Jump to content

Petition To Save Alpine! = Verdict: It Stays


154 replies to this topic

Poll: Should Alpine Peaks remain in rotation? (611 member(s) have cast votes)

With some tweaks to Alpine Peaks geometry, should it stay in rotation?

  1. Yes. (521 votes [85.27%])

    Percentage of vote: 85.27%

  2. No. Explain why. (90 votes [14.73%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.73%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 ScrapIron Prime

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 4,805 posts
  • LocationSmack dab in the middle of Ohio

Posted 01 January 2016 - 07:42 AM

People dislike this map for two reasons. First, the fight always happens in the same place, either of the main hill or around the three tightly clustered objectives in Conquest mode. Second, it's so long range it makes their medium laser and streak builds nearly useless.

Folks, that second one is NOT a bad thing. Some times you just shouldn't bring a streak launcher to a gauss rifle fight. The Battletech genre has long expressed this truth, that being out ranged is bad, and that while it takes mixed weaponry to round out a company, fire lances of long range weapons are an important aspect of the game.

Alpine Peaks is one of the few maps standing between balanced weapon load outs and the "pulse laser vomit" crowd. Removing maps like Alpine Peaks from rotation would only further encourage people to specialize in short range builds, as there would be less incentive to carry long range weaponry on slower mechs.

So please, leave the original Alpine Peaks in rotation once the new one comes out. It's more content for the game, and it's the school of hard knocks for people who refuse to fight outside 300 meters.

Edited by ScrapIron Prime, 01 January 2016 - 07:43 AM.


#22 C E Dwyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,274 posts
  • LocationHiding in the periphery, from Bounty Hunters

Posted 01 January 2016 - 07:47 AM

Your poll is slanted and of no value, because people that vote yes don't have to explain why.

Are you a retired Commissar from the defunct U.S.S.R ?

Because that's how their totally fair and not corrupt elections worked back then

#23 TercieI

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 8,147 posts
  • LocationThe Far Country

Posted 01 January 2016 - 08:18 AM

Turn the assault and skirmish spawns 90 degrees and keep it. (They're actually ok but a lot of people play it dumb and it is dull). It's great on conquest, would hate to lose that.

#24 Ken Harkin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 336 posts
  • LocationLong Island, New York, USA

Posted 01 January 2016 - 08:21 AM

Absolutely keep it. If you guys are going to create an entire new map then simply fix the mountain on this one and keep it in rotation. There is a disturbing lack of maps you can see things on. Frozen City should pay me credits for every time I am stuck playing on it. What is the use of visuals and custom paint when you can't see a damn thing. Every new map sees the need to destroy visibility.

Keep Alpine with a minor tweek. NUKE Frozen "Misty" City.

View PostScrapIron Prime, on 01 January 2016 - 07:42 AM, said:

People dislike this map for two reasons. First, the fight always happens in the same place, either of the main hill or around the three tightly clustered objectives in Conquest mode. Second, it's so long range it makes their medium laser and streak builds nearly useless.

Folks, that second one is NOT a bad thing. Some times you just shouldn't bring a streak launcher to a gauss rifle fight. The Battletech genre has long expressed this truth, that being out ranged is bad, and that while it takes mixed weaponry to round out a company, fire lances of long range weapons are an important aspect of the game.

Alpine Peaks is one of the few maps standing between balanced weapon load outs and the "pulse laser vomit" crowd. Removing maps like Alpine Peaks from rotation would only further encourage people to specialize in short range builds, as there would be less incentive to carry long range weaponry on slower mechs.

So please, leave the original Alpine Peaks in rotation once the new one comes out. It's more content for the game, and it's the school of hard knocks for people who refuse to fight outside 300 meters.


QFT. I may not be happy when I drop in my DDC with 2 LBX10 and 3 SRM6 but I deal with it. Move to cover and maneuver. At the same time when I wind up there in my Raven 3L or BJ with twin PPC I do the happy dance.

