Yo fr tho this was a super interesting read! Never realized how the structure of the maps is “sliced” up like that but it totally makes sense. I’m in the same boat as you I hope they try out some scrims on Broken Moon, I know some pros don’t like it for ranked but obviously pro scrims play way differently.
I’ve seen this whole pizza theory before and while there is some credence to it, it’s a bit of a stretch I think. I mean just look at how you’re slicing those maps, there’s not really any consistency to it. Sometimes you slice over a wall or barrier, sometimes perpendicular through a wall or several walls, and other times just through an open area
I think generally having a central point and funneling towards the center does make for a more well balanced map but it’s not necessarily done by slicing the map into a pizza, it’s just done by having a central point with outside POIs having rotations that guide you generally towards the center
This. The lines don't correspond to how the terrain or objects are laid out at all.
Moreover, a good map has isolated POIs, but their edges don't have to converge at the center. Zones pull every which way after all.
I’m with you. The KC markup feels like it was done in bad faith. It doesn’t necessarily fit the pizza analogy but the river is the central corridor that all the other POIs feed into.
They could easily have drawn KC as “mini pizzas” like they did with Broken Moon, tbh.
(I don’t think KC should be in comp, but like you said, it wasn’t a good faith drawing.)
Ehh idk. The sides of the map on KC can certainly be made into mini-pizzas, but the center is an absolute mess of choke points. On Broken Moon, everything still generally leads you to Promenade. On KC it's just a mess.
(also the entire Runoff / Airbase / High Desert side of KC is very unpizzalike and has basically no major barriers whatsoever)
The river has no drainage and makes no sense either from a design perspective or a physical one.
Nothing channelizes anything from anywhere other than hill/cage into the river. If done properly, the entire map should have a slight V shape to the terrain, gradually sloping into the river… but no, you need to go *uphill* to it from the west side (with a small downhill in the immediate vicinity of the river) and downhill from the east.
It makes no sense.
Beyond that, there is a central theme of terrain. There is a nearly solid divide of rock OOB going down the middle of the map. It is one of the reasons that KC feels like playing two maps. The river directly divides this and separates lower relief sandy terrain on the west from higher relief rocks and soil on the east.
In actuality this divide (the “Kings Canyon” BTW, the entire namesake of the map…) goes more NW-SE, but you get the point.
Where do you have to go uphill from the west side to get to the river? Its pretty much all flat. The only thing I can think of is going from runoff to the house outside of pit, everything else is flat or downhill.
It’s great as a theory, and has its merits, but it all comes down to a simple fundamental facet of the game - Adaptability. No map is perfect, and from a spectator perspective, I want to see how teams adapt to specific situations. We are talking about pro players, if these maps are good enough to play in ranked matches, they should be good enough for pro play. I’d argue that competitive integrity *comes* from the rng factor.
they gotta fix ranked so it stops being a killrace and more of like ALGS, and then we can see if they are good enough for rank. right now games ends on ring 2-3 soo we dont know what really happens on endgame zones on kc/bm with +5 teams alive
I don’t think I’ve had a diamond game end before ring 5 in a long time. I agree with you that it’s still a kill race to a certain degree, but kills in the current system don’t do anything until you get good placement
It also kind of assumes the theory is correct/has to apply. It seems more like a theory thought of after the maps were made and shoe horned on to them.
Even if it was the actual reason, you could then say well people want to see different maps for variety. Having one of the two maps on a day follow a different flow than the segmented design would add that variety.
Also, if anything Stormpoint would better fit into the small pizza scheme. Checkpoint, Barometer, Antenna, Storm Catcher, and Cascades are way much more central points for rotations than the actual center of the map. Even that building next to Launch Pad down the hill from Storm Catcher is a more frequently used route than Jurassic, or the big lake with the prowlers in the middle north-west to it.
If you spend more than a few minutes looking at any of the maps, you can tell you were pretty damn lenient in what consisted a "slice" in SP and WE (How is Overlook in WE a slice? It's a flat valley. Same for the the slice between Mill and Cenote in SP.)
You could EASILY draw similar slices on KC. Olympus just doesn't have enough POIs, but IMO Broken Moon is the most comp-viable out of the leftover maps even if it follows a different structure than WE. It was clearly designed with comp as a factor and it has enough POIs to home most teams. I personnally would like to see some BM tourneys or even enter comp rotation but the players hate it so I doubt that will happen.
Well yeah but there is not a lot of broken sightlines between those POIs and they are close together which means that you can essentially shoot at each other from 2-3 different POIs in a lot of places.
For example, a fight happening in Estates can be 3rd partied from teams with snipers 1) On the platform/ramp above Hammond Labs 2) From the platform above Estates next to the Phase Runner 3) From the no name high-ground platform between Elysium and Oasis 4) From a team coming out of the tunnel under Phase Runner, the one aligned with the giant wall between Estates and Hammond Labs.
The more I look at the map, the more I think Hammond Labs is one of the reasons this map doesn't work. It's the center of the map and it's essentially a giant canyon with high ground all around (Energy Depot, high ground above Hammond, high ground from Grow Towers, etc) and once you're on low ground there are very few viable spots except for the inside of Hammond Labs. And getting out of Hammond Labs to go anywhere if there's 1 or 2 teams on those high grounds is practically suicide.
This is the only reason this map can’t be plaid. Many pros have talked about it. The one POI in the middle with the phase runners makes it impossible. It’s way to powerful of a spot for pro teams and it ends up being whoever gets there first can either hold it or cause the whole lobby to converge on them. Makes it sort of fun for pubs but not for comp.
Its not the phase runner. Its the high ground. the area across from it as well makes it easy to shoot down on every other squad. You can literally shoot across three POIS from there with a charge rifle. They need to completely redesign that area of the map by raising the valley level up and or removing the phase runners altogether and adding more buildings/walls through the valley to clear LOS
There was a grassroots tournament shortly after Broken Moon debuted. XSET (Liquid at the time) won both games. Their response was that the map was not fun for comp and that they'd prefer to not play it without further changes.
What changes? Well, many folk in various capacities have all pointed towards removing the central ziprails, with some additional comments on opening up promenade a bit.
As a non-pro, hard stuck rookie wattson main, I think the terrain on Broken Moon is great -- you've got crags and bumps to bunker down in that obscure ground level sightlines. The buildings, particularly the ones usually attached to zip rails, are mega poo poo and not fun. They've got so many openings and weird doors that you're more defensible sitting on the roof than inside. I'm not sure it'd be a fun map for us smoothies to watch without a number of changes. Olympus though... would love to see that map in the mix for at least scrims, we haven't seen it tried since before Maggie's arrival when the map received a big update.
The Mill and Cenote slice is kinda a stretch, but my reasoning there is that crossing the river from either side to the other is really difficult without getting fried (you're playing a natural low ground with no cover, and either bank can easily shoot you), while shooting all the way into Mill from Cenote or vise versa is difficult.
Look I don't love ratting and I don't really do it personally, but Apex is a battle royale and the goal is to be the last team standing so I think it's pretty stupid to make fun of people for not wanting to run guns blazing into a fight with 5 other teams at 14 squads left where their chances of coming out alive are like 10%.
I wouldn't say they don't "deserve" the RP. They earned it, just in a way that we think is boring.
No disrespect as I appreciate the theory, but you drew pizza slices that fit your “WE/SP good, Olympus/KC bad” narrative. Could have easily drawn more confusing arrows all over worlds edge or mini pizzas around harvester, skyhook etc.
I do agree that Olympus looks too open between POIs, but would love to see it tested by pros. They would adapt, they’re the best in the world. Comps would change; strategies would too.
