Upvote Upvoted 2 Downvote Downvoted
TF2 maps koth maps
1
#1
1 Frags +

1st place:
http://forums.tf2maps.net/showthread.php?t=19603
2nd place:
http://forums.tf2maps.net/showthread.php?t=19780
3rd place:
http://forums.tf2maps.net/showthread.php?t=19560&highlight=flake

Anyone play any of them? Any of them not shit?

1st place:
http://forums.tf2maps.net/showthread.php?t=19603
2nd place:
http://forums.tf2maps.net/showthread.php?t=19780
3rd place:
http://forums.tf2maps.net/showthread.php?t=19560&highlight=flake

Anyone play any of them? Any of them not shit?
2
#2
2 Frags +

I think they played earlier versions of both arctic and flake in the New Map Weekends. If my memory serves me well, arctic(or whatever it was called at the time) was really fun.

Looking at the screenshots I fear those crates would be too much of an advantage to whoever owns the point, but who knows until it gets played in a scrim and not a pug.

I think they played earlier versions of both arctic and flake in the New Map Weekends. If my memory serves me well, arctic(or whatever it was called at the time) was really fun.

Looking at the screenshots I fear those crates would be too much of an advantage to whoever owns the point, but who knows until it gets played in a scrim and not a pug.
3
#3
koth_product
1 Frags +

in my experience, arctic is very hard to push. railbridge plays decently but the train can be a pain. flake is going to be filled with obnoxious pyros and the map is pretty flat. They're all decent maps but I feel a lot could be done to make them play better.

in my experience, arctic is very hard to push. railbridge plays decently but the train can be a pain. flake is going to be filled with obnoxious pyros and the map is pretty flat. They're all decent maps but I feel a lot could be done to make them play better.
4
#4
1 Frags +

I've played both Arctic and Flake a little. Both were only in pugs though, so maybe some of the things I observed were due to differences in skill or people being new to the maps. Anyway, here are my thoughts.

The first thing about both maps is that they are supposedly designed for highlander play. Usually a map which is designed for highlander will be larger and have more alternate routes than a map designed for sixes, and the design of these maps bears that out somewhat.

In terms of size, Arctic is a little larger than Viaduct and Flake is about the same size. Additionally, both have more flanking routes than Viaduct - Arctic has two paths across the point as well as a "cliff" like Viaduct and a path underneath, similar to Waste. Flake has several little paths among the various structures, where it is very easy to hide and pass unnoticed. When I played them in 6v6, (especially Flake), what this translated to was constant roamer bombs and scout flanks. In highlander, I would expect much the same with a lot of spy and roaming pyro action.

The key feature of Arctic is probably the crates at middle. I don't think such a large height advantage at mid is present on any other KOTH map. Soldiers spamming from the top of the crates are very powerful, as it's almost impossible to approach mid without taking significant damage. Even more annoying, though, are minisentries placed atop the crates - an engineer can put a dispenser in the upper room and control a large portion of the map with infinite wrangled minis. That alone is probably my biggest gripe about this map in highlander play.

As demoman, Flake was an extremely frustrating map for me to play. Already mentioned was how easy flanking is - though whether you consider that an upside or not probably depends which class you play. Also annoying is how strong heavy can be on this map. Since the map is small and there are many enclosed spaces, you're almost always fighting at close range. And constant small height differences make it easier for the heavy to neutralize your soldier than it would be on other maps. Maybe flanking scouts can beat 450 hp heavies, but personally I'd rather not deal with either. Also Flake has a cliff on the edge, so of course you're going to get one scout who thinks it's hilarious to FaN you off - whether you like that or not, again, probably depends which class you play.

I've played both Arctic and Flake a little. Both were only in pugs though, so maybe some of the things I observed were due to differences in skill or people being new to the maps. Anyway, here are my thoughts.

The first thing about both maps is that they are supposedly designed for highlander play. Usually a map which is designed for highlander will be larger and have more alternate routes than a map designed for sixes, and the design of these maps bears that out somewhat.

In terms of size, Arctic is a little larger than Viaduct and Flake is about the same size. Additionally, both have more flanking routes than Viaduct - Arctic has two paths across the point as well as a "cliff" like Viaduct and a path underneath, similar to Waste. Flake has several little paths among the various structures, where it is very easy to hide and pass unnoticed. When I played them in 6v6, (especially Flake), what this translated to was constant roamer bombs and scout flanks. In highlander, I would expect much the same with a lot of spy and roaming pyro action.

The key feature of Arctic is probably the crates at middle. I don't think such a large height advantage at mid is present on any other KOTH map. Soldiers spamming from the top of the crates are very powerful, as it's almost impossible to approach mid without taking significant damage. Even more annoying, though, are minisentries placed atop the crates - an engineer can put a dispenser in the upper room and control a large portion of the map with infinite wrangled minis. That alone is probably my biggest gripe about this map in highlander play.

As demoman, Flake was an extremely frustrating map for me to play. Already mentioned was how easy flanking is - though whether you consider that an upside or not probably depends which class you play. Also annoying is how strong heavy can be on this map. Since the map is small and there are many enclosed spaces, you're almost always fighting at close range. And constant small height differences make it easier for the heavy to neutralize your soldier than it would be on other maps. Maybe flanking scouts can beat 450 hp heavies, but personally I'd rather not deal with either. Also Flake has a cliff on the edge, so of course you're going to get one scout who thinks it's hilarious to FaN you off - whether you like that or not, again, probably depends which class you play.
5
#5
1 Frags +

arctic has an extremely fun mid with the tunnel flank and the mid, hanz just needs to fix a few issues with the paths to the point being less than stellar and it's golden. more fun than viaduct imo. i havent found the crates to be THAT much of an issue, it's quite easy to take at least your crate when pushing, and then you get to spam the defenders on the point.

i dont think flake or railbridge have near as much potential.

arctic has an extremely fun mid with the tunnel flank and the mid, hanz just needs to fix a few issues with the paths to the point being less than stellar and it's golden. more fun than viaduct imo. i havent found the crates to be THAT much of an issue, it's quite easy to take at least your crate when pushing, and then you get to spam the defenders on the point.

i dont think flake or railbridge have near as much potential.
Please sign in through STEAM to post a comment.