100 replies to this topic

[DROPSHIP]

With today's patch bringing a much-needed new map into the rotation, and Community Warfare (hopefully) coming in December, I wanted to revisit a topic that I know has been brought up before - Procedural Map Generation.

With the number of planets that you should be able to fight over in Community Warfare, I think the game would benefit greatly from procedurally generated maps that would mean a unique experience with every battle.

Is this even something that is possible with the Crytek engine and the assets currently used on the MWO maps that we have?

[Galen Crayn]

Sounds good for me...

[CDLord HHGD]

Probably not to the level of detail required. Would be nice though, I'd take a downgrade in visuals for an upgrade in quantity. It all depends on if their plan for maps stays the same or now that IGP is out of the way they modify it.

[Mister Blastman]

DROPSHIP, on 23 September 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

With today's patch bringing a much-needed new map into the rotation, and Community Warfare (hopefully) coming in December, I wanted to revisit a topic that I know has been brought up before - Procedural Map Generation.

With the number of planets that you should be able to fight over in Community Warfare, I think the game would benefit greatly from procedurally generated maps that would mean a unique experience with every battle.

Is this even something that is possible with the Crytek engine and the assets currently used on the MWO maps that we have?

This would change the game so profoundly in so many positive ways I don't even know where to start. Yes please.

[Bilbo]

The question is not whether it's possible. The question is whether or not the maps could be generated with spawn points that don't bias the outcome of the match.

[darkkterror]

For some reason I'm not imagining that procedural map generation and the current state of movement with how very small rocks and ridges can bring your 100 ton assault Mech to a halt going well together. That's just my initial impression. Who knows, maybe the procedural programming could be made in a way that it automatically smooths out these issues.

If (and I think that might be a big if) this can be done, then sure, why not?

[AlexEss]

doable, yes.

But iirc they did not go that route because procedural maps tend to be very basic in design in order to keep map balance (or are found in games where map balance is less important). so they instead went with a smaller core of maps that are each hand-crafted and balanced.

We might see somehting along these lines in the future but i feel it is unlikely.

[DROPSHIP]

Bilbo, on 23 September 2014 - 08:18 AM, said:

The question is not whether it's possible. The question is whether or not the maps could be generated with spawn points that don't bias the outcome of the match.

I'm sure something could be coded, and as long as the distances of the spawn points were far enough away from each other, it couldn't possibly be worse than than some of the matches the MM puts together now. Hell, it might even give Lights and Mediums a better role.

[Heffay]

It would make matches a complete crap-shoot. You can't secure known areas. Just wander around blindly and hope you meet a smaller group of enemies with a larger group.

[Johnny Z]

Just think how fun an endless Terra Therma would be. Weeeee

[Sadist Cain]

when you think about it it wouldnt work out very nicely for CW (or would it???)

If you're completely rolled due to a bad map layout and a planet is at stake - not good.

At the same time it could simulate all the different areas combat could occur on a planet, not all of these are going to be fair in their layout. However how do you decide who gets that advantage with a random system? You might come across situations where the defending team should have a terrain advantage but the auto map doesn't reflect this.

I think a happy medium would be either destructible maps. This would make current maps change over time in a battle and result in pieces of cover being blown away.

OR giving lances an option to choose the area in which they will drop (with a close range restriction to avoid blobtards) so the teams decide their own advantage/disadvantage.

[Lynx7725]

Can it be done? Yeah sure. But you won't like it.

[nonnex]

procedual maps would be sweet in combination of CW, because it would give us an immersion that every planet/system in CW has a different environment. which would be natually the case.

Technically not impossible, but hard. Very hard, not even very very hard.

Startingpoints, hitboxes, glitches, all the other technical issues etc etc. all to consider... neg, won't happen so fast I think.

Edited by nonnex, 23 September 2014 - 08:30 AM.

[DROPSHIP]

Sadist Cain, on 23 September 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

OR giving lances an option to choose the area in which they will drop (with a close range restriction to avoid blobtards) so the teams decide their own advantage/disadvantage.

That's an interesting idea.

Lynx7725, on 23 September 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

Can it be done? Yeah sure. But you won't like it.

I would certainly like it more than the same, small, tired maps over and over.

[Asyres]

I'm sure they could make procedural maps. I'd prefer that they used their programming resources on other things, though. Procedural generation would produce a multitude of bland (and possibly unbalanced) maps.

[Johnny Z]

Well I think some would like a persistent map with maybe defnders bases and attackers dropships and long battles with time to repair armor in repair stations via liquid metal. etc

Btw liquid metal already exists today so entirely possible. Maybe allow up to 80% of armor to be repaired in a fair length of time. Would it be possible to show for instance a leg repaired with that look? It wouldnt be pretty but for realism.

Edited by Johnny Z, 23 September 2014 - 08:35 AM.

[Heffay]

DROPSHIP, on 23 September 2014 - 08:28 AM, said:

I would certainly like it more than the same, small, tired maps over and over.

Then ask for more maps. Not infinite bad maps.

[Lynx7725]

DROPSHIP, on 23 September 2014 - 08:28 AM, said:

I would certainly like it more than the same, small, tired maps over and over.

No you won't.

Procedurals can create maps, but it can create maps that are utterly bad. Flat open areas with no cover. Maps with mech-size potholes to catch mechs. Maps so rugged the match is timed out before anyone gets into anywhere worthwhile. And that's if they get everything working perfectly. If not, invisible walls, mechs clipping through mountains...

Procedural generation isn't all bad. But the randomness makes any sort of map strategies largely irrelevant, which makes the game more a Rambo shooter. We already have significant problems with that already.

Perhaps we should get procedurally generated maps. Then we'll be better able to appreciate the effort the PGI team puts into the maps.

[Ghogiel]

It's possible I guess. But not really.

it would be plain perlin generator making deserts, hills or mountain like terrains. Possibly a vegetation generator to place some appropriete trees or plants if those fit in pallet selected for the map. Map loading would take a while to compile since even offline high end generators take mucho time to run a 4kx4k height map. We aren't talking 2mins for anything fancy. Slapping bases down in any balanced way is sketchy at best. I'm just going to stop there.

[Johnny Z]

Well they would take sectors of forest colony designed for procedural, then mix and match them. Thats how it is done basically.