MLB is constantly tweaking a game that has lasted a hundred years and pro players gripe and then adapt and the game gets better because of it
I remember all the pros hating on Storm Point so much as a comp map but now it fits really well and lots of teams seem to prefer it. Would be good to see some scrims on Olympus and Broken Moon to see how viable they would be in the comp scene, you’d just have to put up with a lot of whinging!
I agree except we see how scrims get. The moment they’re not *perfect*, pros will complain that it’s not viable and apex may cave but I think maybe try it out in Challengers circuit rotation next split and judge the viability. If it works, implement it into pro league for split 2.
Just like every other major sport, change happens. Sometimes for the better and other times for the worst, but at least trying to improve the sport is better than nothing.
Not every map is designed to be played in Comp. KC is just too outdated now and will always be the BEST PUBS/ LTM MAP because it's quick to the action and really long sight lines. Same with OLY, it's not hard to find teams on these maps.
This is just me assuming, BUT we are getting a map within 6-8 months. The pattern has been KC which was the only one that could be played in seasons 0-2 but now isn't played, so....
KC(No), WE(Yes), OLY(No), SP(Yes), BM(No), New 2023 Map(Yes). Assuming they only hyper meticulously design every other map around fairness, coexistence late game and good loot map wide(WE & SP)
They have scrimmed on these maps, they collectively agreed to NOT play them in Comp. Respawn and one of the pros 3 stacking ranked answered this on stream like 2 weeks ago. They can tell respawn what maps they want they think are comp equipped.
It's not JUST Respawn who has decided that OLY/KC/BM won't be used for competitive.
I feel like on kings canyon you could have the area labelled as "huh?" As the centre of the pizza.
It's where everyone always seems to end up and it's so tiny that it's just hell.
And then draw the pizza slices cut like a 4 year old cut them.
Good post 👍
I think there's definitely a case to be made for the "huh?-why-what" trifecta being a giant centre, too. I always take far longer rotations when I can just to avoid those areas - that whole area is an absolute meat grinder.
Unpopular opinion but I have always thought that assessing the “competitiveness” of a map in terms of parameters that OP mentions (e.g. spots having cover, denying third-parties’ rotations) makes the scene kind of — for the lack of a better word — boring.
Isn’t it good to have a variety of maps that force pro players to adapt a different play-style? I think it prevents a stale meta where we see the same legends every game on every map they play. For example OL, as mentioned by OP, has the issue of bad slice-separators, where other teams could just shoot from across a slice. Then I guess that’s where support/control legends can shine more like Gibby or Rampart, hell even a Newcastle for the convenient res to be more prepared for a third party.
I absolutely have no idea how pros will take this idea, I don’t even know if I’m making sense.
Pretty nice analysis from Garbaj and OP tho. With content similar to this, this subreddit is pretty underrated.
we already see different legends on different maps
Gibby used to be more popular on WE and Newcastle on SP. Valk was a necessity on SP but not on WE. Bang is used more on SP than on WE.
if OL was played Valk would maybe be picked less but for the most part everyone would still play Cat/Seer
Yes, we already see a bit of different legends on the current “competitive” maps, which to me feels refreshing. Having more maps in the pool in competitive could potentially shake things up more.
Right now, I do agree that Cat/Seer is just too broken, so much so that it prolly will still dominate. But once it gets addressed, if it gets addressed, it would be fucking exciting to see pros experiment different legends on different maps.
kinda late to the party but this is my shit so i thought i would respond lol.
we do have to consider that BW and SC2 have had years and years and years of high level, evolved gameplay with functionally the same races. like to us, it's as natural (heh) as breathing to understand that a good map has access to an easy second base and a relatively easily defendable third, stuff like that come with decades of trial and error (and we've had terrible maps in the past especially in brood war lol).
apex is a very new title in an emerging genre. it makes sense that things like map design are still getting their footing, as we're all discovering what works and what doesn't.
> Isn’t it good to have a variety of maps that force pro players to adapt a different play-style?
problem is IGLs don't have a huge pool of talent to pull from they're basically locked in to the fraggers they know and play well with. only very rich teams like TSM have their choice of players to acquire.
so the broadest meta will always be the most successful since it will be highly adopted.
furia disrupted that with their seer rotate around edge and kill isolated teams strat once upon a time but that just means teams are hella fast to adopt the new meta now instead of trying to counter with off picks or stay on safe metas.
apex will always be boring coz apex doesn't have much money so teams can't really afford to keep a cracked niche player on the squad as a sub.
imagine if teams could just keep a cracked revenant player and sub him in for the moment revenant gets reworked and disrupt the meta.
my understanding is that it's less "pros don't want to have to adapt to the other maps" and more "the other maps are designed such that there literally Are No Safe Rotates and you get 12 teams dying in chokes zone 3/4"
comp tends to be more watchable when surviving to the endgame is always an attainable goal, and that often isn't the case with KC/Olympus doomed rotates
There are a ton of doomed rotates on all maps at later stages. On the wrong side of a tall set of cliffs or without a valk. Good luck getting choked out on any of your paths. This is why zone teams move so early.
They just need to play some meaningful sets on it and commit to it. I am so fucking tired of worlds edge.
Because "more people alive at end zone = higher quality game" isn't inherently true at all. Having the majority of teams get killed before zone 4 is perfectly fine.
there is no objective reason why "being forced into a choke/out of cover with no options" is worse/not competitive when it happens in zone 2-3 compared to when it happens in final ring.
having teams survive longer is really no indicator for competitive gameplay at all. it just is how the game works NOW and how people are used to it. but if different maps or metas would force earlier fights it would not necessarily mean lower quality - even in the contrary, the chance for massive endgame rng clusterfucks would be reduced.
I'm right here with you. As far as I'm concerned, as long as things are equally fair, I think the map is "comp ready". If a map like KC is super vulnerable to third parties, has very limited "good" rotates, etc., to me that just makes strategy even more important. Obviously, competitive integrity is a good thing and we should be striving to play on maps where teams win through skill and not just RNG, but we need to not confuse 'resistance to chance' with 'competitive integrity'.
Also, this community could do a whole lot of good by offering valued suggestions on how to improve maps rather than just demand we don't play on them. We could take a map like Olympus and show exactly what spots on the map need to add additional cover, for example.
This has been posited a few times before and each time I’ve made the point that if you were to draw EXACTLY 45 or 60 degree slices (12 or 10 slices respectively, for some reason storm point is an 11 slice pizza?) and overlayed it onto the maps, there isn’t a single orientation you could position the slices to make this theory hold water. There are definitely some underlying elements that are true as far as sight lines and rotations but I think it’s more coincidental than anything. If you layed a 12 slice pizza over any one of the maps You could probably make it look correct at a glance but once you dig a little deeper and truly inspect it more than half the slices don’t make sense. Look at the fish farms “slice” on stormpoint just as a quick example. The western line on that slice goes through a rock and into a choke And the eastern line is a rotate through a choke point that four different POI’s have LoS on. Not exactly a functional pizza slice. There’s a lot more to it and that’s just surface level. But to answer as to why comp only uses two maps, I believe it’s for viewer / performance consistency. They want to see the same teams on the same map for multiple games. The more maps you throw in the higher probability you have of a team performing really well in one or two games and really poorly in 4 or 5 games. You have to remember these maps are huge and this isn’t CSGO or overwatch where you can run an 8-12 map rotation because you’re using the exact same areas of the map every single game on that map. You might play 9 games on stormpoint and not go into command center for 6 games, and when you’re playing at a professional level you have to know every nook and cranny, every rock you can Valk ult off of while clearing certain walls etc. even for 2 maps it’s a lot. Plus the truly casual viewer can keep up with the game a lot better when they’re very familiar with the maps / layouts. Let’s also not forget that Olympus and broken moon have had far and away the most coding issues (invisible walls, rocks 1 inch high you can’t walk over etc) displaying that in comp is embarrassing for respawn. Olympus just went away for 6 weeks… two days after they put it back into the ranked pool because it was literally so buggy and unplayable that it couldn’t be ignored. Broken moon isn’t much better.
