#1
Posted 11 December 2014 - 04:46 PM
I found the game didn't really pick up until over half way. There should be way more open ground or something outside the base, the chokepoints are really nasty for gameplay imo
One game i had fun was using an ice ferret OUTSIDE the base ( was defender ) and shooting mechs attacking other gates from behind.
#2
Posted 11 December 2014 - 04:52 PM
The basic design of the maps is sound, but unfortunately the game can't handle much bigger maps. With bigger maps, the chokepoints wouldn't be so crowded, but we would still enjoy the strategical element of the current design.
#3
Posted 11 December 2014 - 04:59 PM
#4
Posted 11 December 2014 - 05:00 PM
Deathblob could not be more powerful as it was before.
Will need to drop more to draw a better conclusion (dropped on the ice map as defender).
#5
Posted 11 December 2014 - 05:08 PM
Plus having a Radar station/ comms tower being able to be knocked out to limit defenders re-enforcements for say an additional 30 seconds would have been a nice touch.
Edited by Bulvar Jorgensson, 11 December 2014 - 05:08 PM.
#6
Posted 11 December 2014 - 05:13 PM
Alistair Winter, on 11 December 2014 - 04:52 PM, said:
I'm pretty sure Cryengine could handle bigger maps just fine...if the maps get bigger then 4 kilometers x 4 kilometers (on a regular scale which MWO does not use) is about the limit with the 32 bit client.
Edited by Darth Futuza, 11 December 2014 - 05:13 PM.
#7
Posted 11 December 2014 - 05:15 PM
Darth Futuza, on 11 December 2014 - 05:13 PM, said:
He probably meant performance wise, because most people are getting like 5-30 fps in this battles.
#8
Posted 11 December 2014 - 05:16 PM
Karamarka, on 11 December 2014 - 05:15 PM, said:
He probably meant performance wise, because most people are getting like 5-30 fps in this battles.
*some people
Im fine, and I dont even have a super awesome rig.
#9
Posted 11 December 2014 - 05:17 PM
Karamarka, on 11 December 2014 - 05:15 PM, said:
He probably meant performance wise, because most people are getting like 5-30 fps in this battles.
If that's the case, I doubt its the map causing the issue apparently there's a bug this patch that affects fps: http://mwomercs.com/...re-patch-13358/
Personally my FPS hasn't changed at all (and I play on a craptop), but several people in my unit reported that they had massive fps drops (on any map).
Edited by Darth Futuza, 11 December 2014 - 05:19 PM.
#10
Posted 11 December 2014 - 05:19 PM
#11
Posted 11 December 2014 - 06:16 PM
SpeedingBus, on 11 December 2014 - 05:19 PM, said:
Technically that's pretty realistic, defending a defensible position is generally easier then assaulting it.
#12
Posted 11 December 2014 - 06:21 PM
Darth Futuza, on 11 December 2014 - 06:16 PM, said:
Except that attackers typically try to have 3v1 advantage versus the defenders because of things like that
#13
Posted 11 December 2014 - 06:21 PM
we only have 2 maps and they are quite different
i hope that each future map gets more and more different
imagine a map that is fairly open but has many gates within a Ringed compound
also, if no attackers are around , gates should open for defenders to pass through (if they dont already)
#15
Posted 11 December 2014 - 06:36 PM
Karamarka, on 11 December 2014 - 04:46 PM, said:
I found the game didn't really pick up until over half way. There should be way more open ground or something outside the base, the chokepoints are really nasty for gameplay imo
One game i had fun was using an ice ferret OUTSIDE the base ( was defender ) and shooting mechs attacking other gates from behind.
Defenders should have the advantage in this game mode. That being said, one of our Defenses of New Caledonia failed because the QQ FRR 12-man managed to draw our Brawlers consistently into small unit actin within the heavily constricted terrain just inside of Alpha Gate on the new. Hot Springs map. After 22 minutes there were only 6 Defenders with Mechs tot throw into combat.
Battle of Attrition at its best!
My hat is off to QQ and the FRR Heathen Army!
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users