#25 Kyle Travis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 210 posts

Posted 01 January 2016 - 08:23 AM

Yes because I want more maps not less.....and different maps

#26 JernauM

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 132 posts

Posted 01 January 2016 - 08:23 AM

Whatever problems Alpine might have could probably be fixed to a large extent just with changes to spawn locations, and, most critically, spawning all lances together.

We don't need to lose one of the few maps which has decent visibility, decent mobility, and does not tank frame rates like the newer maps do. I am concerned that the new map PGI plans to release is just going to be a cold version of new Caustic Valley: foggy, cluttered, and with annoying impediments to mobility everywhere.

#27 adamts01

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 3,417 posts
  • LocationPhilippines

Posted 01 January 2016 - 08:47 AM

View PostCathy, on 01 January 2016 - 07:47 AM, said:

Your poll is slanted and of no value, because people that vote yes don't have to explain why.

It looks, to me, like there are plenty of people explaining why they want it kept.

View PostTheCaptainJZ, on 01 January 2016 - 07:34 AM, said:

Alpine is terribly unbalanced. Better to start over.

There are probably 20 mountains on Alpine.The map could be considered slightly unbalanced because of 1 of them. Just knock out that one mountain, copy and paste some buildings and trees from another map, and everyone is happy. Sounds pretty easy to me.

#28 ScrapIron Prime

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 4,805 posts
  • LocationSmack dab in the middle of Ohio

Posted 01 January 2016 - 08:50 AM

Fix the central mountain by adding impassable rock spires to the side nearest the base, the side along the canyon pass. If you can't climb that side or shoot from that side, you won't fight on top of that hill. It would become a culdesac looking over the center of the map only.

#29 m

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 528 posts

Posted 01 January 2016 - 08:52 AM

Years ago people never used to brawl in the same damn spot on the mountain like they do today, which cuts off 50% of the map every time we enter it.

The reason everyone goes up to that mountain is because once 12v12 and Skirmish was implemented, the map absorbed the same spawn points as Assault mode, and later it was mentioned to us that everything was going to change uniquely to it's own mode, which changed slowly to what it is now.

This map was the first map released as designed for 12v12 Assault with a bit of an after-thought of Conquest in mind. Appeasing Skirmish Mode, and making each map spawn unique so they each have their own spawn location is what destroyed the likeness of this map for me (nerfing also kind of forced people to enjoy the close-quarter fights as well in Standard Play).

We never go to the "Radio Tower" anymore. Nice part of the map that is just a waste of pixels and design money to be honest.

Also, from what I have noticed from players who started in this game after Skirmish-mode was implemented was this; They do not care to complete what the game mode states (Assault, Conquest) if they can wipe out the opponent with the mindset of Skirmish Mode in mind. If the mode is Conquest people, play it as such.

#30 Big Tin Man

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 1,957 posts

Posted 01 January 2016 - 09:11 AM

Without debating the merits of alpine, we have map voting now. More choice is better. Let us choose if we want to see it ever again.

#savealpine

#31 Cyrano47

    Rookie

  • 5 posts

Posted 01 January 2016 - 09:29 AM

God no. It's an interesting map in conquest but insanely boring in any other mode. Most maps offer a decent mix of ways to play it, but Alpine is just dominated by long range weapons. Conquest forces people to go to areas where that isn't the case, but your average assault or skirmish features people camping out in the big, open areas 90% of the time.

It's also way too big for a 12 on 12 game. THe last surviving light mech can run and needlessly delay the end of the match way to easily and it just takes too long to develop. Not all maps need to be tiny little brawl arenas but this one took it too far. Maybe, MAYBE rehab it as a CW map - those benefit from larger map sizes.

#32 Tyler Valentine

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Senior Corporal
  • 1,472 posts
  • LocationChandler, Arizona

Posted 01 January 2016 - 09:55 AM

Yes please!

