24 replies to this topic

[Tarogato]

This is, in my opinion, this simplest way to vastly improve gameplay in Mechwarrior Online: multiple sets of spawns and base locations per map. Just like how the matchmaker chooses a random map each match, it would also choose one of the various configuration possibilities. We've been playing the same configurations on the same maps for years... it's starting to get old. We need a breath of fresh air and variety.

I'll start each section by posting what the original/default configurations are for that map and mode, and then my own crafted alternate configurations will follow. One of the primary goals of this project is to force engagements to happen in locations of the map(s) that aren't well utilised by the current spawn configurations in the game. I've carefully crafted each configuration with balance in mind - making sure that lance spawns are equidistant from primary objectives plus each other and that terrain features don't interrupt balance between sides too much. In other words, I didn't just plop icons onto maps, I thought this through and put a lot of hours into it, including running around the maps in a Locust and making sure many of the spawns and bases were well placed.



Also, paging Paul Inouye. This idea was introduced to Thad Jantzi some months ago, and this was his response:

Thad Jantzi, on 07 April 2015 - 08:22 AM, said:

“Things like adding new spawn points in skirmish, new base locations in assault, and new node configurations in conquest.”

It's a nice idea. Bug Paul about it.

Alpine Peaks:

Assault:

Spoiler

I'm putting Alpine Assault first, because I think it's easiest to understand at a glance. Starting with the default (in game) configuration:







That's what it looks like. Now here are my alternates:

Conquest:

Spoiler

This is liable to have the most interesting results, I think. First the present config, then my alternates. (don't mind the icons in the upper left corner, I forgot to remove them)

Skirmish:

Spoiler

I'm actually not doing Skirmish for Alpine. The I9 hill is just a black hole that sucks everything toward it. Without capture objectives on the map, it doesn't matter where the spawns are, I9 hill will be the fighting location every match. PGIplzfix.

Terra Therma:

Assault:

Spoiler

Not many possibilities with Assault. I explored the map extensively and I could only come up with two alternates, for a total of three configurations.

Conquest:

Spoiler

These excite me a little. I also had to be extra careful and plotted out the travel distances from each lance to each cap point to make sure they were properly balanced. Remember, the presently-in-game layout is displayed first:

Skirmish:

Spoiler

Same as Alpine, any variants aren't really worth mentioning because the middle caldera is the prime point of interest on the map regardless of where you spawn. I don't think there's any way around that problem.

Tourmaline Desert:

Assault:

Spoiler

First, the one we're used to:






Now, here is a buttload of options. Basically any two bases connected by a black line can be an Assault Mode setup and it'll work. I did this because I was lazy.

Conquest:

Spoiler

Skirmish:

Spoiler

Okay, for this I'm going to show one of the ways I prepared and balanced these configurations: plotting out where people are most likely to go and where engagements are most likely to occur (shown by the black divider). As usual, the configuration already in the game is first, then my alternate spawns:

Forest Colony

Assault:

Spoiler

Okay, for Forest Colony I went a step further and marked all the impassable terrain on the map so it was easy to reference. That took about three hours to do in itself, but I didn't just do it for this post - I'll be sharing this as a resource to the community later.

Conquest:

Spoiler

Crimson Strait

Assault:

Spoiler

Conquest:

Spoiler

Viridian Bog

Assault:

Spoiler

Conquest:

Spoiler

I may devise configurations for other maps if there is any interest. River City comes to mind.

Edited by Tarogato, 02 September 2015 - 12:18 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

10/10

Would like again!

[old man odin]

Love the concept. Some of these spawn locations need adjusting but PGI definitely should do this. It would be a great way to get some variety into the game without the need to spend a lot of resources on maps or split the queues further with new game modes.

I think you should have a go at creating Alpine skirmish spawns despite the hill. If you avoid placing teams where the hill is roughly the middle of them, then people wont use it. The map is large enough to afford you placing both teams on the same half.

[Sean Ward]

Great ideas. I think that some points could use tweaking but fantastic idea and I 100% support this initiative! It's a relatively low effort way of vastly increasing the map diversity.

[Kamikaze Viking]

Sean Ward, on 03 September 2015 - 12:21 AM, said:

It's a relatively low effort way of vastly increasing the map diversity.

That was the whole point of the exercise.

[zudukai]

as a concept this shows good promise for variation in the public and group queues. i hope we do get to see something like this in the future, a simple mod to showcase map features from new perspectives.

however, the lobby lists for the random elements would be sloppy and laborious to find out each spawn in a huge list, and would benefit from a new style of map selection or perhaps a random spawn check box (or something to that effect) to allow the consistency needed for league and E-sport play.

[LordSkyKnight]

This is a fantastic idea. I really hope the devs see this and can maybe work some (or all, but let's not get too ambitious) of this into the game.

zudukai, on 03 September 2015 - 03:27 AM, said:

as a concept this shows good promise for variation in the public and group queues. i hope we do get to see something like this in the future, a simple mod to showcase map features from new perspectives.

however, the lobby lists for the random elements would be sloppy and laborious to find out each spawn in a huge list, and would benefit from a new style of map selection or perhaps a random spawn check box (or something to that effect) to allow the consistency needed for league and E-sport play.

A way to solve this would be an interactive map to select spawns instead of a drop down list. Again, super ambitious because it would take a lot of dev time to do, but it would be awesome.

