22 replies to this topic

[pbiggz]

im certain im not the first person who's thought of this.

[TheSilken]

Looks good. Anyone remember the Steiner Palace on Tharkad or Lion Base in MW4? Sure would like to see maps like that in CW.

Edit: How could I forget Griffin Base or the Palace on Kentares IV? Add something like them too.

Edited by TheSilkenPimp, 29 December 2014 - 03:26 PM.

[pbiggz]

My thought is that the idea of lanes and chokepoints is too... MOBA, there are no other tactical options, you cant scale the mountains in long ranged light mechs, you cant jump over the walls (because the only walls are by the gates), virtually the ENTIRE map is unused save the gates and inside the base. Why waste so much map space when an open map with a really cool base with walls on all sides, etc could be way cooler.

[Yokaiko]

I support this idea.

[Dirty Starfish]

+1

I think in this case the defenders would have to be able to open the gates though.

Edited by Serial Peacemaker, 28 December 2014 - 04:40 PM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Lots of potential, so would this be as big as Tourmaline or Alpine? Curious about the scale.

A big flat Urban map with a huge fortress in the middle like this would be welcome variety in CW.

[Felix7007]

I support

[HARDKOR]

Do want.

[Farix]

The attackers are at a huge disadvantage, more so than on the current two maps, because their force is divided and it would take too long to consolidate their strength for a good push through one of the gates. At best the lances that start at LZ1 and LZ3 can attack the south gate, but LZ2 are completely on their own. Whereas the defenders can easily consolidate their forces and move quickly between two, if not all three, gates. This is especially true given that a push through the west gate is unlikely because of the time it takes for the lance at LZ3 to move there.

[pbiggz]

@Farix, you do make a good point. You could make the attackers spawn together, doesnt really matter, my intent was to point out how map real estate can be put to better use in a way that could give both attackers and defenders way more tactical options.

Edited by pbiggz, 28 December 2014 - 05:19 PM.

[Joe Mallad]

pbiggz, on 28 December 2014 - 04:14 PM, said:

im certain im not the first person who's thought of this.

looks good and this is what I too have been suggesting to PGI for a new and different type of attack/defend map. The only big change with this that would be needed is that the defenders drop ship would need to drop straight down into the base to drop off new mechs. If they did fly over and not drop down, the defending drop ships would need to be programmed to not be able to fire at attackers unless inside the walls. Letting the defending drop ships fly one and shoot outside of the walls would give the defenders too much of an advantage.

[pbiggz]

Another good point, but defending dropships now come with exclusively medium lasers, if they fly quickly enough, and at a high enough altitude, then they wont be able to fire unless they're stationary, or near stationary, dropping mechs in the base.

[Farix]

pbiggz, on 28 December 2014 - 05:16 PM, said:

@Farix, you do make a good point. You could make the attackers spawn together, doesnt really matter, my intent was to point out how map real estate can be put to better use in a way that could give both attackers and defenders way more tactical options.

Making the lances spawn in the same LZ eliminates the purpose of one, if not two, of the gates depending on which LZ you use. On top of that, it ends up being no better than the two maps we already have.

[Dirty Starfish]

Cw is supposed to require teamwork anywho. I think even pugs won't have trouble coordinating strikes when they are given a road to the objective

[pbiggz]

Farix, on 28 December 2014 - 07:05 PM, said:

Making the lances spawn in the same LZ eliminates the purpose of one, if not two, of the gates depending on which LZ you use. On top of that, it ends up being no better than the two maps we already have.

i disagree, the point im trying to make is an open map concept like this gives the attackers and defenders more tactical options. The other two gates are just as vulnerable as the nearest one, and if the defenders think the way you do, its entirely possible they wouldnt be expecting an attack on the other gates. What im trying to do is present an alternative in which the game is more open and less focused on lanes and choke points.

Serial Peacemaker, on 28 December 2014 - 07:10 PM, said:

Cw is supposed to require teamwork anywho. I think even pugs won't have trouble coordinating strikes when they are given a road to the objective

remember the grey box in the middle is supposed to represent city. Specifically, a dense metropolitan area, with narrow streets, tall buildings, etc. Something that disrupts line of sight for both attackers and defenders, so it wouldnt be that cut and dry for either side.

Edited by pbiggz, 28 December 2014 - 07:13 PM.

[xX PUG Xx]

Here is a concept I came up with using the Bog artwork and HPG Manifold assets.

[Alistair Winter]

I like that the attacker isn't forced into two or three set paths directly to the gate. When the attacker can come from any angle, it makes scouting more important for the defenders.

Ideally, scouting should be so important that the defenders will want to send out 2-4 light mechs to determine where the next attack is coming from. Ideally, it should be too risky to just stay in base, because the map should punish defenders who aren't able to adjust position as required. The map should punish teams who stay with the Orbital cannon in 12 king crabs.

And this is where your map fails, in my humble opinion. With a base shaped like that, the defenders have neither the need nor the ability to move around much. They're basically all at the same place and there's no incentive for leaving the base. If there's one good thing about Sulfur rift, it's the fact that defenders are often required to move around a bit more, depending on where the attackers are sending in mechs.

The gates need to be further apart, I think. There should also be more turret defenses close to the gates, and less turrets close to Omega. This allows the defenders to spread out more, and punishes them for simply hugging Omega.

I actually think it would be better to place each gate at the tips of the triangle, with lots of turrets. This makes each gate easier to hold, allowing attackers to spread out more. But it also makes it a lot more difficult for the defenders to relocate, and it makes it difficult to hold Omega. Camping Omega would just let attackers take out all the turrets and generators and then start zerg rushing the fragile Orbital Cannon.

[Xyroc]

Yes I love this and its what I expected a attack defend mode to be. Anything besides the current very restricted map type.

[TGWabba]

pbiggz, on 28 December 2014 - 04:14 PM, said:

im certain im not the first person who's thought of this.

The main problem I see with this map which has already been mentioned is that the attackers are too far away from each other. They need to spawn closer to each other for both protection and coordination.

I have interesting suggestion for the map though. move the base to the coast and remove that wall there. That way attackers can choose to go in from the sea but have nearly 0 cover. Of course a base would use the area for docks and such but have lower buildings and a dry dock to prevent too much cover. Also put some turrets right there where they can help repel a sea attack.

[Strikeshadow]

These types of ideas are also beind discussed here.

http://mwomercs.com/...munity-warfare/