit is unique in the 6s meta because of its strategist nature (Attack/Defend style), where teams can take the time to understand sightlines and positioning and orchestrate coordinated pushes. The reason it falls out of the interest-pool I feel is because it's just not fun to play in a pick-up-game setting, where it's not something that's easy to have a basic understanding for.

The pug thing aside, I hope gravel pit will get back in the normal rotation and people will look into it as an opportunity to develop their game sense and tactics, something that gpit is unique in enabling for its players compared to more DM-intensive maps.

Its biggest weakness is the capture times. If it were time to try and improve it, the capture time simply needs to be knocked down a few seconds so that defense isn't incentivized to bum-rush B repeatedly, but can still have enough time to prepare to defend C. Also it prob wouldn't kill to have more health packs on the map, as well as ammo. It's spread too thinly to allow a fair amount of fighting on the points.
6
#6
0 Frags +

just please make it not best of 3, we do not need 1hr+ worth of gravelpit, it gets boring, everyone hates it when it goes to round 3

best of 1, deal with people that can't decide the same way you do if it's the decider round

genuinely all it needs imo.

just please make it not best of 3, we do not need 1hr+ worth of gravelpit, it gets boring, everyone hates it when it goes to round 3

best of 1, deal with people that can't decide the same way you do if it's the decider round

genuinely all it needs imo.
7
#7
3 Frags +

scout mains dont want to play engineer standing in one or two spots for a whole round (which can take 15 minutes), which is why gpit gets neglected at the lower levels. A "pro" version the map won't fix that issue.

scout mains dont want to play engineer standing in one or two spots for a whole round (which can take 15 minutes), which is why gpit gets neglected at the lower levels. A "pro" version the map won't fix that issue.
8
#8
0 Frags +

I feel like the layout of the map needs to be kept the same, but certain props should be moved around as well as replacing many of the small health kits for a few medium kits and ammo packs. Also, maybe there should be an easier way to hold A, as in the past the strategy was send a scout/soldier/single offclass to defend it, and then focus on holding B.

I feel like the layout of the map needs to be kept the same, but certain props should be moved around as well as replacing many of the small health kits for a few medium kits and ammo packs. Also, maybe there should be an easier way to hold A, as in the past the strategy was send a scout/soldier/single offclass to defend it, and then focus on holding B.
9
#9
8 Frags +

Gpit isn't better than any map we're currently playing regardless of whitelist.

It was removed partly because its an even more undesirable "chore" than viaduct is for it being the only map on that game type, on top of that being A/D in particular.

Which brings me to the other part of A/D at the top level consisting of either constant suicide plays into a heavy/engi to get a force (which some lucky player gets to play for half the game), or sitting on your sniper for a minute or two until you can work him in far enough to get a kill, both with a giant height/positional disadvantage.

Watching it can be neat but playing it literally feels like trying to break into 5cp last uphill against a parked bus.

I'm all for testing things that can potentially improve our TF2 experience but gpit was removed for a reason and is a lost cause imo.

Gpit isn't better than any map we're currently playing regardless of whitelist.

It was removed partly because its an even more undesirable "chore" than viaduct is for it being the only map on that game type, on top of that being A/D in particular.

Which brings me to the other part of A/D at the top level consisting of either constant suicide plays into a heavy/engi to get a force (which some lucky player gets to play for half the game), or sitting on your sniper for a minute or two until you can work him in far enough to get a kill, both with a giant height/positional disadvantage.

Watching it can be neat but playing it literally feels like trying to break into 5cp last uphill against a parked bus.

I'm all for testing things that can potentially improve our TF2 experience but gpit was removed for a reason and is a lost cause imo.
10
#10
1 Frags +

id prefer a new A/D map to gpit. the fact that a valve map that released with the game 9 years ago remains the best A/D map for competitive is a travesty in itself. the whole split A & B design is pretty bad too honestly (at least for 6s).

unfortunately theres not enough drive for A/D for anyone to even bother putting the effort into making an A/D map since theres a good chance itll go to waste.

id prefer a new A/D map to gpit. the fact that a valve map that released with the game 9 years ago remains the best A/D map for competitive is a travesty in itself. the whole split A & B design is pretty bad too honestly (at least for 6s).

unfortunately theres not enough drive for A/D for anyone to even bother putting the effort into making an A/D map since theres a good chance itll go to waste.
11
#11
1 Frags +
Jarrett000Gpit isn't better than any map we're currently playing regardless of whitelist.

It was removed partly because its an even more undesirable "chore" than viaduct is for it being the only map on that game type, on top of that being A/D in particular.

Which brings me to the other part of A/D at the top level consisting of either constant suicide plays into a heavy/engi to get a force (which some lucky player gets to play for half the game), or sitting on your sniper for a minute or two until you can work him in far enough to get a kill, both with a giant height/positional disadvantage.

Watching it can be neat but playing it literally feels like trying to break into 5cp last uphill against a parked bus.

I'm all for testing things that can potentially improve our TF2 experience but gpit was removed for a reason and is a lost cause imo.

are there any other potential A/D maps that we could test? Or other A/D maps that have been tested besides gpit?

[quote=Jarrett000]Gpit isn't better than any map we're currently playing regardless of whitelist.

It was removed partly because its an even more undesirable "chore" than viaduct is for it being the only map on that game type, on top of that being A/D in particular.

