Dev Stream, Thad Talks About Map Improvements!
#41
Posted 08 May 2015 - 08:03 PM
#42
Posted 08 May 2015 - 08:17 PM
Praetor Knight, on 08 May 2015 - 08:02 PM, said:
I would rather see something like a crashed plane or dropship there, over having big rocks.
Here is a poor mock up of why I think it might work since the runway is at a good angle for wreckage to be in the water instead of boulders.
Brilliant!!
#43
Posted 08 May 2015 - 08:24 PM
Praetor Knight, on 08 May 2015 - 08:02 PM, said:
I would rather see something like a crashed plane or dropship there, over having big rocks.
Here is a poor mock up of why I think it might work since the runway is at a good angle for wreckage to be in the water instead of boulders.
Landing strip too short/narrow. It should not appear as if it is a place holder
#44
Posted 08 May 2015 - 08:30 PM
Tarl Cabot, on 08 May 2015 - 08:24 PM, said:
The way I had thought about it was, it was a small field for smaller craft that was pressed into service to evacuate civilians during the fighting.
And there are plenty of scary short runways in the world: http://www.dailymail...touch-down.html
#45
Posted 08 May 2015 - 08:36 PM
#46
Posted 08 May 2015 - 08:52 PM
Dennis de Koning, on 08 May 2015 - 03:30 PM, said:
The rocks in the river for example are just proxies, there are no trees in the planar view, the lighting is not changed etc, etc.
Do not take any of the images as literal representations. All images show the RC redux in an incomplete state.
So please, keep this in mind when you post your critique.
thanks.
DdK
I'd like to further complain that none of these are a personal Hatchetman for all players named "Dawnstealer." Other than that? Map's pretty good - nice work.
#47
Posted 08 May 2015 - 08:53 PM
Quote
I dont know that its too short/narrow.
but the aircraft thats on it is way too big. I think it would be fine for normal sized aircraft.
#48
Posted 08 May 2015 - 09:50 PM
Appogee, on 08 May 2015 - 12:31 PM, said:
What a waste. Son I is disappoint.
If the large greyed-out mountain area in the bottom center was actually playable map, instead of out of bounds, there'd be far more interesting battle options.
Thanks for trying PGI.. really. But, couldn't you guys have just modified all those CW maps for general use? Would have been a great thing to do and can't really be that much of a problem...
Edited by RENEGADEMOON, 08 May 2015 - 09:52 PM.
#49
Posted 08 May 2015 - 09:54 PM
Praetor Knight, on 08 May 2015 - 08:30 PM, said:
The way I had thought about it was, it was a small field for smaller craft that was pressed into service to evacuate civilians during the fighting.
And there are plenty of scary short runways in the world: http://www.dailymail...touch-down.html
Well I do not think it is an Aerocraft, I think it is a dropship as it closely resembles another dropship just larger.
I think the "airstrip" is for multipurpose reasons.
For eg for aerocraft to land and aerospace fighters while dropships and VTOL like aerospace dropships could land.
I picture this ship can VTOL it's way up but it's more easier to give it a little 'push' forward first so that lift could help it up faster in a quicker time. (Using KSP as my evidence here, going straight up may take time, going straight forward can take to much space, doing both at the same time gets into the air quicker.)
Also it's not as bad as MW:4 landing strips...
This is it's "Landing strip", the landing strip for this mainly horizontal flying dropship is the same length as the dropship! (this is because it's a semi vtol like dropship, both down and forward facing thrusters work at the same time)
#50
Posted 08 May 2015 - 09:55 PM
Khobai, on 08 May 2015 - 08:53 PM, said:
I dont know that its too short/narrow.
but the aircraft thats on it is way too big. I think it would be fine for normal sized aircraft.
I agree with the size of the ship. The new airstrip looks fine imo. It would be logical to scale it down or replace it with something smaller.
As for the new rocks in the river, in regards to their size and placement they don't natually blend well with the map.. especially being the only rocks there and happen to be surrounding a bridge. A few smaller rocks throughout the river and maybe shortening the current ones currently added would do the trick.