Obviously the spawn points and mountain need to be reworked but this map has tons of conquest potential. It's already one of the best conquest maps now.

#33 Logan Pryde

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 143 posts
  • LocationKooken's Pleasure Pit

Posted 01 January 2016 - 09:56 AM

I enjoy this map, especially when the fight takes place somewhere other than the mountain. Nerf the mountain, but keep the map! We already have such a limited amount of maps in the rotation that it's pitiful. We need to be adding way more maps, not removing maps just because another one is set to release!

#34 Katus

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 82 posts
  • LocationTucson AZ

Posted 01 January 2016 - 10:25 AM

I don't have a problem with Alpine as it stands. I like to fight at range and maps like Alpine are where I can get some real nice sniping and Lurming in.

#35 Felicitatem Parco

    Professor of Memetics

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 13,522 posts
  • LocationIs Being Obscured By ECM

Posted 01 January 2016 - 10:59 AM

We should keep the map. Just move the spawns and collectors. You can keep people away from the mountain by spawning all teams closer to the lower city and just give the mountain to one team, but spawn the other team so far away that they do not feel compelled to attack the mountain.

My favorite game of Alpine was when my team spawned below the mountain, and we just waited for the lemmings that took the mountain to realize that we would only meet them halfway. After enough all-chat banter, they decided to abondon the mountain and actually engage in combat. It was fun, but we only had 4 minutes to fight by the time they came down to fight.

So... Just spawn one of the teams so far away from the mountain that they do not feel obliged to conquer it... At least it worked for me :-)

#36 Wildstreak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 5,154 posts

Posted 01 January 2016 - 11:26 AM

Polar Highlands is the New Alpine, they changed the name since they had to make so many changes to make it balanced.

#37 Team Chevy86

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Clamps
  • The Clamps
  • 1,074 posts
  • LocationDue North

Posted 01 January 2016 - 11:38 AM

View PostCathy, on 01 January 2016 - 07:47 AM, said:

Your poll is slanted and of no value, because people that vote yes don't have to explain why.

Are you a retired Commissar from the defunct U.S.S.R ?

Because that's how their totally fair and not corrupt elections worked back then


As you can see... People that vote yes can also comment. They don't need my permission. Voting yes shows you agree with the proposed changes. Nothing more.
Explaining why you vote no will help bring more discussion about it's flaws
Should I have it ranged 1 -> 6 with Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree with a big fat MEH right in the middle?

#38 Túatha Dé Danann

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Caladbolg
  • Caladbolg
  • 1,164 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 01 January 2016 - 12:15 PM

The only good game mode for Alpine was concquest, the rest of the time everyone did sigh which is never a good sign out loud for a game which purpose is fun.

So, no - delete Alpine. Only issue: I'm hoping the new map will also have a good conquest mode that is en par with the Alpine peaks conquest mode. If not, thats bad, if yes, then there is no reason to keep alpine.

Next on the list to do rework: Geometry on HPG and Tourmaline and changing Terra Therma to not be a "run into the Donut" game. Here, only conquest may be an exeption from this rule, but its still far away from being as good as other maps.

Edited by Túatha Dé Danann, 01 January 2016 - 12:16 PM.


#39 Ostrea

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 41 posts

Posted 01 January 2016 - 01:10 PM

Alpine Peaks is little more than a boring long-range laser and LRM turkey shoot from high peaks in a featureless landscape where Charlie is typically abandoned somewhere way out in the south 40. Conquest is the only bearable mode. The advent of Polar Highlands as a replacement on 01.19.16 is welcome news.

#40 Dirk Le Daring

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,083 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 01 January 2016 - 02:06 PM

PGI, keep Alpine Peaks. It is, in my opinion one of the best maps we have.

It is not the fault of the map that players are unable to think in different ways with regards to taking tactical control of the map.

Keep Alpine Peaks.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users