Asymmetrical Multiplayer Design

Introduction

In this article I'll write about some things you should take into consideration if you're creating an asymmetrical multiplayer level. I'll assume that you're designing for a team versus team game where both sides start in set locations, since creating an asymmetrical deathmatch level tends to be more forgiving. Throughout the article I'll use my level dod_palermo as an example, which is an asymmetrical, non-linear multiplayer level for the game Day of Defeat Source.

Let me start by saying that asymmetrical design is the most time-consuming type of layout you can do. It's inherently not balanced and it requires a great deal of playtesting and iteration since you can find that one side has an advantage once players get to know the level. However, players will appreciate all the work that went into it if you pull it off, since you've basically created two maps in one, offering unique options and possibilities depending on what side the player chooses to play for.

Let's get started with the aspects you need to consider while designing an asymmetrical level. Some sections have examples from dod_palermo, which you can click on to see a bigger version.

Counters

Each side needs to be able to counter the opposing side in some way, to prevent areas becoming one-sided and unbalanced. If one side has an advantageous sniper-position, the other side needs ways to be able to stay out of its view to be able to flank it, or an opposing sniper-perch where a sniper can keep tabs on it. If one area is heavily favoring one team, then it will most likely see less action as players learn the map and know to avoid the area.

In the picture above, you can see the center courtyard. Each side has their dedicated sniper/machinegun area, the opposing side is highlighted with red. Even though the layout is asymmetrical, you have about as many entrances to cover from each side, yet each side has its own weaknesses and strengths. The broken-roof spot is quite exposed, which also gives it a great field of view. The opposing side has more cover, but less line of sight, which makes it easier for the other team to keep tabs on it.

Each team has the same amount of entrance-points into the courtyard, ensuring that no team has an advantage over the other one. If one side had three entrances while the other had two it would quickly become one sided, which would throw off the balance in the rest of the map since more traffic would get packed into fewer areas. Another thing to keep in mind here is that height-difference plays a huge role in the value of an entrance point. A high entrance point is more valuable than a low entrance point, since it's easier to retreat, and you get a better view of the area.

The thought of keeping things even between the two teams has also extended to the spawn areas, where both sides have the same type of exits. If one team is able to throw grenades in/out the spawn area (a clear design flaw, looking back on it!), then the same should be possible for the opposing team.

Balancing

Balancing is the most problematic part of designing an asymmetrical level. However, there's some things which helps you out here which you should always keep in mind.

The first one is timing. If Team A takes 15 seconds to reach the middle courtyard using the most optimal route, then the other team should match that time. If one team is able to set up more quickly than the other then it's suddenly an attack-defend scenario instead of a clash, which can throw off the balance for the remainder of the round.

Another thing to think about is sightlines. If you have similar paths and timings to an area, but one team is more exposed when using their path then that's a weakness which can be used by the other team to gain an advantage. This also comes into play when thinking about routes to major areas.

Example :
Team A and B both have reinforcement-routes leading from the spawn to the center courtyard. However, Team A is more exposed when entering their reinforcement-route, whereas Team Bs route is entirely indoor, which gives them total concealment. The balance is now favoring Team B, which will have an effect on how a round plays out.

Lastly, each team should have the same amount of options when it comes to navigating through the level. This comes down to the same amount of movement routes, how they connect with eachother and so forth. As I mentioned earlier, if one team has fewer routes to worry about then those become easier to defend or assault, which again throws off the balance.

Non-Linearity

Non-linearity is something you can experiment with when creating an asymmetrical level. This means that instead of fighting through a "corridor", several areas connect to eachother, granting the player lots of freedom when it comes to navigation and handling problems (flanking, ambushing etc.). Below is the rough layout of dod_palermo. The green area is the playable area, the orange areas marks the restricted spawn areas.

When designing something non-linear, it's very interesting to see what areas of the map almost become abandoned since none of the action is centered there, and enemies have a hard time getting to since they're often intercepted on the way there. In dod_palermo, one such area is the western spawn exit of the Axis team, shown below.

Since it's so far up in the corner, it's not often used, even though there's a control point there which needs to be taken to win the round. However, most players circle around it, trying to get into the fight quicker. This can be seen as a problem and could be fixed with easier availability, however, these "dead areas" can serve as great ambush-points, where once in a while an enemy player has managed to reach it and can set up an ambush on non-aware players. Once this has happened, it forces the enemy team to be aware of the area and keeps them on their toes.

High-level Symmetry

Even though you're designing an asymmetrical level, you still need to consider the high level symmetry, meaning that each team has the same type of territory available to them. If one side only has wide open areas, while the other side only has cramped interior areas available to them, the map will become extremely hard to balance. A nice balance between open and closed areas is needed for both sides, meaning that no side has an easier job in winning the round.

If you're going for a non-linear level, you can split the level up into main passages which all go towards or past a shared center. This will make the map easy to navigate and should make it less likely that a new player will get lost. In dod_palermo, there's two main passages on each side of the level, along with a shared courtyard which sees constant fighting.

Long-term Playtesting

Finally one quick note about playtesting an asymmetrical level. I recommend sitting in on the playtesting, and that you keep a group of regular playtesters. Like I mentioned earlier, the map can reveal unbalanced areas after players have gotten to know it. If you use the same group of playtesters for several iterations then they'll have knowledge about the layout and can help you identify problem-areas. Of course you should still get fresh eyes on the map as well, since you probably want new players to have a good time as well!

I hope you've enjoyed reading this article on asymmetrical multiplayer design. If you have any questions or comments I can be reached at magnar.jenssen@gmail.com

Thanks for reading!

Return home.