75 replies to this topic

[R Razor]

I agree that being able to select a specific map would be bad for the game and all you'd see were min/max setups on the battlefield, no question about that.

There is a flip side though.

No Military, at least none that I am aware of, just randomly charges off into battle without knowing where they are fighting, what the environment is like, and planning equipment requirements accordingly. I think instead of a map selection, or even map voting, the random factor should stay in place but you should know what map you're facing before you select your mech for the match.

Put a time limit of say 1 or 2 minutes or lock out the ability to make any changes to existing mechs so that you're forced to select a mech that is already configured in your mech bay.

This would allow for some flexibility I would think, provided you either kept balanced builds in your garage, or owned enough chassis that you could pre-configure say a 'Phract for each particular map.

I believe it would provide incentive to the player base to buy more mechbays (a win for PGI), more modules (another win for PGI as folks would need to play more to grind the cbills needed) and give a little more meaning to the maps and mechs fighting in the match.

I'm sure there are other ways all of the above could be done as well, but the bottom line is that, in my opinion, it's asinine to think that you wouldn't know what kind of environment you're about to get dropped in to.

[Kutfroat]

is the desire to push the stats really that big?

i mean, if you pick only cheese loadouts, e.g. dual gauss jagermech with no backup weapons, you deserve to get completely destroyed on some small maps. or you get lrm-ed to death on caustic in your cheese direwolf...thats really good...at least on some maps cheese gets balanced out by map design. or ac40 on alpine...suck it up!

with map selection, you would only see dualgauss/lrm boats on alpine, tourmaline and caustic valley. ac40 and srm/pulselaser boats on canyon network, river city and forest colony. and no one would ever play mordor (ok, this one really sucks) or hpg and the last map (the one with the mining theme), because you cant specialize for this maps, so you wouldn´t get an advantage over other builds.

sounds "fun"...

Edited by Kutfroat, 16 November 2014 - 05:00 AM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

ShadowSpirit, on 15 November 2014 - 11:59 PM, said:

No. Taking your SRM mech and landing on Alpine is what drives people nuts.

Well, I find being stuck on 2 maps all the time cuz no one dares to play any others evne more nuts. I played BF3 for like 10 lvls or so, and all I saw was Kharg, the 2 port maps and the occasional Operation Firestorm and the map with the huge radio tower on it....but the actual map list? its got like 30 maps on it....

MWO with map selection would devolve into like 3 maps being the only ones played. Most likely, River City, Frozen City and Manifold, simply because they are all brawler maps.....and Frozen City is cold as ****, so it fits the Laser vomit builds.

While I really dislike several of the maps myself, like Caustic and Mordor, I dont think a map selection would be a very good idea for this game.....maybe the option to opt out of maybe 2, but something like BF3's map selection? The MM would be very boring, very fast.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Vassago Rain, on 16 November 2014 - 12:40 AM, said:

I hate to break it to you, but no one brings a generalist build. Large lasers are as viable on every map, as are SRMs and LRM spam in the underhive.

Hey... I run generalist builds. but that's because I like TRO builds.

So sue me if I'm not the best pilot, but generally I do okish.

Edited by Flash Frame, 16 November 2014 - 05:46 AM.

[Anarcho]

"simulationwise" makes no sense we do not know where we are going to land and get ready properly for that terrain, BUT, like ppl said above, the mix makes the game more dynamic.

[Walluh]

Goodbye matchmaker times. I wish they would put the soft choices for gamemode back in, too.

[Quaamik]

Sandpit, on 16 November 2014 - 01:01 AM, said:

........................It doesn't work like that. There's a reason soldiers take balanced loadouts with a few specialized pieces of gear for the GENERAL areas (notice how I didn't say specific areas?) they are going to fight in. Sure they may know they're going to a "cold" location and pack their longjohns. They do not, however, no the exact location of their battles. They do not take one specific loadout that will only work in a very precise location. If you think otherwise you have absolutely NO idea how strategies, supply lines, logistics, etc. work in a military operation.

The reason assault rifles like the M-16 /AKM / AK-74 replaced sub guns (Thompson, Sten, MP5) and full powered battle rifles (M-14, FAL, G3) on the battlefield.

[John Archer]

DYSEQTA, on 15 November 2014 - 11:58 PM, said:

It would be pretty dumb if they added map selection. We would end up with a situation like CS were the community basically plays 2 maps endlessly. Variety is still the spice of life, even if some of that variety drives you nuts.

Key word, 'variety'. There really is none. I usually get the same three maps over and over and over. I rarely get the maps that I enjoy playing. I have no idea how their selection system works but it could definitely use some dev. loving.

Although.. the matchmaking queue is slow enough as it is... I can just imagine how long one would be searching if one had to go through a 'did player play this map yet? If yes, on to the next one, if no, player gets this one' scenario.

[Xythius]

It's really pretty simple - removing maps from circulation will add to queue times. Couple that w/ all the points about dominating certain maps w/ tailored builds & you will have a dead game in a matter of weeks.

And I'm saying that as someone who only has a few 'generalized' builds. If I drop into Alpine w/ my Splatcrow, then I simply stay out of sight until the brawl begins. It kinda sucks because I can't start contributing to the battle right away, but it pays off in the latter stages where I can help play clean up, or keep lights from flanking/harrasing. Part of thinking/acting tactically is being able to anticipate enemy movements & get your weapons into range to be effective.