Which brings me to the other part of A/D at the top level consisting of either constant suicide plays into a heavy/engi to get a force (which some lucky player gets to play for half the game), or sitting on your sniper for a minute or two until you can work him in far enough to get a kill, both with a giant height/positional disadvantage.

Watching it can be neat but playing it literally feels like trying to break into 5cp last uphill against a parked bus.

I'm all for testing things that can potentially improve our TF2 experience but gpit was removed for a reason and is a lost cause imo.[/quote]

are there any other potential A/D maps that we could test? Or other A/D maps that have been tested besides gpit?
12
#12
5 Frags +

edifice was played in ugc and it was better than gpit imo but not better enough.

If you're going to have a gamemode that facilitates "abusing" classes that lack mobility (being able to set up perfectly fine with a heavy, sniper, engi ect) then you cant have too many giant towers, powerful sightlines, or cramped doorways without it being hell to push.

edifice was played in ugc and it was better than gpit imo but not better enough.

If you're going to have a gamemode that facilitates "abusing" classes that lack mobility (being able to set up perfectly fine with a heavy, sniper, engi ect) then you cant have [i]too[/i] many giant towers, powerful sightlines, or cramped doorways without it being hell to push.
13
#13
4 Frags +
Kavunfortunately theres not enough drive for A/D for anyone to even bother putting the effort into making an A/D map since theres a good chance itll go to waste.

this is very true aswell

I have plans on making an AD map to be honest, made for competitive, the problem is I can't really justify finishing it, it's a living hell getting competitive players to test your maps at all, unless you're already known pretty well, let alone a non-5cp map.

I got by thanks to being in the community myself, and having sideshow on my side- but for an A/D map? Almost impossible. The situation is just such that the majority of mappers cannot get maps tested at all, not only that, there's no previously made map that mappers can learn from, as opposed to 5cp maps that all follow the same formula.

I don't imagine anyone will come out with a successful A/D map, until Phi makes one specifically tailored to 6v6 needs.

[quote=Kav]
unfortunately theres not enough drive for A/D for anyone to even bother putting the effort into making an A/D map since theres a good chance itll go to waste.[/quote]

this is very true aswell

I have plans on making an AD map to be honest, made for competitive, the problem is I can't really justify finishing it, it's a living hell getting competitive players to test your maps at all, unless you're already known pretty well, let alone a non-5cp map.

I got by thanks to being in the community myself, and having sideshow on my side- but for an A/D map? Almost impossible. The situation is just such that the majority of mappers cannot get maps tested at all, not only that, there's no previously made map that mappers can learn from, as opposed to 5cp maps that all follow the same formula.

I don't imagine anyone will come out with a successful A/D map, until Phi makes one specifically tailored to 6v6 needs.
14
#14
0 Frags +
Jarrett000If you're going to have a gamemode that facilitates "abusing" classes that lack mobility (being able to set up perfectly fine with a heavy, sniper, engi ect) then you cant have too many giant towers, powerful sightlines, or cramped doorways without it being hell to push.

This is a really good point about gravel pit; while it hosts numerous entrances on every point for offense (bar the "give-up-A-for-free" strat), defense has always been ridiculously strong in certain spots with a hidden heavy on C-tower, engineer away from a sightline in the gravelpits with spam support at nearby entrances, etc. This is what makes pushing C a nightmare for your standard offense, and typically requires the specialists, which offense has very little to offer compared to defense's specialists which host virtually no limitations.

Jarrett000edifice was played in ugc and it was better than gpit imo but not better enough.

Edifice's main problem was the main connector from B-site (I think it was B) to A and the ramp-room/window leading to C. This was a very powerful spot to watch the point and one of the main entrances to C as a team. Also the sightline is incredibly awful for both A and B, it has a slightly worse BLU-spawn tunnel than gpit, and the spire on C was unique but overall the site is just way more flanky than gpit's C in terms of places to hide and run around while avoiding enemy players.

[quote=Jarrett000]If you're going to have a gamemode that facilitates "abusing" classes that lack mobility (being able to set up perfectly fine with a heavy, sniper, engi ect) then you cant have [i]too[/i] many giant towers, powerful sightlines, or cramped doorways without it being hell to push.[/quote]

This is a really good point about gravel pit; while it hosts numerous entrances on every point for offense (bar the "give-up-A-for-free" strat), defense has always been ridiculously strong in certain spots with a hidden heavy on C-tower, engineer away from a sightline in the gravelpits with spam support at nearby entrances, etc. This is what makes pushing C a nightmare for your standard offense, and typically requires the specialists, which offense has very little to offer compared to defense's specialists which host virtually no limitations.

[quote=Jarrett000]edifice was played in ugc and it was better than gpit imo but not better enough.[/quote]

Edifice's main problem was the main connector from B-site (I think it was B) to A and the ramp-room/window leading to C. This was a very powerful spot to watch the point and one of the main entrances to C as a team. Also the sightline is incredibly awful for both A and B, it has a slightly worse BLU-spawn tunnel than gpit, and the spire on C was unique but overall the site is just way more flanky than gpit's C in terms of places to hide and run around while avoiding enemy players.
15
#15
2 Frags +

i want gravelpit back
if people can get the fucking quickfix and soda popper unbanned then gravel pit should be a cakewalk to bring back

i want gravelpit back
if people can get the fucking quickfix and soda popper unbanned then gravel pit should be a cakewalk to bring back
Please sign in through STEAM to post a comment.