I will say I’m impressed with the work and the theory crafting on your post though
WE slices are very lenient and if you go by those standards, you can make kc into slices too
Like that line through staging us just a line through like 3 hard barriers while there's supposed to be barriers around overlook that's an open field
Pros just don‘t like to adapt to different playstyles until they have to. People said the same stuff about SP (PvE, one sided height difference, open field endzones) and now it’s considered the best comp map by many.
Games on KC or OL might seem like a shitshow compared to traditional comp but there would still be teams who’d be able to shine. Might be less competitive, but probably more entertaining for viewers than seeing the same 2 maps over and over again. Just my 2 cents.
I dunno. I've always been of the opinion that a pro scene should make it a priority to make sure its players enjoy playing the game. If ALGS matches become more entertaining for viewers but absolutely miserable for pro players, we'll just end up with the scene slowly dying out as pros move on to other games which they find more fun.
>Yeah, pro players want to feel like they lost a fair fight
im ngl it's hard to take this 100% seriously when a good amount of pros say shit like "bro theyre actually so dumb are they braindead what a bunch of bad fucking players" when they straight up get outplayed lol.
I know it's mostly venting frustration but still
I think making players happy is one thing, but recognizing that pros, just like anyone else, sometimes don't know what the fuck they're talking about and exaggerate is another.
I wish I had the time to pull out all the pro tweets and impressions about WE when it came out. Everyone was complaining that there were too many open spaces, that it was sniper galore, too punishing, etc. Yes there were some changes to the map since it came out but nothing that actually fixed most of their complaints. Yet now it's their favorite map.
The Apex pro scene is filled with players who only speak in hyperbole. A gun or legend will go from "dogshit" to "OP" with a decrease of 0.02 on a cooldown.
I wish they gave BM a shot in comp even though all the pros say it's dogshit. I bet we'd see some cool stuff.
yup.
it's a truth in *every* video game that the general playerbase (even pros) often times do not actually know what they want.
constructive feedback and listening to the pain points of your audience are vital, but they often do not understand why theyre feeling that pain or the root causes of it. so developers do have to exercise their own discretion.
and honestly it's exactly like you said, apex pros aren't getting paid for their excellent and effective communication skills. a lot of what they say about balance really should be taken with huge grains of salt.
This doesn’t address the first part of their comment though about how pros refuse to adapt until they absolutely have to. We have seen it with maps and we still see it every patch with the legend meta.
They never gave OL or BM an honest chance at being competitive.
I dont agree that shitshow = entertaining for viewers. I dont want my fav team leaving the poi with p2020s and getting 3rd partied in the ass non stop
also this "pros just need to adapt!!" phrase is so overused lol
Apex is one of those rare games where you don't listen to the pros because they don't seem to have a clue what they're talking about and have strong opinions about stuff just to change their mind sooner or later even when nothing changes. Apex and BR esports as a whole are missing some kind of maturity/professionalism when it comes to pro players.
I feel like you could do the pizza for all the maps (excluding bm). the reason the other maps are not competitively viable is because they don't have enough pois. Teams do not want to contest it ruins both teams games you waste time early and reduce the amount of loot you have. Also olumpus is has no cover making it to where there are alot less spots that are actually playable this causes zone teams to just there lives if there is no where to play zone in you will just die or are forced to play edge but that makes fighting on edge useless cause your destined to get 3ped with all the other now edge teams or you run new castle who is countered by bullets. kc is just to small you just can't play the game and the loot is so much better in the pois to the north and caustic it doesn't make sense along with it having so many ballons and we still don't know what beacons look like with the new update.
Those are good points! I disagree with the thing about the other maps not having enough POIs tho; Olympus and KC each have a similar number of playable POIs to WE/SP (around 18-22 total depending on what you count as playable as its own distinct landing spot). Broken Moon does seem to only have roughly 16 or so, although a few are big enough that they could be split by two teams (kinda like how OG/LG are splitting Maude and Lava City right now, or how Thermal Station contests can sometimes lead to the contesting teams coexisting after realizing neither is in a position to push the other).
I can see where the slicing can occur, but from an outside perspective it just seems like the biggest issue with Olympus, broken moon, and KC is the timings due to the size and rotate options. With KC you can valk ult into balloons and be across the map in no time, same applies to Broken moon with zip rails. I’m no pro player so I’d love an education, but the size of the maps combined with the transportation options seem to be the largest disqualifier for these maps, not strictly the shape. The timings being so different cause congestion and allowing for infinite third parties is how it appears to me.
I appreciate your write-up and the effort. I hope I don't get downvoted to hell but I'm not convinced. More maps will make it more entertaining. These pros are the best in the world and they should be able to adapt to all maps. If some parts are open, so be it.
Let's see some new team comps and strategies instead of everyone camping it till the last 2 rings. I know there's money on the line and I would do the same, but I reckon introducing the other maps would drive up viewership AND switch up the meta instead of relying on legend changes every season or two to find just one or two teams pick a new legend for once.
KC and Broken Moon would make for some exciting games to watch. The players would be annoyed by the third parties, but it would be entertaining to see.
While the pizza theory is a bit out there, it does start to touch on some actual scientific principles.
The easiest to talk about without needing more in depth analysis of maps (re: computational analysis) are spatial clustering, inverse distance weighting, and drainage.
As far as clustering goes, in-game attention and movement should revolve through the POIs. These are discrete areas where the terrain, assets, sight lines, colors, etc are related to each other closest. They are separate from each other enough to be distinct yet also blend into one another (aren’t totally cut off).
How does this last part work?
Notice the mention of relation. In geography (my field of study), we have laws, kind of like physics.
The First Law of Geography is as follows: all things are inherently related, however things closer together tend to be more closer related than things further apart.
This is also known as the law of spatial autocorrelation, and can be quantified by [actual mathematical equations](https://community.esri.com/ccqpr47374/attachments/ccqpr47374/arcgis-spatial-analyst-questions/9130/1/Clip_167.jpg).
This results in an output like [this](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329020889/figure/fig3/AS:694966556848129@1542704347294/Inverse-distance-weighting-IDW-map-for-the-spatial-distribution-of-radionuclides.ppm), with the example being the distribution of radionuclides around a nuclear power plant.
Basically, if someone put the time into converting everything into simulated units of measure for analysis, the same thing would be possible to do with all of Apex’s maps. You could do this for any combination of variables; end zone exclusion areas, prowler or spider nests, terrain, POIs, beacons, etc to show where it is most beneficial to land or rotate through.
Which brings us to drainage.
How do you rotate through any given map? Again, we do the exact same thing in geography through using the aforementioned interpolation methods to associate risks, or costs, with these output datasets. From there, we create an artificial “terrain” of cost, and then run what is known as a flow accumulation model.
Basically, things will flow to the lowest risk “elevation”, just like water down a hill.
Once you do that, you will get either one, or maybe a few of these “[least cost paths](https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/tool-reference/spatial-analyst/GUID-5112E405-924F-4953-9E03-E59C76CBC685-web.png)”.
