188 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

Noth, on 07 August 2014 - 05:45 PM, said:

Yeah, you are not bad in that aspect.

But look at Axeface. They are contemplating something that the community has asked for for almost as long as this game has been around. He sees no good in this and instead reverts to calling it bad because the of PGI's past leading the game to be in place behind where it should probably be. Then the others who read those devs comments and take them as literally meaning they don't care about maps or that they won't make more when if they didn't they would not have churned out 6 maps in one year, nor be working on some new maps even if they are slow.

Not everyone is like that, but often the most vocal are and they are the one's that often stand out.

you have just as many that run around "MWO/PGI is the greatest evaaaar!" though and dismiss, troll, ignore, etc. any point, question, inquiry, suggestion, feedback, etc. that doesn't praise MWO/PGI as one of, if not THE, greatest game and company ever, in the history of gaming.

I can understand the cynicism and skepticism a lot easier than I can the mentality of those I listed above. They're just as bad. Any time you try to have a meaningful discussion abotu how to improve something in this game they flock and rain down talking about how you're just a troll, you shouldn't give feedback that isn't "this is great!", and try to get your topics derailed and locked or jettisoned. They just do it while saying nice things about PGI/MWO so that makes it "ok"

[Sandpit]

IraqiWalker, on 07 August 2014 - 05:05 PM, said:

People will ALWAYS complain.

As for maps, I would rather they made more maps, but hey, at the same time, I have an understanding of the position they are in, and the fact that they are understaffed.

EDIT: I will say this. What we really need is massive maps, possibly if they scaled down the mech sizes we could have the same effect with not so huge maps.

yes they will

This is where we disagree. 3 years and millions of dollars. If they are understaffed that's THEIR fault. They've had the time and money to ensure they keep their company staffed properly. That's not our problem, that's theirs. They started this process with a budget of over $5,000,000. That's more than enough to get off teh ground. They, by their own admission, have said they're growing, setting record numbers of players, selling clan mechs like hotcakes. If they can't properly staff their company with that, well then it's really time to take a look at why.

yes! bigger maps would also add a lot more to the game in tactics, roles, strategies, builds, etc.

[GoManGo]

PGI will string along all the fools it can find to believe them and buy into this terribly shallow mech game I wont even call it BattleTech or MechWarrior because its just that bad.And when all the cows have been milked and no more money can be made they will drop this IP like a hot potato and close the servers.Everything but quality content comes first to this company.

[Tremendous Upside]

Sandpit, on 07 August 2014 - 06:00 PM, said:

yes they will

This is where we disagree. 3 years and millions of dollars. If they are understaffed that's THEIR fault. They've had the time and money to ensure they keep their company staffed properly. That's not our problem, that's theirs. They started this process with a budget of over $5,000,000. That's more than enough to get off teh ground. They, by their own admission, have said they're growing, setting record numbers of players, selling clan mechs like hotcakes. If they can't properly staff their company with that, well then it's really time to take a look at why.

yes! bigger maps would also add a lot more to the game in tactics, roles, strategies, builds, etc.

The biggest problem of all with the maps is that having almost ALL of them built to funnel traffic into the same predictable areas (as they admittedly have said they are) -- it means that for every map they do release, about 80-90% of the map goes virtually unused. Unused game after game after game. Just wasted time and effort. Instead all they need to do to liven things up is to start releasing simple and more open maps. Build them in a modular fashion so you can shuffle sections around and build several alternates on the same tile sets at the same time. Why they opt to do it any other way is beyond me. You had more content on release for the multiplayer side of games like quake and unreal than there is here after 3 years of work.

