174 replies to this topic

[Rhaythe]

Riptor, on 22 October 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:

But did no one at some point stopped and thought "Hm... would this actually pass as a functional base in real life? Would these floor patterns not be rather counter intuitive for mechs and vehicles to move across? And where are the humans suposed to work here since everything seems to be scaled for mechs?"

While that does annoy me slightly, considering all of science fiction pretty much suffers from the same ordeal leads me to give this map a little more leeway. I'd love to see a fully-realized, interoperable, "living" map. But that takes time and resources and - more importantly - rendering power. I have 2 videocards and a six-core processor, and this game still chugs for me at times.

Besides, a real lunar base would look like this:


Not this:


The latter is far more visually interesting.

[JokerVictor]

pbiggz, on 22 October 2013 - 06:59 AM, said:

The fact that some of you are crying about ui 2.0 and moon base despite spending the last 6 months crying about NOT HAVING ui 2.0 and moon base makes me sad. Obviously nothing will make you happy.

Yes, when the product presented looks terrible, you generally will complain harder considering you've waited over a year for said {Scrap} product.

And I was hoping something these jagoffs at PGI have slapped together in the past 6 months would entice me back into the game... Nope. Still the same t*rd. A new wrapper doesn't make it stink less.

Also, these guys are really really terrible at map design.

[Rhaythe]

JokerVictor, on 22 October 2013 - 08:17 AM, said:

Also, these guys are really really terrible at map design.

Have you played any of the Call of Modern Warfare Duty: Battlefield Shooter 43 games lately? In my worthless opinion, there you will find "terrible" map design. I would say the maps here range from Mediocre to Pretty Decent, with Terra Therma being an outlier at "pure garbage".

[Riptor]

Rhaythe, on 22 October 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

While that does annoy me slightly, considering all of science fiction pretty much suffers from the same ordeal leads me to give this map a little more leeway. I'd love to see a fully-realized, interoperable, "living" map. But that takes time and resources and - more importantly - rendering power. I have 2 videocards and a six-core processor, and this game still chugs for me at times.

Besides, a real lunar base would look like this:


Not this:


The latter is far more visually interesting.

How about some smooth roads that connect the landing pads and the ramps up and down the facility? How about instead of random obelisks that have no aparant reason to exist besides.. well looking cool you place down some actuall buildings that seem as if they have a reason to be there.. you know.. like control towers for the landing pads, some sort of control building that houses the servers to record incomming messages? Hangar bays or storage buildings for replacement parts?

Something that makes the base look like it says "Yep i can function for the purpose i was intended for"

And not "If you try to run across my surface with your locust you will break its legs and fall on your nose"

Heffay, on 22 October 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

Stop? All I have to do is keep feeding out the rope. You're doing a great job of hanging yourself.

Oh look! Its heffay time again!

How so heffay? Do you actually have any kind of arguments?

Whats this? You dont?

Seriously... between us two forum members... you look horrendous in your underwear.

Edited by Riptor, 22 October 2013 - 08:30 AM.

[pbiggz]

I'd say pgi is actually pretty good at map design, the only exception is of course, forest colony, frozen city, and river city, which are crappy shoe box sized maps. Caustic valley is ok but boring.

The rest of them are quite good, even terra therma (secret to terra therma is to avoid mount doom, everyone has this urge to charge into the volcano and die, but then again, it did take a while for people to figure out that the caldera on caustic valley was the worst place on the map). The new map looks awesome, and its high time we had some sizable in-door areas other than framerate cave on forest colony, grey untextured crack on frozen city, and puny truckstop hanger on river city.

Anyone who makes the sweeping generalization that EVERY map pgi makes is {Scrap} probably has very little understanding of how a map is actually balanced. You're not a level designer, don't pretend that you are.

[Karyudo ds]

Rhaythe, on 22 October 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Besides, a real lunar base would look like this:
...

Not this:
...

The latter is far more visually interesting.

Well, a real lunar base NOW. I'm guessing in a thousand years we're going to at a minimum be far more able than a buggy and a studio apartment.