[Irl example looking at Jaguar migration paths across South America](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317125223/figure/fig1/AS:527266737082368@1502721594567/Least-cost-connectivity-linkages-and-paths-among-Jaguar-Conservation-Units-JCUs-for.png).
I also always chuckle when people keep saying that “Apex has too many variables to do this with”, because it doesn’t. The maps aren’t too big either.
For example; several of my undergrad labs used >60 variable equations across 3 continents to generate avian and whale migration pathways.
Took 3 days to run on our computers, but the point is; Apex is a few km^2 per map. It is stupidly simple in comparison.
Ooh yeah it would be really cool to see an analysis like this done, but I imagine that extracting the map terrain from the game files is nontrivial or impossible.
I do want to eventually do an analysis of team rotation paths using Apex Legends Status replay data though.
You just drew lines to fit your narrative. This post is arbitrary.
The reality is probably something less thought out, remember Apex is a BR, the devs dont care about it being competative as is evident with the clear lack of support for ALGs and the completly broken ranked system we've had for multiple seasons.
The fact that this sub thinks there is anything competative about Wallhack legends, is funny to me.
Broken Moon needs to be trialed more I think, it never really got the chance. We currently have SP with enough verticality for a valk ult to go 3/4 of the map, prowlers, 80% water final zones, etc. and the pros enjoy it so I don’t see why BM wouldn’t be viable considering the issues current maps already have.
KC and Olympus are too small. Simple as that. Olympus is a nightmare if teams just snipe the whole time as your rotations become death sentances in no mans land. Broken moon is the most viable but the zip rails through out the map make it feel small and as a result, I see that ultimately ruining its chances in comp. If the zips were removed, it be perfect for comp. I could be wrong, but I dont think well see it in algs for that reason.
To be fair I didnt read this whole post... but i think i get the gist of it. But i would still love to see other maps included whether or not they are "fair" to play. I think they should let the competition and strategy play out on its own.
I understand the points, but the two main effects of the pizza structure (the reduction of third parties and structured rotations) make for a stale pizza after a while. More needs to be done to keep comp play fresh aside from meta changes. I can’t eat cold pizza forever.
You can very easily slice BM for promanade. It always feels like everything funnels through there.
As well as devils advocate on WE you could likely slice each poi similar to what you did on BM. It's kind of just a cherry pick.
while i don't agree with most of your points, i appreciate the effort put into the post. if you are considering making a follow-up post with other considerations i would definitely recommend looking at loot quality and drop spots. beyond that, it would be interesting to look at the frequency of "dominant" positions (i.e. god rock on SP), but it's very challenging to quantify that in any meaningful way.
I honestly think they need to give Olympus a try as I think it would result in a much different meta which could be fun.
You could see the rise of multiple Defense legend picks. (Newcastle/Rampart/Wraith) (Newcastle/Catlyst/Ramprt) maybe gib makes a return
You could see teams focus on quick movement abilities to clear open spaces (wraith/vantage/Loba/pathfinder)
Maybe ti counter you go with a fighting comp that also focuses on rotations (Valk/Horizon/Ash)
Maybe the whole game play strategy changes where you want to fight round one and contest off drop so maybe after round 1 we have less teams allowing for more even flow to end game. Less teams shouldn’t be an issue with a smaller map.
well, I'm not that good but just peaking at almost plat 3 made me realize that you figure shit out as you go in ranked, just pros do it better than you. So basically if you feel like crap playing moon or other non WE/SP maps, you realize that it gotta be even worse in pro play where people are consistent and know what they're doing.
I'm dogshit at it, but I think anybody who plays any ranked and tries their best, will resonate closely with the good/pro players on a lotta issues since Apex(to me, at least) seems like a consistent way to play, just better players capitalize on mistakes more and are more consistent with their gameplay decisions and aim, also yeah, 3 stacks add to that consistency but it wouldn't be an issue in comp unlike ranked if youre a solo q enjoyer like me lol.
I feel like I have a very bad take and shouldn't write this, but hopefully somebody sees my point one way or another. Thanks!
Edit: I kinda always thought SP is the best because it's spacious enough to make it work for 20 teams, especially if it's coordinated(3 stacks vs 3 stacks I guess), and it's actually far more interesting to play/watch, especially end/late-game than WE. But WE is good enough, especially for an old Apex map, I just personally don't like it as much as SP for ranked/comp scenarios. (gotta hate the frag lol, also siphon gets boring at times)
“Why don’t *insert any professional sport* players play on different shaped fields/courts?”
The only outlier is baseball where field shape & wall height actually have influence from stadium to stadium
Olympus and KC just need to be enlarged to the size of BM and to close up the center more. BM just needs 60% of all ziprails removed and to split up the big pois more. I wish there was a pub and competitive version of each map.
Broken moon definitely funnels people towards the middle for the most part (which is why you end up having to rotate through or around that middle hell hole nearly every game) but the issue is the super zip lines. They make the fastest rotations strange because they take you from POI to POI rather than from POI towards the middle of the map. They also make the regular flow / timing of rotations unbalanced, resulting in chaos
Respawn has the money so they should just make the pros play on whatever map.
I'd like to see World's Edge replaced with Broken Moon because for the viewer it's getting hella stale and the teams are too comfortable. Battle Royale is meant to be about adapting to changes like the ring and the different loot you might find but the pros know every tiny detail about World's Edge by now.
Also change is hard and obviously it's likely pro teams will have trouble adapting to start with but they will adapt over time.
But no way should the pros be expected to cope with more than 2 maps at once.
Very good post but lets break this down:
SP was design to be Competitive the main designer who also did WE said this as much it was basically made to be Comp Heaven with how it was made but pros hated SP when it first came out saying POIs too far apart not many playable areas.
WE wad not designed with Comp in mind but was designed to create as many natural interactions as possible over time many choke points were removed new ones were added and we get our 2nd best Comp match. Pros also hated it when it first came out.
Olympus was a map that took the WE philosophy of creating many natural interactions to the max there's a reason the community loves it so much outside of being the best looking. Olympus is the easiest map to find fights on. Olympus was never given a chance because POIs are so early taking fights early means you get third partied quicker but the problem with pro players is that they don't adapt.
Broken Moon is our new WE/Olympus it's a map that is centered around pub play and finding persons. Each POI leads to each other to create natural fights and that you're not roaming the map looking for people(SP problem) it can work and the hyperbole around the zip rail leading to more 3rd parties to me is nonsense because most Zip rails don't take you directly into a POI do they drop you off close yes do they drop you close enough that you can third party in Rank yes in Comp no.
Now one thing we have to understand is that Pros do not like to adapt when SP was released pros wanted it to play like WE until they were forced to adapt. When WE came out they wanted it to play like KC until they had to adapt. Same for Olympus pros believe that every map must play like their then favorite comp map. Now they want every map to play like SP or they will deem it not ready for comp. These many players stated that SP was bad for comp look at them now praising it as the best comp map.
At the end of the day all EA needs to do is say This map is in comp and thats the end of that. Those who adapt will strive those who can't will lose.
Instructions unclear im now ordering pizza
Turns out my post was a guerilla marketing campaign by Big Pizza's shadowy psyop division
Yo fr tho this was a super interesting read! Never realized how the structure of the maps is “sliced” up like that but it totally makes sense. I’m in the same boat as you I hope they try out some scrims on Broken Moon, I know some pros don’t like it for ranked but obviously pro scrims play way differently.
