50 replies to this topic

[RedDragon]

So I was browsing through ye olde BT-rulebooks again when I came to the topic of planetary assaults without exact information about the drop zone and the battlefield. And I thought how cool it would be to have MWO throw you onto a battlefield that you don't know like the back of your hand as it was in previous MW titles. After some battles you knew every single hill, building and lake as if it was your backyard.
MWO wants to set a high value on information warfare, but what use could that be if the only information to gather is about the enemy?

An idea came to my mind that could improve information warfare by adding the factor of terrain to the unknown variables at the start of a match.
So how could MWO achieve this? The idea of randomly generated maps has often been brought up and the consensus is that it would be a bad idea. I assent to this, since randomly generated maps (if technically implementable at all) don't offer the possibilities and quality of "real" maps.

Another way, and here my idea comes into play, would be to have fixed maps, but some variables on these maps that make them unique (or at least different) each time you play on them. This would require certain conditions to change with every instance the map is loaded. I'm not talking about weather or day/night cycle; those are not a part of information warfare in this sense.
My idea would be to have some key points on every map that can randomly be changed with every match. Some examples to clarify:
- There are 3 bridges on a map spanning a large chasm/river. But only 1 or 2 of them are intact in each match, allowing passage. 1 or 2 are randomly destroyed before each match.
- There is a dam on a map that randomly may be destroyed before a match, setting a part of the map under water. Same goes with a dry/wet riverbed.
- A valley that may randomly be passable or blocked by a rock slide.
- A forest that may or may not be burned down.
- A crashed drop ship that alters the routes on a map.

Those are just some examples, I'm sure you could find some more for each map.
It is important that the players don't know this, until they actually SEE it.

The point is this: By implementing such randomly generated features, scouts would play a vital role apart from just spotting for the enemy. If a team wants to reach and hold a strategic point on a map, they would have to find a route to this point. If there is only one passable bridge on a map and the players don't know which one it is, the scouts would have to find it out before the main force advances.
This would also alter the experience on each map since fighting would be different with each "variant" of a map.

I think this is an easy to implement way to have variation on each map and to emphasize the role of scouts. If it isn't technically possible to have randomly generated features like this for each match, this could also be put into effect by making 2 or 3 variants of each map with only a little work (changing 1 bridge to a destroyed model for example or filling a once passable valley with some rocks to render it unpassable). If the players don't see which variant of a given map they are about to play, this would have the same effect. They'll know the general layout of the map but the tactical situation will have to be reconnoitred by the scouts first.

What do you all think of this idea?

[Dymitry]

Me likes! Makes perfect sense, also would somewhat avoid exploit extreme configurations, as there is a randomness element that we must cater for in the mechlab.

[Lavi]

Not only this...

Just making some random weather at start could make the engadgement completely different without even adding the factors OP said.

Forgot to add the IR module??? and the drop happens on night sector of the planet? bad luck mate.. next time save a slot for the IR

dusty winds reducing energy weapons damage/range? a sudden rain? a heavy wind making the computed range/finder less accurate .

even if its just eye candy...
then visibility alterations would make a map a new one just dimming "the lights"

[Reoh]

I mentioned something like this in the last similar thread, where scouts might check ahead and find landslides had blocked off one of the routes and so forth. Might block some mechs outright, but JJ's could still hop over. The basic map would be set out, with special points that had a random option of being blocked or not, maybe even just a slight bump that covered the legs and could be walked over. I really like all the other options you've come out because I never fleshed it out like that. Nice job!

[Strum Wealh]

Personally, I like the idea.

For terrain (hills, valleys, and such), I could see it being altered by a relatively simple rotation, such that "North" isn't always in the same direction and "Hill A" isn't always at "Coordinates X1, Y1".

And like you've outlined, bridges and dams (and buildings in urban environments) can be randomly destroyed immediately prior to the start of a match.

