16 replies to this topic

[Glothrenite]

I find Sahara Siege to be quite unbalanced in favor of the north side.

The north side seems to have a smoother more protected run into both energy points.  Where as the south side has a, not as easy to navigate into, one node and enters via a low gap into choke for the other energy node.  South side has buildings for cover but can be used too by north side forces to ambush so thats not really an advantage either way.

North side has a distinct height advantage at the AA .. they drop in from higher ground allowing them to more easily establish themselves on the roof.  South side must climb a slight rise up to the AA through the Buildings, which, while you could argue is a cover advantage, just really does not feel that way during play.

I think mirrored maps get boring and having small differences makes for a more interesting and realistic experience.  But the lopsided feeling I get from Sahara detracts from the fun.

I would like to see a higher access point to the AA from the south side .. perhaps a series of buildings that lend themselves to an equivilent 'drop in' that the north side enjoys.

I would like a change made to how the south side enters into the western energy node.  The raised choke point you travel through is such a painful little section of the map, to the point were most games have it that south side simply concedes that node.

Peace out.

[CakeBandit]

I had a similar experience. The terrain itself provides a pretty handy advantage to one side.

[defekt]

Yeah, the north side has a very easy time on that map - given broadly equal teams in measurable ways.

[p4g3m4s7r]

Agree, though I don't think the balance is that bad. I think you could easily keep the overall structure if you just removed a lot of the cover from the north side and/or added tighter choke-points near their base.

It's definitely really fun to play, though.

[c0mad0r]

I have yet to even play Siege lol... not enough servers allocated for it and I'm too lazy to hammer the join button. I'll believe you though.

[Gagzila]

Hey Gloth,

I see you managed to snag a match on Sahara . I haven't played from the South side yet but I did get the feeling that North had an advantage over South when defending AA.

I'm definitely all for non-mirrored maps and to have dynamic, diversely interesting and fun maps that are balanced out through different pros and cons for each side of the map.

Cheers,

Gagzila

[R3TRI8UTI0N]

So this is why I sucked so much..

[DarkPulse]

I've actually won from both sides. That cover argument is kind of weak since really it thwarts most folks.

North does have more of a twisty path than south, for example.

[akatrio]

Having played on Sahara from both sides, I concur with the notion that the red team/northern's side appears to have a terrain advantage. I find I am able to reach both energy stations & the anti-air gun in about half the time it takes for me to reach them from the blue/south base. I also agree that a slight slope advantage exists for the red team has when trying to reach the anti-air gun before blue. Delays teammates face when trying to reach certain locations can make the difference between another shot from the anti-air gun, how much more energy the enemies are fueling up on, etc.

I do like the map (it's my favourite atm), but I think some adjustments for terrain balance would lead to more enjoyment for both teams.

EDIT: I have mostly played from the red side & only at most a handful of times on blue (I also tend to veer towards a certain energy station when on blue). Maybe someone who has played on blue more than red might have different observations.

Edited by akatrio, October 28 2012 - 10:19 PM.

[Glothrenite]

So i was probably a little annoyed when I posted, but in essence I stand behind what i've said .. though maybe its not as extreme as I've implied.

[Coot]

Seems like nobody wants to play siege as ive barely playerd any also. But ya siege needs a shorter duration in total and even from playing DM I can see North is above south which is an advantage

[Glothrenite]

Coot, on October 29 2012 - 12:45 AM, said:

Seems like nobody wants to play siege as ive barely playerd any also. But ya siege needs a shorter duration in total and even from playing DM I can see North is above south which is an advantage

errrr ... what_ siege is about all i play its way fun .. seems like loads of people play it .. i'd be happy if it went for even longer (though i think its spot on) ... and yes ............ north is indeed above south ...


oh you meant above as in higher ground .. yeh time for bed.

[R3TRI8UTI0N]

Yes siege is my favorite gametype, and I haven't played much others.

[Spiderz]

i think this was the related image we discussed

[Immie]

Definitely seems like the north side has a huge advantage in getting to the AA silo. Usually I can just spawn, boost directly forward, and be on the cliff overlooking it very quickly. The cliff itself is a pretty big advantage, since it lets you poke and dislodge enemies if they manage to get there first.

Personally, I like mirrored maps.

[Turic]

Mirrored maps is boring. Now from both sides you can use different taktics, different gameplay, it gives more fun. I played from both sides and sometimes win, sometimes loose, the main part of game is team, not side.

[RedVan]

I've had wins and losses on both sides, but I'd have to agree, it is easier winning from the north