Pearl Harbor: Twist or Stick?

[MrBenn]

What is the consensus on the changes to the Pearl Harbor map? Is it more balanced since the gameplay was adjusted towards the end of last year, or was the gameplay better prior to that? Both cairns and I would like to see this put to bed, and the options facing us are

a) stick with the adjusted (current) version.
b) revert to the original version.

I'll keep checking on the poll in this thread as a barometer of opinion, but would welcome discussion about the relative merits (or otherwise) of tweaking maps once they're up into live play.

--MrBenn

[cairnswk]

There's been plenty of debate, but my preference is to see the original version restored.
The current combination is quite...oh hum!
It's lost it's Japanese attack appeal

[danryan]

There's been plenty of debate, but my preference is to see the original version restored.
The current combination is quite...oh hum!
It's lost it's Japanese attack appeal

Absolutely go back to the original. It is a plain vanilla map now, before it was incredibly exciting with the crazy drops you could get. A gem of a map.

[freakns]

keep todays version. two reasons. first one, its much more balanced, second, dan likes the first version.

[Qyu]

i vote for a revert

but i would prefer with plane bonus like :
2 planes : +1
3 planes : +2
4 planes : +3
all planes : +6/7 (like now)

[Riazor]

Back to the original! I barely play it anymore, because it has just become a whole lot less fun, to me at least.

[jbrettlip]

Count one more return to original for Owen, who is forum banned adn can't vote.

[Robinette]

Although i consider myself quite the expert on the current version...
---i have played the current version not just once, but TWICE ---
but i never got a chance to play the original version...

Although, from all i've heard, the original sounds like it had a more interesting game play...

[johnkelly00]

Can someone explain the differences? What changes were made?

[shidarin]

Original all the way.

[cliffaspinall]

Keep them both. Call one the Original Pearl Harbor and the other Pearl Harbor 2 (or something similar).

[pmchugh]

More balanced doesn't always mean better map.

[flexmaster33]

I find the new version to be much easier to read and the play flows better. I avoided the original Pearl Harbor, but I enjoy this new one.

[fumandomuerte]

Is this new version a fair 1vs1 option? The original wasn't (only played the map once because I hated the drop).

[MarshalNey]

I loved the original Pearl Harbor more than any other map, and the changes were bewildering to me. The original was an extraordinary team map- so what if it wasn't perfect for 1v1 play?

The bottom line is, how could you diminish the importance of the planes- and by extension the AAs- in a map called Pearl Harbor? The bonus requirements might not seem that different, but it has had a huge effect on the way games are played. I would always see planes getting shot down by the AAs, now it's hardly worth the bother.

There's just no central thematic gameplay here anymore.

There are more balanced maps out there than the original version- but that doesn't mean that the original was badly balanced, just that it wasn't at the top of the pile... The old map was fun, the new one is merely safe. I'll value fun over a few measly points any day.

Oh, I voted to keep the original, in case anyone didn't guess