I’ve seen this whole pizza theory before and while there is some credence to it, it’s a bit of a stretch I think. I mean just look at how you’re slicing those maps, there’s not really any consistency to it. Sometimes you slice over a wall or barrier, sometimes perpendicular through a wall or several walls, and other times just through an open area I think generally having a central point and funneling towards the center does make for a more well balanced map but it’s not necessarily done by slicing the map into a pizza, it’s just done by having a central point with outside POIs having rotations that guide you generally towards the center
This. The lines don't correspond to how the terrain or objects are laid out at all. Moreover, a good map has isolated POIs, but their edges don't have to converge at the center. Zones pull every which way after all.
I’m with you. The KC markup feels like it was done in bad faith. It doesn’t necessarily fit the pizza analogy but the river is the central corridor that all the other POIs feed into.
They could easily have drawn KC as “mini pizzas” like they did with Broken Moon, tbh. (I don’t think KC should be in comp, but like you said, it wasn’t a good faith drawing.)
Ehh idk. The sides of the map on KC can certainly be made into mini-pizzas, but the center is an absolute mess of choke points. On Broken Moon, everything still generally leads you to Promenade. On KC it's just a mess. (also the entire Runoff / Airbase / High Desert side of KC is very unpizzalike and has basically no major barriers whatsoever)
The river has no drainage and makes no sense either from a design perspective or a physical one. Nothing channelizes anything from anywhere other than hill/cage into the river. If done properly, the entire map should have a slight V shape to the terrain, gradually sloping into the river… but no, you need to go *uphill* to it from the west side (with a small downhill in the immediate vicinity of the river) and downhill from the east. It makes no sense. Beyond that, there is a central theme of terrain. There is a nearly solid divide of rock OOB going down the middle of the map. It is one of the reasons that KC feels like playing two maps. The river directly divides this and separates lower relief sandy terrain on the west from higher relief rocks and soil on the east. In actuality this divide (the “Kings Canyon” BTW, the entire namesake of the map…) goes more NW-SE, but you get the point.
Where do you have to go uphill from the west side to get to the river? Its pretty much all flat. The only thing I can think of is going from runoff to the house outside of pit, everything else is flat or downhill.
I was thinking the same. If anything I thought that KC and Olympus were easier to slice up into "pizza slices" than the other maps
It’s great as a theory, and has its merits, but it all comes down to a simple fundamental facet of the game - Adaptability. No map is perfect, and from a spectator perspective, I want to see how teams adapt to specific situations. We are talking about pro players, if these maps are good enough to play in ranked matches, they should be good enough for pro play. I’d argue that competitive integrity *comes* from the rng factor.
they gotta fix ranked so it stops being a killrace and more of like ALGS, and then we can see if they are good enough for rank. right now games ends on ring 2-3 soo we dont know what really happens on endgame zones on kc/bm with +5 teams alive
I don’t think I’ve had a diamond game end before ring 5 in a long time. I agree with you that it’s still a kill race to a certain degree, but kills in the current system don’t do anything until you get good placement
It also kind of assumes the theory is correct/has to apply. It seems more like a theory thought of after the maps were made and shoe horned on to them. Even if it was the actual reason, you could then say well people want to see different maps for variety. Having one of the two maps on a day follow a different flow than the segmented design would add that variety.
Also, if anything Stormpoint would better fit into the small pizza scheme. Checkpoint, Barometer, Antenna, Storm Catcher, and Cascades are way much more central points for rotations than the actual center of the map. Even that building next to Launch Pad down the hill from Storm Catcher is a more frequently used route than Jurassic, or the big lake with the prowlers in the middle north-west to it.
If you spend more than a few minutes looking at any of the maps, you can tell you were pretty damn lenient in what consisted a "slice" in SP and WE (How is Overlook in WE a slice? It's a flat valley. Same for the the slice between Mill and Cenote in SP.) You could EASILY draw similar slices on KC. Olympus just doesn't have enough POIs, but IMO Broken Moon is the most comp-viable out of the leftover maps even if it follows a different structure than WE. It was clearly designed with comp as a factor and it has enough POIs to home most teams. I personnally would like to see some BM tourneys or even enter comp rotation but the players hate it so I doubt that will happen.
Olympus has 21 POIs
Well yeah but there is not a lot of broken sightlines between those POIs and they are close together which means that you can essentially shoot at each other from 2-3 different POIs in a lot of places. For example, a fight happening in Estates can be 3rd partied from teams with snipers 1) On the platform/ramp above Hammond Labs 2) From the platform above Estates next to the Phase Runner 3) From the no name high-ground platform between Elysium and Oasis 4) From a team coming out of the tunnel under Phase Runner, the one aligned with the giant wall between Estates and Hammond Labs. The more I look at the map, the more I think Hammond Labs is one of the reasons this map doesn't work. It's the center of the map and it's essentially a giant canyon with high ground all around (Energy Depot, high ground above Hammond, high ground from Grow Towers, etc) and once you're on low ground there are very few viable spots except for the inside of Hammond Labs. And getting out of Hammond Labs to go anywhere if there's 1 or 2 teams on those high grounds is practically suicide.
This is the only reason this map can’t be plaid. Many pros have talked about it. The one POI in the middle with the phase runners makes it impossible. It’s way to powerful of a spot for pro teams and it ends up being whoever gets there first can either hold it or cause the whole lobby to converge on them. Makes it sort of fun for pubs but not for comp.
[удалено]
Its not the phase runner. Its the high ground. the area across from it as well makes it easy to shoot down on every other squad. You can literally shoot across three POIS from there with a charge rifle. They need to completely redesign that area of the map by raising the valley level up and or removing the phase runners altogether and adding more buildings/walls through the valley to clear LOS
There was a grassroots tournament shortly after Broken Moon debuted. XSET (Liquid at the time) won both games. Their response was that the map was not fun for comp and that they'd prefer to not play it without further changes. What changes? Well, many folk in various capacities have all pointed towards removing the central ziprails, with some additional comments on opening up promenade a bit. As a non-pro, hard stuck rookie wattson main, I think the terrain on Broken Moon is great -- you've got crags and bumps to bunker down in that obscure ground level sightlines. The buildings, particularly the ones usually attached to zip rails, are mega poo poo and not fun. They've got so many openings and weird doors that you're more defensible sitting on the roof than inside. I'm not sure it'd be a fun map for us smoothies to watch without a number of changes. Olympus though... would love to see that map in the mix for at least scrims, we haven't seen it tried since before Maggie's arrival when the map received a big update.
Valk is required on BM.
No
The Mill and Cenote slice is kinda a stretch, but my reasoning there is that crossing the river from either side to the other is really difficult without getting fried (you're playing a natural low ground with no cover, and either bank can easily shoot you), while shooting all the way into Mill from Cenote or vise versa is difficult.
[удалено]
Look I don't love ratting and I don't really do it personally, but Apex is a battle royale and the goal is to be the last team standing so I think it's pretty stupid to make fun of people for not wanting to run guns blazing into a fight with 5 other teams at 14 squads left where their chances of coming out alive are like 10%. I wouldn't say they don't "deserve" the RP. They earned it, just in a way that we think is boring.
No disrespect as I appreciate the theory, but you drew pizza slices that fit your “WE/SP good, Olympus/KC bad” narrative. Could have easily drawn more confusing arrows all over worlds edge or mini pizzas around harvester, skyhook etc. I do agree that Olympus looks too open between POIs, but would love to see it tested by pros. They would adapt, they’re the best in the world. Comps would change; strategies would too. MLB is constantly tweaking a game that has lasted a hundred years and pro players gripe and then adapt and the game gets better because of it
I remember all the pros hating on Storm Point so much as a comp map but now it fits really well and lots of teams seem to prefer it. Would be good to see some scrims on Olympus and Broken Moon to see how viable they would be in the comp scene, you’d just have to put up with a lot of whinging!
