44 replies to this topic

[Voivode]

So, I don't know if I'm the only one, but I'm really quite sick of all the big, empty, open maps. What's wrong with plenty of cover? I'm not saying the maps in the game should be removed or anything quite so idiotic as that, but I would like to see future maps focus on a different kind of combat. Rather than providing a large space with little cover, what about a tight, urban space? Why not some maps where having a longer range weapon provides no advantage at all? A brawlers paradise to balance out the sniper paradises they've inundated the game with?

Just my thoughts. What do you guys think?

[SmithMPBT]

Maybe the CryEngine can't handle too many buildings. River City is more like a River Outpost.

[Voivode]

You could be right. It would be truly disappointing if there was never any possibility of real urban combat in this game.

[BarHaid]

Personally, I would like to see serious forest combat. Although it might get old only seeing the branches in front of your cockpit.

[Navy Sixes]

I'd love to see a big -I mean Stalingrad big- urban wasteland map. Outlying, waist-high suburbs, A big, central burnt-out downtown with some cored-out structures you can drive into and through, along with some open parks within the city proper.

There'd be a little something for everyone, but you'd get a lot of down n' dirty scrapping.

Dude, I love LRMs, and I'd love this map.

Edited by Tycho von Gagern, 11 September 2013 - 07:34 PM.

[GRiPSViGiL]

It really doesn't matter how detailed the maps are because elitist's will dumb down the GPU settings so they can see you all the way across the map through rendered stuff they usually shouldn't be able to so they can be better than you. I mean night maps are not night due to setting your sliders a certain way. I don't agree with this or respect it but i have to do the same so they don't have an advantage over me.

I agree though, I would like to see more foliage and objects as well.

[Voivode]

I don't think you can make buildings disappear by dumbing down the GPU settings. Maybe foliage would be "removed" by elitist players but a true urban map would force everyone into the fray.

BarHaid, on 11 September 2013 - 02:58 PM, said:

Personally, I would like to see serious forest combat. Although it might get old only seeing the branches in front of your cockpit.

Possibly some kind of giant trees? A planet with a species that dwarfs redwoods so there is a patternless and ubiquitous set of cover on the entire map?

[Statixstorm]

Personally I'd like to see more weather functions... I want to see driving rain with lightning and thunder. Fog that glows when you put lasers through it.

I can dream and that is about it.

[Sug]

Voivode, on 12 September 2013 - 05:30 AM, said:

I don't think you can make buildings disappear by dumbing down the GPU settings.

Before I upgraded my video card (and went from low to high settings) I could see the other team from the friendly base in River City at the start of the match. Now they are hidden behind buildings.

[Voivode]

Sug, on 12 September 2013 - 06:32 AM, said:

Before I upgraded my video card (and went from low to high settings) I could see the other team from the friendly base in River City at the start of the match. Now they are hidden behind buildings.

So, before you upgraded the GPU on your system you were able to see across the map? I know there is a straight shot on that map to the other teams start area, but I guess the real question is, were you able to see through the buildings? It seems like that's what you're saying and if true, that's a serious issue with the game.

[Adridos]

SmithMPBT, on 11 September 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

Maybe the CryEngine can't handle too many buildings.

Could be true, but not in the immediate sense.

It is an engine and just like any other, you could plonk down a few thousand buildings and it would be pretty fine. However, the way it is designed would probably impair the framerate too much. Just guessing based on how they seponded to the issue of low not having some foliage and thus giving an advantage by saying that when it comes to performance, they try to keep drawcalls at minimum while having no problem making the object better looking once it's there (in essence, it's better to have 2 models with 500 polygons, rather than 10 models with 100 polys from the performance standpoint).

[Fut]

GRiPSViGiL, on 12 September 2013 - 04:37 AM, said:

It really doesn't matter how detailed the maps are because elitist's will dumb down the GPU settings so they can see you all the way across the map through rendered stuff they usually shouldn't be able to so they can be better than you. I mean night maps are not night due to setting your sliders a certain way. I don't agree with this or respect it but i have to do the same so they don't have an advantage over me.