Maybe an extension to the citadel or some destruction on the corner facing the cargo ship for a change in dynamic to that area would be a healthy addition too. All in all I am excited to try out the map and see it in the new dynamic lighting.
#51
Posted 08 May 2015 - 10:13 PM
Malleus011, on 08 May 2015 - 01:39 PM, said:
This particular spawn arrangement is exactly what I was going to suggest, even if the river entry on the south central part of the map doesn't ever get opened up. It encourages play across the entire map as opposed to the currently-integrated spawn arrangement of one team on the east side and another on the west side, which just funnels everyone into the central urbanized area.
But even better is your suggestion of multiple, rotating spawn arrangements
Even so, I'm happy to see the map being reworked at all! I'm excited...
#52
Posted 08 May 2015 - 10:22 PM
armyunit, on 08 May 2015 - 12:29 PM, said:
Still, will be nice to have some surrounding terrain. The addition of the island was a great idea!
IF they would have connected it with a BRIDGE to the old dock with the ship, and would have left a bit more room for the water from the river on the other side it would look more like RL !
M A S E, on 08 May 2015 - 09:55 PM, said:
The real problem is that the shuttles which are used to drop 4 mechs in CW are TOO SMALL !
Edited by Norbaer HALL, 08 May 2015 - 10:30 PM.
#53
Posted 08 May 2015 - 10:30 PM
JagdFlanker, on 08 May 2015 - 04:51 PM, said:
Honestly, Crimson Strait is one of the better maps for avoiding this issue. Probably 60%-70% of matches I play there end up in either the "garage"/loading dock area or the tunnel leading to it, but I do have a fair amount of matches where fighting takes place on the northwest peninsula, the western island, or the southern spawn zone. The train station, however, is criminally underutilized - which is a shame because it's probably the coolest-looking part of the map.
Everyone's experience is different, natch. But there's no way CS is worse than TT or AP. You pretty much have to BRUTE FORCE your way into a battle anywhere other than the caldera/valley in those two respective maps. Caustic's bad too, but that's compounded by its small size.
Tourmaline Desert is my favorite map for this very reason. Although there is still some focus on the ring at the center, that area really is a death zone, and the "cover" hills to its north aren't really much safer. I've had numerous fights just about everywhere on that map. I love it!
I also love it because it's not full of artificial, so-obviously-designed-for-'Mechs-and-nothing-but-'Mechs "environmental" features that it looks more like a Solaris arena than an actual world that people would live and work on. HPG Manifold and Canyon Network are probably tied for being the worst at this (unless you want to include CW maps, which get ridiculous) but all maps indulge in it to some degree or another. It's a real immersion-killer, at least for me
I mean, what a coincidence that there's so many rocks just tall enough to keep my 'Mech safe! And it's so odd that all these naturally-formed ravines accomodate my 'Mech so easily too... Weird, rocks and ravines don't seem to form in any other sizes on this planet... or this one... or THIS one... (really?)
Edited by Bloodweaver, 08 May 2015 - 10:40 PM.
#54
Posted 08 May 2015 - 10:42 PM
#55
Posted 08 May 2015 - 10:43 PM
Now we will probably have more light mechs surviving last and running around extending the match which is already over.
You guys need to improve maps but you need to have some more sophisticated objectives in mind when you do it.
That is if you ever plan to evolve this game into anything more than 12vs12 deathmatch.
#56
Posted 08 May 2015 - 11:41 PM
Edited by Snoopy, 08 May 2015 - 11:42 PM.
#57
Posted 09 May 2015 - 04:30 AM
just a hint:
the fire should burn longer 1 or two minutes and spread a bit to lay down a hot smoke Screen and do heat increase an mechs.
The smoke Screen would bring new tactical opportunities.
Of course trees without leafs don't burn Long and don't spread that much and less smoke like on the snow maps. Maybe it should take longer to set trees on fire on snow maps!
There are three things you Need to set a fire
1. a flamable substance
2. Air
3. Ignition temperature
and everything in an appropriate rate
#58
Posted 09 May 2015 - 04:33 AM
#59
Posted 09 May 2015 - 06:44 AM
#60
Posted 09 May 2015 - 09:41 AM
4 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users