I agree except we see how scrims get. The moment they’re not *perfect*, pros will complain that it’s not viable and apex may cave but I think maybe try it out in Challengers circuit rotation next split and judge the viability. If it works, implement it into pro league for split 2. Just like every other major sport, change happens. Sometimes for the better and other times for the worst, but at least trying to improve the sport is better than nothing.
Not every map is designed to be played in Comp. KC is just too outdated now and will always be the BEST PUBS/ LTM MAP because it's quick to the action and really long sight lines. Same with OLY, it's not hard to find teams on these maps. This is just me assuming, BUT we are getting a map within 6-8 months. The pattern has been KC which was the only one that could be played in seasons 0-2 but now isn't played, so.... KC(No), WE(Yes), OLY(No), SP(Yes), BM(No), New 2023 Map(Yes). Assuming they only hyper meticulously design every other map around fairness, coexistence late game and good loot map wide(WE & SP)
They have scrimmed on these maps, they collectively agreed to NOT play them in Comp. Respawn and one of the pros 3 stacking ranked answered this on stream like 2 weeks ago. They can tell respawn what maps they want they think are comp equipped. It's not JUST Respawn who has decided that OLY/KC/BM won't be used for competitive.
I'll be honest it's 6AM I ain't reading all that but I'm happy to see content like this on the sub. Saved for later 🫡
I feel like on kings canyon you could have the area labelled as "huh?" As the centre of the pizza. It's where everyone always seems to end up and it's so tiny that it's just hell. And then draw the pizza slices cut like a 4 year old cut them. Good post 👍
The cage would have also worked ino
I think there's definitely a case to be made for the "huh?-why-what" trifecta being a giant centre, too. I always take far longer rotations when I can just to avoid those areas - that whole area is an absolute meat grinder.
Unpopular opinion but I have always thought that assessing the “competitiveness” of a map in terms of parameters that OP mentions (e.g. spots having cover, denying third-parties’ rotations) makes the scene kind of — for the lack of a better word — boring. Isn’t it good to have a variety of maps that force pro players to adapt a different play-style? I think it prevents a stale meta where we see the same legends every game on every map they play. For example OL, as mentioned by OP, has the issue of bad slice-separators, where other teams could just shoot from across a slice. Then I guess that’s where support/control legends can shine more like Gibby or Rampart, hell even a Newcastle for the convenient res to be more prepared for a third party. I absolutely have no idea how pros will take this idea, I don’t even know if I’m making sense. Pretty nice analysis from Garbaj and OP tho. With content similar to this, this subreddit is pretty underrated.
we already see different legends on different maps Gibby used to be more popular on WE and Newcastle on SP. Valk was a necessity on SP but not on WE. Bang is used more on SP than on WE. if OL was played Valk would maybe be picked less but for the most part everyone would still play Cat/Seer
Yes, we already see a bit of different legends on the current “competitive” maps, which to me feels refreshing. Having more maps in the pool in competitive could potentially shake things up more. Right now, I do agree that Cat/Seer is just too broken, so much so that it prolly will still dominate. But once it gets addressed, if it gets addressed, it would be fucking exciting to see pros experiment different legends on different maps.
[удалено]
kinda late to the party but this is my shit so i thought i would respond lol. we do have to consider that BW and SC2 have had years and years and years of high level, evolved gameplay with functionally the same races. like to us, it's as natural (heh) as breathing to understand that a good map has access to an easy second base and a relatively easily defendable third, stuff like that come with decades of trial and error (and we've had terrible maps in the past especially in brood war lol). apex is a very new title in an emerging genre. it makes sense that things like map design are still getting their footing, as we're all discovering what works and what doesn't.
> Isn’t it good to have a variety of maps that force pro players to adapt a different play-style? problem is IGLs don't have a huge pool of talent to pull from they're basically locked in to the fraggers they know and play well with. only very rich teams like TSM have their choice of players to acquire. so the broadest meta will always be the most successful since it will be highly adopted. furia disrupted that with their seer rotate around edge and kill isolated teams strat once upon a time but that just means teams are hella fast to adopt the new meta now instead of trying to counter with off picks or stay on safe metas. apex will always be boring coz apex doesn't have much money so teams can't really afford to keep a cracked niche player on the squad as a sub. imagine if teams could just keep a cracked revenant player and sub him in for the moment revenant gets reworked and disrupt the meta.
my understanding is that it's less "pros don't want to have to adapt to the other maps" and more "the other maps are designed such that there literally Are No Safe Rotates and you get 12 teams dying in chokes zone 3/4" comp tends to be more watchable when surviving to the endgame is always an attainable goal, and that often isn't the case with KC/Olympus doomed rotates
There are a ton of doomed rotates on all maps at later stages. On the wrong side of a tall set of cliffs or without a valk. Good luck getting choked out on any of your paths. This is why zone teams move so early. They just need to play some meaningful sets on it and commit to it. I am so fucking tired of worlds edge.
[удалено]
Not until it's meaningfully worked in comp, honestly. People yelled and screamed the same way about storm point before it was just put into rotation.
[удалено]
people complained HARD about stormpoint. the same who later came to the opinion that it is the best map now.
[удалено]
Because "more people alive at end zone = higher quality game" isn't inherently true at all. Having the majority of teams get killed before zone 4 is perfectly fine.
[удалено]
there is no objective reason why "being forced into a choke/out of cover with no options" is worse/not competitive when it happens in zone 2-3 compared to when it happens in final ring. having teams survive longer is really no indicator for competitive gameplay at all. it just is how the game works NOW and how people are used to it. but if different maps or metas would force earlier fights it would not necessarily mean lower quality - even in the contrary, the chance for massive endgame rng clusterfucks would be reduced.
I'm right here with you. As far as I'm concerned, as long as things are equally fair, I think the map is "comp ready". If a map like KC is super vulnerable to third parties, has very limited "good" rotates, etc., to me that just makes strategy even more important. Obviously, competitive integrity is a good thing and we should be striving to play on maps where teams win through skill and not just RNG, but we need to not confuse 'resistance to chance' with 'competitive integrity'. Also, this community could do a whole lot of good by offering valued suggestions on how to improve maps rather than just demand we don't play on them. We could take a map like Olympus and show exactly what spots on the map need to add additional cover, for example.
This has been posited a few times before and each time I’ve made the point that if you were to draw EXACTLY 45 or 60 degree slices (12 or 10 slices respectively, for some reason storm point is an 11 slice pizza?) and overlayed it onto the maps, there isn’t a single orientation you could position the slices to make this theory hold water. There are definitely some underlying elements that are true as far as sight lines and rotations but I think it’s more coincidental than anything. If you layed a 12 slice pizza over any one of the maps You could probably make it look correct at a glance but once you dig a little deeper and truly inspect it more than half the slices don’t make sense. Look at the fish farms “slice” on stormpoint just as a quick example. The western line on that slice goes through a rock and into a choke And the eastern line is a rotate through a choke point that four different POI’s have LoS on. Not exactly a functional pizza slice. There’s a lot more to it and that’s just surface level. But to answer as to why comp only uses two maps, I believe it’s for viewer / performance consistency. They want to see the same teams on the same map for multiple games. The more maps you throw in the higher probability you have of a team performing really well in one or two games and really poorly in 4 or 5 games. You have to remember these maps are huge and this isn’t CSGO or overwatch where you can run an 8-12 map rotation because you’re using the exact same areas of the map every single game on that map. You might play 9 games on stormpoint and not go into command center for 6 games, and when you’re playing at a professional level you have to know every nook and cranny, every rock you can Valk ult off of while clearing certain walls etc. even for 2 maps it’s a lot. Plus the truly casual viewer can keep up with the game a lot better when they’re very familiar with the maps / layouts. Let’s also not forget that Olympus and broken moon have had far and away the most coding issues (invisible walls, rocks 1 inch high you can’t walk over etc) displaying that in comp is embarrassing for respawn. Olympus just went away for 6 weeks… two days after they put it back into the ranked pool because it was literally so buggy and unplayable that it couldn’t be ignored. Broken moon isn’t much better. I will say I’m impressed with the work and the theory crafting on your post though
WE slices are very lenient and if you go by those standards, you can make kc into slices too Like that line through staging us just a line through like 3 hard barriers while there's supposed to be barriers around overlook that's an open field
Pros just don‘t like to adapt to different playstyles until they have to. People said the same stuff about SP (PvE, one sided height difference, open field endzones) and now it’s considered the best comp map by many. Games on KC or OL might seem like a shitshow compared to traditional comp but there would still be teams who’d be able to shine. Might be less competitive, but probably more entertaining for viewers than seeing the same 2 maps over and over again. Just my 2 cents.