I agree though, I would like to see more foliage and objects as well.

No offence, but that's a really ****** attitude - "Everybody else is cheating, so I have to as well".
And people wonder why society is in such a decline...

[Duncan Longwood]

I'm on board for more cover... and more scenery in general. The Inner Sphere is supposed to be at constant war for over 1000 years but there aren't many signs of it on most of the maps. Tourmaline probably does the best job at showing evidence of past battles, but still gives no sense of what everyone died fighting over. Some of the maps (looking at you, Alpine) look like playing on a tabletop game-board, but without any scenery set upon it.

Personally, I spent time with 40k on tabletop and Mech-warrior games for my Battletech experience, but even people who have never played any tabletop can appreciated the craftsmanship and beauty of a well made game-board. Basically, I just want to play on maps that make me feel like I'm playing on the best designed tabletop game-boards, like some of the amazing boards that have been made by the GW studio team.

[Sug]

Voivode, on 12 September 2013 - 06:42 AM, said:

So, before you upgraded the GPU on your system you were able to see across the map? I know there is a straight shot on that map to the other teams start area, but I guess the real question is, were you able to see through the buildings? It seems like that's what you're saying and if true, that's a serious issue with the game.

In matches, not only River City, I'd be closing on a mech while firing thinking I was hitting it, but as I got closer something like a building would pop into view. This is only at extreme rangesc 1000m or more, I was just taking potshots.

[GRiPSViGiL]

Fut, on 12 September 2013 - 06:54 AM, said:

No offence, but that's a really ****** attitude - "Everybody else is cheating, so I have to as well".
And people wonder why society is in such a decline...

Technically it isn't cheating since all your doing is moving your GPU sliders. No 3rd party software is used but nice try bud.

[Navy Sixes]

Duncan Longwood, on 12 September 2013 - 07:48 AM, said:

I'm on board for more cover... and more scenery in general. The Inner Sphere is supposed to be at constant war for over 1000 years but there aren't many signs of it on most of the maps. Tourmaline probably does the best job at showing evidence of past battles, but still gives no sense of what everyone died fighting over. Some of the maps (looking at you, Alpine) look like playing on a tabletop game-board, but without any scenery set upon it.

Personally, I spent time with 40k on tabletop and Mech-warrior games for my Battletech experience, but even people who have never played any tabletop can appreciated the craftsmanship and beauty of a well made game-board. Basically, I just want to play on maps that make me feel like I'm playing on the best designed tabletop game-boards, like some of the amazing boards that have been made by the GW studio team.

And in addition think of all the things you can do that you really can't do on a tabletop... we're all thinking hard cover, but what about smoke? What if there's an industrial park on one side of the map that is always ablaze (extra heat in this zone) and the thick, greasy smoke from it blows in a soft "wall" of cover across the rest of the map? Strategies would develop around the best places to pass through, or how to draw the enemy through and into traps...

[Lyoto Machida]

BarHaid, on 11 September 2013 - 02:58 PM, said:

Personally, I would like to see serious forest combat. Although it might get old only seeing the branches in front of your cockpit.

Only if trees could be knocked down and...wait for it...set on fire. Adding heat/smoke to the environment would seriously change a battle.

Imagine a snowy night, forest map...in the caldera of a volcano (on a space moon...underwater).

[Voivode]

Lyoto Machida, on 12 September 2013 - 02:36 PM, said:

Imagine a snowy night, forest map...in the caldera of a volcano (on a space moon...underwater).

Haha! Underwater! You just made me think of the ridiculous Jade Falcon underwater mission in Mechwarrior 2!

[Earl White]

Hmmm if anything there is too much cover on maps, with a few exceptions, there is almost always some form of cover near you, or at least the option of a route that provides it. If you did add maps with more cover though, it would make LRMs far too weak (they are already not that strong anyway). Definitely like to see an underwater base map, think that could look quite spectacular and be a joy to play in.

Edited by Earl White, 13 September 2013 - 07:43 AM.

[Pirate2Ninja]

Bryan Ekman mention on NGNG more urban maps are coming.