[Duncan1dah0]

Great idea. I remember it took me a couple of drops when I first started playing to figure out the spawn points could vary between lances. It sorta took some of the entertainment away when I learned all the spawn points between all the maps and game modes. You and the team get into ruts of always going one way and always fighting in the same place. The new forest would be awesome if we could get more fights to break out in more locations.

[Barantor]

Diversity in experience from match to match has almost always been a good thing when playing these types of games.

[quantaca]

How can one not support this ? I dont know, so im here the show my support

Edited by quantaca, 03 September 2015 - 05:04 PM.

[Vellron2005]

+1 on Original Post

[Little Details]

Just saw this cross-linked from outreachhpg... Taro has been bringing this up all the time, and now he outdid himself by actually giving spawn ideas (the one on Bog where both teams start on the side and race to the caps would be epic).

WE.NEED.THIS.

The massive benefit to players to shake up the experience vs the relatively low programming input required has to make this a no brainer. I'd give up new maps for a year to have this level of diversity in the current maps.

Try 3 spawns per map/type - over time if we learn that some aren't fair/make for a good experience, change them up slightly or scrap that spawn idea and try another one.

[DailyFrankPeter]

Yes. Something definitely needs to be done about the spawns.

I was more hoping for an ability to choose though.

[BearFlag]

This idea has been around for some time but never (to my knowledge) presented in such fine detail.

It falls into the category of map dynamism and should have had priority over destructible terrain. Oh well.

Having variable spawn, resource and base locations will offer more closure angles and so use more of the large maps out there. It would probably also necessitate actual scouting (since you don't know where the enemy is starting).

Hand in hand with this is getting rid of the two kilometer drop spread. The giant spreads compel a useless "rendezvous" phase at the beginning of every game.

Another possibility in dynamic maps is variable exclusion zones (ie Out of Bounds). A map larger than the play area(s) could be built but have changing OOB overlays (from a pre-determined set) game to game. A step further would have dynamic exclusion zones (OOB areas that can be "released" during play based on some condition). This would allow for new game modes conditioned on in-game results.

EDIT: A further incentive to scouting in assault mode would be to have the location of the enemy base unknown and unshown. It has to be "found" before it shows on friendly displays. No "base rush" before recon.

Edited by BearFlag, 06 December 2015 - 02:02 AM.

[zudukai]

BearFlag, on 05 December 2015 - 09:38 PM, said:

This idea has been around for some time but never (to my knowledge) presented in such fine detail.

It falls into the category of map dynamism and should have had priority over destructible terrain. Oh well.

Having variable spawn, resource and base locations will offer more closure angles and so use more of the large maps out there. It would probably also necessitate actual scouting (since you don't know where the enemy is starting).

Hand in hand with this is getting rid of the two kilometer drop spread. The giant spreads compel a useless "rendezvous" phase at the beginning of every game.

Another possibility in dynamic maps is variable exclusion zones (ie Out of Bounds). A map larger than the play area(s) could be built but have changing OOB overlays (from a pre-determined set) game to game. A step further would have dynamic exclusion zones (OOB areas that can be "released" during play based on some condition). This would allow for new game modes conditioned on in-game results.

that would indeed be most excellent. i do continue to support this idea.

positive examples can be found from the "Battlefield" series of games where this is a series staple gametype they had nicknamed "rush" did exactly that, "destroy objective A + B, unlocks destructible objective C + D and so on"

MWO can vary this by having capture points, along side destructible objectives or respawn lives, or other objectives, such as gates and e.t.c.

edit* why not send a message to Russ on twitter?

Edited by zudukai, 05 December 2015 - 10:10 PM.

[BearFlag]

zudukai, on 05 December 2015 - 10:06 PM, said:

that would indeed be most excellent. i do continue to support this idea.

edit* why not send a message to Russ on twitter?

Thanks. Maybe someone could tip off Russ on twitter about this thread. I'm an old fart who doesn't twit, tweet or ... nevermind. That last vowel substitution would be inappropriate.

Edited by BearFlag, 06 December 2015 - 01:45 AM.

[DailyFrankPeter]

BearFlag, on 05 December 2015 - 09:38 PM, said:

Hand in hand with this is getting rid of the two kilometer drop spread. The giant spreads compel a useless "rendezvous" phase at the beginning of every game.

Even just that would be a welcome change.

Some lances don't even make the rendezvous alive. And you could say: "Fair game, the team was assault-heavy and the enemy had good lights", if not for the fact that the this is also random.

Edited by DailyFrankPeter, 06 December 2015 - 07:03 AM.

[BearFlag]

DailyFrankPeter, on 06 December 2015 - 06:53 AM, said:

Even just that would be a welcome change.

Some lances don't even make the rendezvous alive. And you could say: "Fair game, the team was assault-heavy and the enemy had good lights", if not for the fact that the this is also random.

Indeed. Not much of an assault driver, but I have three Victors. It's sad when the team enters into a rotation away from the assaults. Have played several games where our entire assault lance is wiped out while the team maneuvers away. Then, of course, they wonder: "Where are the assaults?" Dropping together would alleviate this, I think.

Edited by BearFlag, 07 December 2015 - 12:38 AM.

[Deadmeat313]

Fabulous idea. Doo eeet!

[CommEE]

I like this idea - it is a fast way to add variety to maps, and each map could have X spawn point configuration and the MM could randomly select one, the users could vote on config A, B, C, etc., or it could change every month so that only one config per month is available