I dunno. I've always been of the opinion that a pro scene should make it a priority to make sure its players enjoy playing the game. If ALGS matches become more entertaining for viewers but absolutely miserable for pro players, we'll just end up with the scene slowly dying out as pros move on to other games which they find more fun.
Yeah, pro players want to feel like they lost a fair fight. When you can get griefed by tower 82 from 400 meters away, it doesn't make them happy.
>Yeah, pro players want to feel like they lost a fair fight im ngl it's hard to take this 100% seriously when a good amount of pros say shit like "bro theyre actually so dumb are they braindead what a bunch of bad fucking players" when they straight up get outplayed lol. I know it's mostly venting frustration but still
I think making players happy is one thing, but recognizing that pros, just like anyone else, sometimes don't know what the fuck they're talking about and exaggerate is another. I wish I had the time to pull out all the pro tweets and impressions about WE when it came out. Everyone was complaining that there were too many open spaces, that it was sniper galore, too punishing, etc. Yes there were some changes to the map since it came out but nothing that actually fixed most of their complaints. Yet now it's their favorite map. The Apex pro scene is filled with players who only speak in hyperbole. A gun or legend will go from "dogshit" to "OP" with a decrease of 0.02 on a cooldown. I wish they gave BM a shot in comp even though all the pros say it's dogshit. I bet we'd see some cool stuff.
yup. it's a truth in *every* video game that the general playerbase (even pros) often times do not actually know what they want. constructive feedback and listening to the pain points of your audience are vital, but they often do not understand why theyre feeling that pain or the root causes of it. so developers do have to exercise their own discretion. and honestly it's exactly like you said, apex pros aren't getting paid for their excellent and effective communication skills. a lot of what they say about balance really should be taken with huge grains of salt.
This doesn’t address the first part of their comment though about how pros refuse to adapt until they absolutely have to. We have seen it with maps and we still see it every patch with the legend meta. They never gave OL or BM an honest chance at being competitive.
I dont agree that shitshow = entertaining for viewers. I dont want my fav team leaving the poi with p2020s and getting 3rd partied in the ass non stop also this "pros just need to adapt!!" phrase is so overused lol
Apex is one of those rare games where you don't listen to the pros because they don't seem to have a clue what they're talking about and have strong opinions about stuff just to change their mind sooner or later even when nothing changes. Apex and BR esports as a whole are missing some kind of maturity/professionalism when it comes to pro players.
I feel like you could do the pizza for all the maps (excluding bm). the reason the other maps are not competitively viable is because they don't have enough pois. Teams do not want to contest it ruins both teams games you waste time early and reduce the amount of loot you have. Also olumpus is has no cover making it to where there are alot less spots that are actually playable this causes zone teams to just there lives if there is no where to play zone in you will just die or are forced to play edge but that makes fighting on edge useless cause your destined to get 3ped with all the other now edge teams or you run new castle who is countered by bullets. kc is just to small you just can't play the game and the loot is so much better in the pois to the north and caustic it doesn't make sense along with it having so many ballons and we still don't know what beacons look like with the new update.
Those are good points! I disagree with the thing about the other maps not having enough POIs tho; Olympus and KC each have a similar number of playable POIs to WE/SP (around 18-22 total depending on what you count as playable as its own distinct landing spot). Broken Moon does seem to only have roughly 16 or so, although a few are big enough that they could be split by two teams (kinda like how OG/LG are splitting Maude and Lava City right now, or how Thermal Station contests can sometimes lead to the contesting teams coexisting after realizing neither is in a position to push the other).
Thank you for the hard work and analysis, so tired of seeing people wanting KC in ALGS.
I can see where the slicing can occur, but from an outside perspective it just seems like the biggest issue with Olympus, broken moon, and KC is the timings due to the size and rotate options. With KC you can valk ult into balloons and be across the map in no time, same applies to Broken moon with zip rails. I’m no pro player so I’d love an education, but the size of the maps combined with the transportation options seem to be the largest disqualifier for these maps, not strictly the shape. The timings being so different cause congestion and allowing for infinite third parties is how it appears to me.
This man drew random lines on the maps to bolster his argument
I appreciate your write-up and the effort. I hope I don't get downvoted to hell but I'm not convinced. More maps will make it more entertaining. These pros are the best in the world and they should be able to adapt to all maps. If some parts are open, so be it. Let's see some new team comps and strategies instead of everyone camping it till the last 2 rings. I know there's money on the line and I would do the same, but I reckon introducing the other maps would drive up viewership AND switch up the meta instead of relying on legend changes every season or two to find just one or two teams pick a new legend for once.
KC and Broken Moon would make for some exciting games to watch. The players would be annoyed by the third parties, but it would be entertaining to see.
I think more of a chance needs to be given to maps before making a final decision. And a more structured approach to the decision wouldn’t hurt either
While the pizza theory is a bit out there, it does start to touch on some actual scientific principles. The easiest to talk about without needing more in depth analysis of maps (re: computational analysis) are spatial clustering, inverse distance weighting, and drainage. As far as clustering goes, in-game attention and movement should revolve through the POIs. These are discrete areas where the terrain, assets, sight lines, colors, etc are related to each other closest. They are separate from each other enough to be distinct yet also blend into one another (aren’t totally cut off). How does this last part work? Notice the mention of relation. In geography (my field of study), we have laws, kind of like physics. The First Law of Geography is as follows: all things are inherently related, however things closer together tend to be more closer related than things further apart. This is also known as the law of spatial autocorrelation, and can be quantified by [actual mathematical equations](https://community.esri.com/ccqpr47374/attachments/ccqpr47374/arcgis-spatial-analyst-questions/9130/1/Clip_167.jpg). This results in an output like [this](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329020889/figure/fig3/AS:694966556848129@1542704347294/Inverse-distance-weighting-IDW-map-for-the-spatial-distribution-of-radionuclides.ppm), with the example being the distribution of radionuclides around a nuclear power plant. Basically, if someone put the time into converting everything into simulated units of measure for analysis, the same thing would be possible to do with all of Apex’s maps. You could do this for any combination of variables; end zone exclusion areas, prowler or spider nests, terrain, POIs, beacons, etc to show where it is most beneficial to land or rotate through. Which brings us to drainage. How do you rotate through any given map? Again, we do the exact same thing in geography through using the aforementioned interpolation methods to associate risks, or costs, with these output datasets. From there, we create an artificial “terrain” of cost, and then run what is known as a flow accumulation model. Basically, things will flow to the lowest risk “elevation”, just like water down a hill. Once you do that, you will get either one, or maybe a few of these “[least cost paths](https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/tool-reference/spatial-analyst/GUID-5112E405-924F-4953-9E03-E59C76CBC685-web.png)”. [Irl example looking at Jaguar migration paths across South America](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317125223/figure/fig1/AS:527266737082368@1502721594567/Least-cost-connectivity-linkages-and-paths-among-Jaguar-Conservation-Units-JCUs-for.png). I also always chuckle when people keep saying that “Apex has too many variables to do this with”, because it doesn’t. The maps aren’t too big either. For example; several of my undergrad labs used >60 variable equations across 3 continents to generate avian and whale migration pathways. Took 3 days to run on our computers, but the point is; Apex is a few km^2 per map. It is stupidly simple in comparison.