I can see the point of the arguments in favor of it simply for realism due to choosing your battles & bringing the most effective weapon for the terrain, but the tradeoff for the amount of customization in this game is that some builds, on some maps, will be subpar. It's up to you, the pilot, to figure out how to apply the firepower you brought in the most effective way possible.

~Xythius

[Quaamik]

I'd like map selection to some extent, but as a ranking lobby.

Prior to selecting the launch you rank all the maps in your order of preference (or select "random / no preference"). Then he matchmaker totals the map scores from everyone it puts together, and selects the map with the highest score.

The problem would be that large team could force selection of a given map. I don't know how that could be fixed, without still making there be a random element.

The drawback of any system that allows you to opt out of certain maps is that certain maps would seldom get played. Who would really choose to play Terra Therma if they could opt out of it? It might get PGI to revamp them. Or it might mean time and effort put into maps would be wasted, and then new maps would never come.

[Quaamik]

R Razor, on 16 November 2014 - 04:48 AM, said:

I agree that being able to select a specific map would be bad for the game and all you'd see were min/max setups on the battlefield, no question about that......

........ I think instead of a map selection, or even map voting, the random factor should stay in place but you should know what map you're facing before you select your mech for the match.

Put a time limit of say 1 or 2 minutes or lock out the ability to make any changes to existing mechs so that you're forced to select a mech that is already configured in your mech bay..
.....

The end result would be to penalize newer players (anyone running trial mechs, or with fewer than a 1/2 dozen chassis) as thy could not easily choose a optimum mech, yet players with a couple dozen could. Also, expect screams of PtW when players who like playing say a TW buy 6 variants of it, each set up for a specific map.

Its part of why I'm hesitant about CW. Since the maps will be specific, and its assumed known, I'm afraid the player base will split into those who play CW exclusively and build their mechs for it, and those who don't and get pounded when they try.

[Bishop Steiner]

ShadowSpirit, on 15 November 2014 - 11:59 PM, said:

No. Taking your SRM mech and landing on Alpine is what drives people nuts.

And if you could choose the map, the comps would just Meta for those maps and Map Camp.

That sounds like LOADS more fun.

While not as effective as it could be, the point of random maps is to discourage overspecialized builds, as Brawlers are in a bind on Alpine, and LRMboats get punished on other maps. You overspecialize, well some maps you will take your lumps.

But if we could choose your maps, all the lazy players would LRMboat on Caustic, Jump Snipe Canyon Country, etc, and probably never fight on RC Night or Terra Therma, at all.

Yeah. Love how people don't actually think things through.

[Jman5]

Just give me 1 or 2 map veto options and I will be happy.

[Cygone]

The ability to just "remove" ONE map from your own selection would suffice!

[Kdogg788]

I guess I'm in the minority here as I don't care what map I drop on, I adjust accordingly no matter what mech or build I have. I don't care to wait through an additional voting phase and would prefer to just get to the match.

-k

[Kodyn]

As someone who tends to build mechs that won't be majorly disadvantaged by any one map, I definitely am not trying to find a way to cheat the system or gain any advantage.

I personally am just tired of being stuck on certain poorly designed maps over and over. I understand that PGI was not very good at making maps for a while(still not spectacular), but I don't want to suffer for that constantly.

I think a lot of people could really get behind the ability to just check off 1-3 maps, even if it's not a hard cancellation of those maps, but will just drive the chances of dropping on them down to a minimum. This will at least provide some actual variety to the maps, rather than the "map of the day" system we have now, where you can forget there's actually more than one or two maps some days.

[Sandpit]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 November 2014 - 08:16 AM, said:

Yeah. Love how people don't actually think things through.

They do actually, they're the ones pushing for it in the first place for the most part so they can do EXACTLY what you're talking about which is exactly why it should never even be considered. They want to play Cheesewarrior Online let them use private matches and metahump on one map to their heart's content.

Kdogg788, on 16 November 2014 - 08:57 AM, said:

I guess I'm in the minority here as I don't care what map I drop on, I adjust accordingly no matter what mech or build I have. I don't care to wait through an additional voting phase and would prefer to just get to the match.

-k

Trust me, you're not. This topic has come up since OB and it's the same people asking for it over and over again. The majority DON'T want metahumpers to be able to dictate the entire game's direction so they can only play on the select 1-2 maps that are optimal for their cheese builds. The majority knows that's exactly what's behind these suggestions and most of the supporters.

The others that support it really just want a little selection options so they don't get stuck on the same map 6 times in a row and would (when they realize the difference between voting and selection) rather have a voting system.

[Durant Carlyle]

Map voting before every drop, yes.

Map selection, no.

Map veto, no.

My map stats, for reference:

[Sandpit]

Durant Carlyle, on 16 November 2014 - 12:21 PM, said:

Map voting before every drop, yes.

Map selection, no.

Map veto, no.

My map stats, for reference:

you've got a very even map spread, remember the "snow" and "night" versions of maps count as the same map so you add those drops together.
Yes to map vote!
No to any other way for players to game the system and only play on optimal maps for their specific and specialized builds

[Kiryuin Ragyo]

luxebo, on 15 November 2014 - 11:55 PM, said:

Soon™.

All I can say.

Yay, say good bye to Alps, River City and Mordor.

Edited by Kiryuin Ragyo, 16 November 2014 - 12:30 PM.