Rhaythe, on 22 October 2013 - 08:21 AM, said:

Have you played any of the Call of Modern Warfare Duty: Battlefield Shooter 43 games lately? In my worthless opinion, there you will find "terrible" map design. I would say the maps here range from Mediocre to Pretty Decent, with Terra Therma being an outlier at "pure garbage".

Actually I feel like I am playing COD at times in MWO. At least in assault, some of the maps like Therma have hugely obvious choke points we funnel into with the majority of the map going unused. I think some of that has to deal with the game modes but in previous Mechwarrior games I don't remember ALWAYS running to the middle to do battle. It's modern design in general but I feel like I'm being treated as being to stupid to not be led around by the hand constantly.

It might not be as bad as COD, but I remember scouting in MW4 was valuable to find your enemy. Here...you'll walk into them soon enough they had to throw in bases to make scouts useful.

[Dadrick]

I'm still trying to figure out why they removed the paper doll from the mechlab. It seems like this new UI has buried everything beneath several layers of menus. If they are looking to improve player retention, I don't think this is the way to achieve that.

[pbiggz]

Riptor, on 22 October 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

How about some smooth roads that connect the landing pads and the ramps up and down the facility? How about instead of random obelisks that have no aparant reason to exist besides.. well looking cool you place down some actuall buildings that seem as if they have a reason to be there.. you know.. like control towers for the landing pads, some sort of control building that houses the servers to record incomming messages?



Oh look! Its heffay time again!

How so heffay? Do you actually have any kind of arguments?

Whats this? You dont?

Seriously... between us two forum members... you look horrendous in your underwear.

Also Riptor, the fact that you have resorted to insulting anyone who disagrees with you indicates that you are on the defensive and already acknowledge that your argument is falling apart #spock

[Rhaythe]

Riptor, on 22 October 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

How about some smooth roads that connect the landing pads and the ramps up and down the facility? How about instead of random obelisks that have no aparant reason to exist besides.. well looking cool you place down some actuall buildings that seem as if they have a reason to be there.. you know.. like control towers for the landing pads, some sort of control building that houses the servers to record incomming messages? Hangar bays or storage buildings for replacement parts?

Not disagreeing with you. In fact, I pretty much said the exact same thing earlier. I guess this map takes me back to old sci-fi, where ships and designs were cobbled together from battleship model sets. This design would fit right at home on the underbelly of the destroyers in Independence Day.

Karyudo ds, on 22 October 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

It might not be as bad as COD, but I remember scouting in MW4 was valuable to find your enemy. Here...you'll walk into them soon enough they had to throw in bases to make scouts useful.

Balanced map design is hard. Asymetric balanced map design is harder still.

[8RoundsRapid]

LOL @ UI2.0.

Like most things PGI takes waaaaaay too long to build, it's got fail written all over it.

And just think, this is what they've been working on for over 6 months now, lol.

Just wait until CW comes out! Hope you guys get your disappoint out of the way now, cuz it's gonna be painful for those of you that think PGI can still pull this off.

[pbiggz]

Though technically mechwarrior 3 had the paper doll on the mech model, i rarely used it, it was easier to select components using the menus on the side, and ui 2.0 will be no exception. The paper doll is a bit finicky.

[Riptor]

pbiggz, on 22 October 2013 - 08:30 AM, said:

Also Riptor, the fact that you have resorted to insulting anyone who disagrees with you indicates that you are on the defensive and already acknowledge that your argument is falling apart #spock

Aaaand making **** up putting words in my mouth suggesting that i commit suicide and having no real arguments is an indicator of winning a discussion?

Yeah i dont think so.

Also i dont see where i insulted anyone kept for poking fun at heffay for pretty much comming to this discussion unarmed blindly flailing at me.

I would treat heffay better if he actually brought some arguments to the table but aparantly hes uncapable and unwilling to present any.

He has brought forth not a single argument that would somehow invalidate anything i said.

Instead hes acting like a smartass without any basis to do so. So thats how i treat him.

If thats using the argument per your definition i dont want to be right because that means i can make stuff up however i want and be right aslong as i am "on the offense"

Oooor... perhaps im trying to actually educate heffay a bit so his incessant white crusade finaly calms down. Even thought i should know better then to expect him to stop his crusade against anyone who dares to critizes PGIs work, ill give you that.