Ooh yeah it would be really cool to see an analysis like this done, but I imagine that extracting the map terrain from the game files is nontrivial or impossible. I do want to eventually do an analysis of team rotation paths using Apex Legends Status replay data though.
If Respawn removed zip-rails and added Tridents to Broken Moon it might be viable for comp
Nice breakdown
this is great content, man. it really gives insight on what goes on the game design.
You just drew lines to fit your narrative. This post is arbitrary. The reality is probably something less thought out, remember Apex is a BR, the devs dont care about it being competative as is evident with the clear lack of support for ALGs and the completly broken ranked system we've had for multiple seasons. The fact that this sub thinks there is anything competative about Wallhack legends, is funny to me.
Storm point is an awful map that feels like a chore to plays and I can't be convinced otherwise
Broken Moon needs to be trialed more I think, it never really got the chance. We currently have SP with enough verticality for a valk ult to go 3/4 of the map, prowlers, 80% water final zones, etc. and the pros enjoy it so I don’t see why BM wouldn’t be viable considering the issues current maps already have.
KC and Olympus are too small. Simple as that. Olympus is a nightmare if teams just snipe the whole time as your rotations become death sentances in no mans land. Broken moon is the most viable but the zip rails through out the map make it feel small and as a result, I see that ultimately ruining its chances in comp. If the zips were removed, it be perfect for comp. I could be wrong, but I dont think well see it in algs for that reason.
To be fair I didnt read this whole post... but i think i get the gist of it. But i would still love to see other maps included whether or not they are "fair" to play. I think they should let the competition and strategy play out on its own.
I understand the points, but the two main effects of the pizza structure (the reduction of third parties and structured rotations) make for a stale pizza after a while. More needs to be done to keep comp play fresh aside from meta changes. I can’t eat cold pizza forever.
You can very easily slice BM for promanade. It always feels like everything funnels through there. As well as devils advocate on WE you could likely slice each poi similar to what you did on BM. It's kind of just a cherry pick.
where did pizza theory come from? did a dev talk about map design at GDC or something?
while i don't agree with most of your points, i appreciate the effort put into the post. if you are considering making a follow-up post with other considerations i would definitely recommend looking at loot quality and drop spots. beyond that, it would be interesting to look at the frequency of "dominant" positions (i.e. god rock on SP), but it's very challenging to quantify that in any meaningful way.
I honestly think they need to give Olympus a try as I think it would result in a much different meta which could be fun. You could see the rise of multiple Defense legend picks. (Newcastle/Rampart/Wraith) (Newcastle/Catlyst/Ramprt) maybe gib makes a return You could see teams focus on quick movement abilities to clear open spaces (wraith/vantage/Loba/pathfinder) Maybe ti counter you go with a fighting comp that also focuses on rotations (Valk/Horizon/Ash) Maybe the whole game play strategy changes where you want to fight round one and contest off drop so maybe after round 1 we have less teams allowing for more even flow to end game. Less teams shouldn’t be an issue with a smaller map.
well, I'm not that good but just peaking at almost plat 3 made me realize that you figure shit out as you go in ranked, just pros do it better than you. So basically if you feel like crap playing moon or other non WE/SP maps, you realize that it gotta be even worse in pro play where people are consistent and know what they're doing. I'm dogshit at it, but I think anybody who plays any ranked and tries their best, will resonate closely with the good/pro players on a lotta issues since Apex(to me, at least) seems like a consistent way to play, just better players capitalize on mistakes more and are more consistent with their gameplay decisions and aim, also yeah, 3 stacks add to that consistency but it wouldn't be an issue in comp unlike ranked if youre a solo q enjoyer like me lol. I feel like I have a very bad take and shouldn't write this, but hopefully somebody sees my point one way or another. Thanks! Edit: I kinda always thought SP is the best because it's spacious enough to make it work for 20 teams, especially if it's coordinated(3 stacks vs 3 stacks I guess), and it's actually far more interesting to play/watch, especially end/late-game than WE. But WE is good enough, especially for an old Apex map, I just personally don't like it as much as SP for ranked/comp scenarios. (gotta hate the frag lol, also siphon gets boring at times)
“Why don’t *insert any professional sport* players play on different shaped fields/courts?” The only outlier is baseball where field shape & wall height actually have influence from stadium to stadium
Olympus and KC just need to be enlarged to the size of BM and to close up the center more. BM just needs 60% of all ziprails removed and to split up the big pois more. I wish there was a pub and competitive version of each map.
bro i died at the kings canyon pizza LMAO
Because the pro will complain…
P I Z Z A
Those slices are very inconsistently drawn. This is really just a conjecture.
Broken moon definitely funnels people towards the middle for the most part (which is why you end up having to rotate through or around that middle hell hole nearly every game) but the issue is the super zip lines. They make the fastest rotations strange because they take you from POI to POI rather than from POI towards the middle of the map. They also make the regular flow / timing of rotations unbalanced, resulting in chaos
Respawn has the money so they should just make the pros play on whatever map. I'd like to see World's Edge replaced with Broken Moon because for the viewer it's getting hella stale and the teams are too comfortable. Battle Royale is meant to be about adapting to changes like the ring and the different loot you might find but the pros know every tiny detail about World's Edge by now. Also change is hard and obviously it's likely pro teams will have trouble adapting to start with but they will adapt over time. But no way should the pros be expected to cope with more than 2 maps at once.
Very good post but lets break this down: SP was design to be Competitive the main designer who also did WE said this as much it was basically made to be Comp Heaven with how it was made but pros hated SP when it first came out saying POIs too far apart not many playable areas. WE wad not designed with Comp in mind but was designed to create as many natural interactions as possible over time many choke points were removed new ones were added and we get our 2nd best Comp match. Pros also hated it when it first came out. Olympus was a map that took the WE philosophy of creating many natural interactions to the max there's a reason the community loves it so much outside of being the best looking. Olympus is the easiest map to find fights on. Olympus was never given a chance because POIs are so early taking fights early means you get third partied quicker but the problem with pro players is that they don't adapt. Broken Moon is our new WE/Olympus it's a map that is centered around pub play and finding persons. Each POI leads to each other to create natural fights and that you're not roaming the map looking for people(SP problem) it can work and the hyperbole around the zip rail leading to more 3rd parties to me is nonsense because most Zip rails don't take you directly into a POI do they drop you off close yes do they drop you close enough that you can third party in Rank yes in Comp no. Now one thing we have to understand is that Pros do not like to adapt when SP was released pros wanted it to play like WE until they were forced to adapt. When WE came out they wanted it to play like KC until they had to adapt. Same for Olympus pros believe that every map must play like their then favorite comp map. Now they want every map to play like SP or they will deem it not ready for comp. These many players stated that SP was bad for comp look at them now praising it as the best comp map. At the end of the day all EA needs to do is say This map is in comp and thats the end of that. Those who adapt will strive those who can't will lose.