[Sandpit]

Banky, on 07 August 2014 - 06:11 PM, said:

The biggest problem of all with the maps is that having almost ALL of them built to funnel traffic into the same predictable areas (as they admittedly have said they are) -- it means that for every map they do release, about 80-90% of the map goes virtually unused. Unused game after game after game. Just wasted time and effort. Instead all they need to do to liven things up is to start releasing simple and more open maps. Build them in a modular fashion so you can shuffle sections around and build several alternates on the same tile sets at the same time. Why they opt to do it any other way is beyond me. You had more content on release for the multiplayer side of games like quake and unreal than there is here after 3 years of work.

ehhhh
yes and no
it's more common in the solo queue because of the blob mentality a lot of times. They've become "comfortable" with where they set up just as the other team has. There's usually a TON of options to fight with on most maps. I've fought from some interesting spots thanks to teammates suggesting we try something new. Some of them outstanding, others... not so much lol. But there's a few options on most maps.

A HUGE problem with some of the current maps is they weren't designed for 12v12. They just weren't and it shows. There are literally times you spawn now and you are immediately under fire and can even get near stun locked if you're unlucky enough to be in a slow big target and they're all gauss and lrms and ppcs. Even if all they did was combine and connect a couple of maps. That would add some really interesting tactics and strategies. It would give some players reasons to rething some of their designs and give others a reason to dust off that "antique" from a week after you bought it, sitting in their hangars.

That would be faster than new maps. It would add a few new tactics and such to the game. It would be fun. It would be "new" at least.

[Styxx42]

All maps are Hamster Cages.
Each designed to limit the time that players are on line, so that the cycle can start again.

Would it be so hard for Pgi to add a Map choice to the launch.

THen ... I know they don't want to hear it.
THey would get a metric they could use to determine good maps and bad maps.
But Pgi has shown they are not interested in player enjoyment.

BEAN COUNTERS.

in Max MC's is all that is TOTALLY important.

I SO love hearing from Players that think this game is Free. So Funny..
Yes, free. LOL

[Noth]

Styxx42, on 07 August 2014 - 06:42 PM, said:

All maps are Hamster Cages.
Each designed to limit the time that players are on line, so that the cycle can start again.

Would it be so hard for Pgi to add a Map choice to the launch.

THen ... I know they don't want to hear it.
THey would get a metric they could use to determine good maps and bad maps.
But Pgi has shown they are not interested in player enjoyment.

BEAN COUNTERS.

in Max MC's is all that is TOTALLY important.

I SO love hearing from Players that think this game is Free. So Funny..
Yes, free. LOL

Allowing map selection causes the issue of even more min/maxed builds, lowering the variety of mechs you see even more.

[WmLowFlyer]

Mister Blastman, on 07 August 2014 - 05:43 PM, said:

MWO has ****** gameplay compared with MW:LL. MW:LL had deep, tactical ticket based fluid gameplay that was dynamic and ever changing. Not... deathball here and win. So most of the most brilliant maps aren't really compatible with MWO at all.

FTFY

[PappySmurf]

Noth [Allowing map selection causes the issue of even more min/maxed builds, lowering the variety of mechs you see even more. ]

This is total hogwash back when we played real MechWarrior and could save mech configurations/loadouts I had 4-6 configurations/loadouts per map and was always building and testing new configurations for fun . In this lousy excuse for a BT/MechWarrior game you cannot even save multiple mech configurations or pick maps MWO Is a lousy BT/MechWarrior game overall.

Edited by PappySmurf, 07 August 2014 - 06:55 PM.

[Kilo 40]

TLBFestus, on 07 August 2014 - 08:16 AM, said:

After reading all of these posts I have question. Since it's obvious you have drank all the flavours of PGIs Kool-aid, please tell us which one tastes the best?

I said some very controversial things for sure. which is why you pointed out exactly what I said wrong instead of giving a snarky nonreply.

PROTIP: being self righteous doesn't make you right.

[Noth]

PappySmurf, on 07 August 2014 - 06:54 PM, said:

Noth [Allowing map selection causes the issue of even more min/maxed builds, lowering the variety of mechs you see even more. ]

This is total hogwash back when we played real MechWarrior and could save mech configurations/loadouts I had 4-6 configurations/loadouts per map and was always building and testing new configurations for fun . In this lousy excuse for a BT/MechWarrior game you cannot even save multiple mech configurations or pick maps MWO Is a lousy BT/MechWarrior game overall.