Or i could just be incredible bored and like to participate in the CW.

[pbiggz]

8RoundsRapid, on 22 October 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

LOL @ UI2.0.

Like most things PGI takes waaaaaay too long to build, it's got fail written all over it.

And just think, this is what they've been working on for over 6 months now, lol.

Just wait until CW comes out! Hope you guys get your disappoint out of the way now, cuz it's gonna be painful for those of you that think PGI can still pull this off.

And again someone who desn't like what he's seeing has failed utterly to actually convey a meaningful argument.

Riptor, on 22 October 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

Aaaand making **** up putting words in my mouth suggesting that i commit suicide and having no real arguments is an indicator of winning a discussion?

Yeah i dont think so.

Also i dont see where i insulted anyone kept for poking fun at heffay for pretty much comming to this discussion unarmed blindly flailing at me.

I would treat heffay better if he actually brought some arguments to the table but aparantly hes uncapable and unwilling to present any.

He has brought forth not a single argument that would somehow invalidate anything i said.

Instead hes acting like a smartass without any basis to do so. So thats how i treat him.

If thats using the argument per your definition i dont want to be right because that means i can make stuff up however i want and be right aslong as i am "on the offense"

Oooor... perhaps im trying to actually educate heffay a bit so his incessant white crusade finaly calms down. Even thought i should know better then to expect him to stop his crusade against anyone who dares to critizes PGIs work, ill give you that.

Or i could just be incredible bored and like to participate in the CW.

When did i tell you to kill yourself!? My point is you are getting overly aggressive trying to defend your point. We would all be better off if we approached this with a level head instead of slinging **** at each other.

[Heffay]

Riptor, on 22 October 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

Aaaand making **** up putting words in my mouth suggesting that i commit suicide and having no real arguments is an indicator of winning a discussion?

That's not at all what that phrase means. It's a colloquialism. If you are a non-native English speaker I can see how you'd be confused, in which case i apologize. But it basically means if you are destroying your own arguments on your own, there is no need to help you do so. Just gotta keep handing out the rope.

[Riptor]

pbiggz, on 22 October 2013 - 08:50 AM, said:

And again someone who desn't like what he's seeing has failed utterly to actually convey a meaningful argument.




When did i tell you to kill yourself!? My point is you are getting overly aggressive trying to defend your point. We would all be better off if we approached this with a level head instead of slinging **** at each other.

Heffay did, not you. You also didnt put words into my mouth like he did when he suggested that I would think some loghouses on the moonsurface would add to the imersion... think about that for a second.

And i come over as agressive because im a passionate guy with alot of free time at his hands today.

And because i want to see what heffay comes up with next.

Heffay, on 22 October 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

That's not at all what that phrase means. It's a colloquialism. If you are a non-native English speaker I can see how you'd be confused, in which case i apologize. But it basically means if you are destroying your own arguments on your own, there is no need to help you do so. Just gotta keep handing out the rope.

See the problem with this heffay is that you have not shown once where i suposedly "destroyed my own arguments"

You claim i do... but have no proof.

Infact you have achieved absolutely nothing. All you basicly did was make stuff up, point at me and go "look.. isnt he funny guys"

But no ones laughing heffay. Its not like droves of people are disagreeing with the points i brought up.

The only one disagreeing with my arguments is you heffay.

Pbiggz didnt even disagreed with my arguments even if he jumped to your aid, he was commenting more about my agressive writing style.

You are that failed stand up comedian that cant get the crowd to laugh because his jokes are so bad, in every single thread you post in to boot.

All you ever do is put words into peoples mouths and then turn around pointing fingers hoping some other paladin agrees with you.

Edited by Riptor, 22 October 2013 - 09:11 AM.

[pbiggz]

Well with regards to the moon map not being as realistic as you'd prefer, considering moon bases are bordering fantasy in the first place, i'm perfectly happy with them taking some liberties here. I think it looks awesome, and as i said before, having some indoor combat will be nice. That being said, having a muddy battle field riddled with mines and craters would be nice as well, it's just not something I image you would see on a moon, or anywhere near a hyper pulse generator for that matter.