Also, each map could have, say, 4-5 possible spawn points for each team, and which is actually used is randomly selected.
AND the spawn points are rotated separately from the map itself; in one game, a given spawn point may be within a city, while in the next game the same spawn point might be in the middle of a forest that is a couple of kilometers away from said city.

And randomized weather would be nice too.

[00seven]

I too like the idea of having the surprise factor implemented on maps.

Urban enviros could have a variety of buildings either destroyed or rebuilt to different specifications. What once was an open factory lot or statdium could not be high rise etc.

There might be some balancing required when someone has learned how to exploit a map repeatedly, it might make it difficult for new teams to come in and even have a chance.

[CCC Dober]

OP: Totally agree. I might even suggest randomizing equidistant spawn points. You would never start from the same spot twice, which means that predefined, well timed tactics would become a thing of the past. Nobody would have the advantage of a certain starting position. Maps could even be asymmetrical and fair at the same time. I really hope your idea kicks off.

[RedDragon]

CCC Dober, on 11 July 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

OP: Totally agree. I might even suggest randomizing equidistant spawn points. You would never start from the same spot twice, which means that predefined, well timed tactics would become a thing of the past. Nobody would have the advantage of a certain starting position. Maps could even be asymmetrical and fair at the same time. I really hope your idea kicks off.

Random drop points would be cool, but I don't know if that will be implemented. Guessing by the videos we've seen so far, the drop zone is at the edge of the map, outside the playable area (marked by those white lines on the ground).

[CeeKay Boques]

Does ANY FPS game have this feature? I know top down games have done this, but I haven't played any competitive first person game under which the map is randomly generated.

[Sirous]

Technoviking, on 12 July 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

Does ANY FPS game have this feature? I know top down games have done this, but I haven't played any competitive first person game under which the map is randomly generated.

None of the newer ones have this, There are many problems that arise with random maps. What the OP is suggesting is something that is random but only in that, there are say 4 variations of said map and it is random on which one you get. Could be easier (or harder, who can say). for the devs to take an existing map and slightly alter it. Or from the outset have this in mind. Now you have one map with many variations, all could be preloaded and the server randomly chooses one of the four. That would be about the best way to implement it and should not be that hard, sadly noone really does this.

I am actually in favor of this idea, I like it.

[Ranek Blackstone]

I've seen stuff like this in other games. Global Agenda had entire maps where things like boxes and window shutters would have preset spawn locations, but wouldn't spawn everytime the map was loaded. So sometimes using your jetpack to infiltrate via the window could work, and other times not so much.

[Uri Brauer]

RedDragon, on 11 July 2012 - 02:54 AM, said:

A forest that may or may not be burned down.

I'd like to apologize about the whole forest incident.

I had reason to believe that there were enemy infantry using the forest for cover, and I attempted to flush them out using my flamers. In no way did I intend to burn down the entire forest, and I regret the dancing and giggling that ensued as the conflagration reached its peak.

I'm aware that this is the fourth forest this week, and that the major planetary export is lumber, but I promise that I'll control myself better next time.

[Bodha]

I would settle for the dev's making lets say 10 variants of a map. Each variant might have different spawns, a different level of infrastructure intact or destroyed etc.

My concern though with either my version or the OPs version of map variety is balance testing is tricky enough. You can easily argue that the variants could easily be imbalanced even though you might be fighting over essentially the same maps. Now I would argue that most people would accept a small amount of imbalance such as one spawn wins 52 or maybe even as high as 55% of the time if in exchange they got variety.

[JokerPW]

As a programmer, I guess the main idea of the thread very "possible".
It's not that hard to implemente it and could do a great good for the game. Well thought, dude ! =]

[]'s

[RedDragon]

Bodha, on 13 July 2012 - 01:30 AM, said:

My concern though with either my version or the OPs version of map variety is balance testing is tricky enough. You can easily argue that the variants could easily be imbalanced even though you might be fighting over essentially the same maps. Now I would argue that most people would accept a small amount of imbalance such as one spawn wins 52 or maybe even as high as 55% of the time if in exchange they got variety.