I hate tell you this, but this is not back in the day. The mindset of gamers has changed greatly. Here we already have problems with mechs and weapons being far more rare than they technically should be. What do you think will happen with map selection?. Most people will not bring heavy energy builds to hot maps, or short ranged mechs to maps like Alpine. Other games have realized this as well and don't allow map selection. Without map selection you are at least somewhat encourage to bring a balanced build. With map selection even that little bit doesn't exist.

Edited by Noth, 07 August 2014 - 07:42 PM.

[PappySmurf]

NOTH [ hate tell you this, but this is not back in the day. The mindset of gamers has changed greatly. Here we already have problems with mechs and weapons being far more rare than they technically should be. What do you think will happen with map selection?. Most people will not bring heavy energy builds to hot maps, or short ranged mechs to maps like Alpine. Other games have realized this as well and don't allow map selection. Without map selection you are at least somewhat encourage to bring a balanced build. With map selection even that little bit doesn't exist. ]

Once again your talking hogwash I would assume most players get so fed up with having to rebuild there mech configuration in MWO'S mechlab and not being able to save there configurations for future use and tuning probably just use the same mechlab configuration for months.
Not caring what it is brawler-sniper-lrm-etc..

I for one hate almost everything PGI has done and its been 3 years and we still have the same grandee repetitive crappy game with low content and low fun .
Sorry pal but MWO is just not MechWarrior and it sure as hell is not Battletech.

Edited by PappySmurf, 07 August 2014 - 08:02 PM.

[Noth]

PappySmurf, on 07 August 2014 - 08:00 PM, said:

NOTH [ hate tell you this, but this is not back in the day. The mindset of gamers has changed greatly. Here we already have problems with mechs and weapons being far more rare than they technically should be. What do you think will happen with map selection?. Most people will not bring heavy energy builds to hot maps, or short ranged mechs to maps like Alpine. Other games have realized this as well and don't allow map selection. Without map selection you are at least somewhat encourage to bring a balanced build. With map selection even that little bit doesn't exist. ]

Once again your talking hogwash I would assume most players get so fed up with having to rebuild there mech configuration in MWO'S mechlab and not being able to save there configurations for future use and tuning probably just use the same mechlab configuration for months.
Not caring what it is brawler-sniper-lrm-etc..

I for one hate almost everything PGI has done and its been 3 years and we still have the same grandee repetitive crappy game with low content and low fun .

Wouldn't even need to rebuild a mech, you just take a different one built for said map. Other games have dealt with this and with map selection, variety of things in use lowers.

[IraqiWalker]

Aresye, on 07 August 2014 - 05:35 PM, said:

Alpine Peaks is here to disagree with you.

Not responding to the rest of the post since you ignored what my other post said.

However, Alpine peaks is actually a good map. It allows for a lot of great dynamic play. Don't blame the map if the players don't utilize it.

Axeface, on 07 August 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:

No, Iraqiwalker. The intention of your mis-informed post was to imply that mod teams dont have the same quality of quality control that developers do, and that 'script kiddies' (thanks, I've never heard that derogatory term) do everything on the fly without any thought to quality or balance.

I direct your concerns at Alpine Peaks, a HORRIBLY unbalanced map. You cannot deny it.

Yeah, mod teams don't have the same level or scope of quality control. There's no denying that. Amateurs and pros don't use the same standards, or even the same development cycles.

By the way, I do consider PGI's work on the maps rather wanting.

As for script kiddies: That's a term that is used on the internet to describe (generally) most people that are very young and new into programming and such. I used that term because the post I was replying to, used it.

Also, what's unbalanced about Alpine? If you say it's the H9-I9 positions, that's not the map being imbalanced, that's one team being idiots, and the other taking advantage of it. There are plenty of lanes to use other than scaling the steep, open ground that gives your opponents the high ground advantage. People sadly don't like using it.

Axeface, on 07 August 2014 - 05:54 PM, said:

How many clan mechs do you see with names you dont recognise? They sold A LOT.

HIRE MORE PEOPLE.