Following kerensky's exodus, comstar clamped down on HPGs, jumpships, and anything else they could get their hands on. The reason? They knew if they didnt, interstellar communications would break down and any chance of salvaging the star league would disappear. By the 3rd succession war, the ares convention on warfare dictated that jumpships, and HPGs should never come under fire, as the inner sphere lacked the technological capability to replace them. That knowledge was lost in the first and second succession wars.

[StonedDead]

Sorry, but I have to agree with Riptor on this. While the map looks cool, it doesn't make a lot of sense technically or tactically. Mechs or heavy vehicles would be tearing that stuff up moving around on it, none of the roads link up, so they would be damaging the base even without fighting on it.

Tactically, it looks like a halo map. No one in their right mind (in this time period) would be fighting in a Comstar facility thereby risking a Comstar edict. Even Hanse Davion only got cut off from Comstar when he had an alternative(faxes), and it still hurt him. The designers have obviously never read anything Battletech.

Edit: UI2.0 looks awesome, can't wait to get that in game.

Edited by Zekester81, 22 October 2013 - 09:23 AM.

[Heffay]

Riptor, on 22 October 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

See the problem with this heffay is that you have not shown once where i suposedly "destroyed my own arguments"

You claim i do... but have no proof.

Remember when you said all the cars are perfectly parked in Joru? Well, you said city map, but I'm pretty sure Joru was the one you meant.

It's like you don't even play the game.

[Riptor]

pbiggz, on 22 October 2013 - 09:10 AM, said:

Well with regards to the moon map not being as realistic as you'd prefer, considering moon bases are bordering fantasy in the first place, i'm perfectly happy with them taking some liberties here. I think it looks awesome, and as i said before, having some indoor combat will be nice. That being said, having a muddy battle field riddled with mines and craters would be nice as well, it's just not something I image you would see on a moon, or anywhere near a hyper pulse generator for that matter.

Following kerensky's exodus, comstar clamped down on HPGs, jumpships, and anything else they could get their hands on. The reason? They knew if they didnt, interstellar communications would break down and any chance of salvaging the star league would disappear. By the 3rd succession war, the ares convention on warfare dictated that jumpships, and HPGs should never come under fire, as the inner sphere lacked the technological capability to replace them. That knowledge was lost in the first and second succession wars.

They also ould punish any faction severly if even one of their precious instalations got damaged. So why are we even fighting inside such an instalation?

There is a certain amount of suspension of disbelief i can go with.. after all im a fan of military vehicle that are completly unpractical.

But with your argument we could go "well why not have space dragons breathing fire into the sky above the satelite dish"

It would look pretty badass.. after all this is the cryengine. But would it make sense? Would it add to the experience?

As i said before, it looks "cool" and "edgy" and alot of work went into making these graphics. I never said that it was a shoddy job.

But i do prefer my science fiction to make sense. You see driving or running any vehicle over the surface of the base would be damaging to the vehicle and the instalation.Nothing in that base suggest that it was made for human interaction. When i see a moonbase i want it to make sense in the context of the universe it is placed in. This base thought? It looks completly out of place as many people before me mentioned.. ranging from the death star to the alien movies.

Cool look... just the wrong universe.

Heffay, on 22 October 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

Remember when you said all the cars are perfectly parked in Joru? Well, you said city map, but I'm pretty sure Joru was the one you meant.

It's like you don't even play the game.

Uh...huh...

The hell is joru?

And really heffay... thats it? That is your big argument that totaly invalidates mine?

What i meant with "City maps" was River city and Crimson Strait.

Have no idea what the hell joru is suposed to be.

So that does actually begs the question if we are actually playing the same game. Because there is no "joru" in the MWO i play.

But anyways... what about the cars heffay? Arent they all neatly parked in their parking lots as if everyone went to work like its a normal monday?

Edited by Riptor, 22 October 2013 - 09:24 AM.

[pbiggz]

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Jihad

Perhaps this map will make more sense in the future.