Yes, balancing would be a problem, although I don't think it would be that hard to do. If a map is planned from scratch with this idea in mind, there can be some ways to include random things without altering the balance too much. I think it would mostly depend on if the spawn points are fixed or also random, whether a team gets an advantage from dropping at a certain location or not. We have to wait and see, but I'm quite optimistic random elements could be implemented with not so much work as to outweigh their gain.

[Fire for Effect]

dynamic maps are a nice idea but probably only a useful idea in more or less open terrain. If you have some chokepoint for only one side that is pretty hard to get through and easily defendable by only 2 mechs well you get the picture...

if you have simply rolling hills with some rocks added in and a few ponds to cools down it will work; any other things like a city map or complex mountains with valleys that might in worst case result in maps where only jump jet mechs can actually reach the enemy...

but i would like some dynamic maps ...

[Talenvar]

If you want a WoT clone, then don't ask for dynamic maps or dynamic elements on the same very basic maps. Every game out there uses static, crappy maps that end up being memorized with dedicated paths to go, limited tactics and limited teamwork.

It's too bad we won't see much in the way of dynamic content at launch but it's definitely my hope that over time, this game will be the one that takes maps to a whole new level and does some severe randomizing and dynamic content that will add infinite replayability and infinite tactics.

[CutterWolf]

Good idea. Hell I would be happy if we get random drop points and weather/day & night

[RedDragon]

Fire for Effect, on 15 July 2012 - 04:33 AM, said:

dynamic maps are a nice idea but probably only a useful idea in more or less open terrain. If you have some chokepoint for only one side that is pretty hard to get through and easily defendable by only 2 mechs well you get the picture...

if you have simply rolling hills with some rocks added in and a few ponds to cools down it will work; any other things like a city map or complex mountains with valleys that might in worst case result in maps where only jump jet mechs can actually reach the enemy...

but i would like some dynamic maps ...

That is the point where balancing comes into play (literally ). I guess it is manageable to have some random features that don't favour one side. They could be in the centre of the map where both teams have to deal with them or there could be random things for both sides at the same time: If a river that divides a map in two parts is dry or wet, both teams will have to deal with it. If one team only has one random bridge to get over a chasm, the other team could have only one passable valley, and so on.

[Bodha]

Talenvar, on 15 July 2012 - 07:44 AM, said:

If you want a WoT clone, then don't ask for dynamic maps or dynamic elements on the same very basic maps. Every game out there uses static, crappy maps that end up being memorized with dedicated paths to go, limited tactics and limited teamwork.

It's too bad we won't see much in the way of dynamic content at launch but it's definitely my hope that over time, this game will be the one that takes maps to a whole new level and does some severe randomizing and dynamic content that will add infinite replayability and infinite tactics.

Bolded the part ppl need to think about long and hard. More maps doesn't really help fight this much. More variability in the same map can affect it more I think. What if sometimes a specific choke point is blocked and sometimes it isnt? What if a variable spawn point system forces both teams to actually find their enemy rather than just run to the middle? If the maps are large enough this basic issue of spawn variety and the target cap point being in different places can make a huge difference.

Imagine for a minute you spawn in on the map and you have a general idea of the terrain (easily explained as sat view or overflight intel), and you know there is an enemy force, but you don't know where they are. Now you NEED scouts to find them. You need faster mechs to skirmish, screen, and potentially flank the enemy main force. These simple things would drastically improve the value of smaller mechs. Now the assault mechs will not just run to the same spot every time. They got to hang out for a minute and figure out where they need to move to after the scouts localize the enemy force. A faster team could easily use their mobility to change the overall feel of a battle. Slower teams will still have the advantage in firepower, but have less battlefield intel and limited ability at forcing the enemy into a fight.