And, this time... i'm really logging off.

I actually don't get that question. Are you referring to the mechs or to the pilots? If it's the mechs, there are no clan mechs that I don't recognize.

Styxx42, on 07 August 2014 - 06:42 PM, said:

All maps are Hamster Cages.
Each designed to limit the time that players are on line, so that the cycle can start again.

Would it be so hard for Pgi to add a Map choice to the launch.

THen ... I know they don't want to hear it.
THey would get a metric they could use to determine good maps and bad maps.
But Pgi has shown they are not interested in player enjoyment.

BEAN COUNTERS.

in Max MC's is all that is TOTALLY important.

I SO love hearing from Players that think this game is Free. So Funny..
Yes, free. LOL

No they would get a metric of maps that the stupid majority likes or doesn't like.

For example, TT is one of the best designed maps they have ever released, however, most idiotic players hate it. Because it forces heat penalty, and requires them to use proper trigger discipline instead of brain-dead alpha strikes.

[Mycrus]

Sug, on 07 August 2014 - 03:57 PM, said:

PGI tends to build everything from the ground up from scratch every time no matter what it is, instead of taking the time to build a set of tools that would allow them to quickly create and change things.

It's like making your house out of legos instead of using prefabed sections. Yeah, that lego house is going to be really cool and detailed when it's done but you'll be living in a god damn tent for 3 years while you build it.

Just to be clear... they are using duplo and not technics...

[Raide Six]

Sandpit, on 07 August 2014 - 06:33 PM, said:

A HUGE problem with some of the current maps is they weren't designed for 12v12. They just weren't and it shows. There are literally times you spawn now and you are immediately under fire and can even get near stun locked if you're unlucky enough to be in a slow big target and they're all gauss and lrms and ppcs. Even if all they did was combine and connect a couple of maps. That would add some really interesting tactics and strategies. It would give some players reasons to rething some of their designs and give others a reason to dust off that "antique" from a week after you bought it, sitting in their hangars.

That would be faster than new maps. It would add a few new tactics and such to the game. It would be fun. It would be "new" at least.

Or they could move the out of bounds areas to the actual edges of the map - they have a lot of unused map space on their current maps.

Edited by SeccaBravo9, 07 August 2014 - 10:24 PM.

[Kyle Wright]

SeccaBravo9, on 07 August 2014 - 10:23 PM, said:

Or they could move the out of bounds areas to the actual edges of the map - they have a lot of unused map space on their current maps.

Ive been wonder this for a while. Whats the point of these out of bounds areas when its couldve been used at terrain for more of the map. Smaller maps would still need to be made larger as 12v 12 doesnt suit them. Why not just make the ends of the map simply you cant run off the edge of the map.

[and zero]

Mycrus, on 06 August 2014 - 11:33 PM, said:

PGI boldly displays for all to see, once again, that not only do they suck at game development, they also have the business sense of a 4 year old. I mean jesus ******* god.

"WE WONT DO THINGS TO MAKE THE GAME VASTLY BETTER IF WE CANNOT DIRECTLY SELL THOSE THINGS. BECAUSE THAT WONT MAKE US ANY MONEY" ******* brilliant.

[Infine]

IraqiWalker, on 07 August 2014 - 08:11 PM, said:

For example, TT is one of the best designed maps they have ever released, however, most idiotic players hate it. Because it forces heat penalty, and requires them to use proper trigger discipline instead of brain-dead alpha strikes.

I don't hate TT for heat penalty.
I hate TT for... Let's see...

It's chokepoint online.
If you don't have JJs - one wrong step and you have to run around the whole map to get back where you were.
I used to ride dualgauss cat, and the slopes make it impossible to fight with torso-mounted weapons anywhere but inside the caldera.
It's friggin dark. It's worse than river city night, because thermal vision does not work.

PS: the more I play, the more I think this game is an elaborate and expensive advertisement campaign for MW:LL.

Edited by Infine, 07 August 2014 - 10:40 PM.

[jaxjace]

Map making should have been and remains top on list of things to do.