Jump to content

New Maps Getting Larger Trend

Feedback

56 replies to this topic

#21 DAEDALOS513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 2,636 posts
  • LocationKingdom of Heaven

Posted 09 February 2016 - 04:32 PM

View PostMechB Kotare, on 09 February 2016 - 04:26 PM, said:

Erm... I remember previous MW titles being also more about patience, rather than pure brainless FPS experience....

That's why there is CW. Besides.. brain cells can still be utilized with smaller maps in quick-play that don't require 3-5 minutes of walking time.

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 09 February 2016 - 04:34 PM.


#22 MechB Kotare

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 720 posts
  • LocationHuntress

Posted 09 February 2016 - 04:46 PM

View PostDAEDALOS513, on 09 February 2016 - 04:32 PM, said:

...smaller maps in quick-play that don't require 3-5 minutes of walking time...


There always was Solaris for that. Maps like HPG manifold are a solaris map for example. Giant blocky arena, that we got as promised "moon base" map.

CW is bad. Its pretty much fail, because each map consists of two dropzones, 2 gates, couple of turrets and gens, and orbital gun. When saying MW experience, im talking about houndres or thousands of Kilometers wide open area, frendlier for balanced builds and tactical/information warfare (you know scout mechs being scouts, and not just backstabbing skirmishers etc)...

CW has really little to nothing common with what i call MW experience. Solaris would be nice tho..

Edited by MechB Kotare, 09 February 2016 - 04:55 PM.


#23 DAEDALOS513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 2,636 posts
  • LocationKingdom of Heaven

Posted 09 February 2016 - 04:48 PM

View PostMechB Kotare, on 09 February 2016 - 04:46 PM, said:


There always was Solaris for that. Maps like HPG manifold are a solaris map for example. Giant blocky arena, that we got as promised "moon base" map.

CW is bad. Its pretty much fail, because each map consists of two dropzones, 2 gates, couple of turrets and gens, and orbital gun. When saying MW experience, im talking about houndres or thouasnds of Kilometers wide open area, frendlier for balanced builds and tactical/information warfare (you know scout mechs being scouts, and not just backstabbing skirmishers etc)...

CW has really little to nothing common with what i call MW experience. Solaris would be nice tho..

Ya, cw has so much potential. The progress feels so slow unfortunately..

#24 DAEDALOS513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 2,636 posts
  • LocationKingdom of Heaven

Posted 09 February 2016 - 04:52 PM

View PostAzurhoden, on 09 February 2016 - 04:08 PM, said:

Wrong again... The game is not EVER meant to be less than a 15 minute draw on your time... And YES, I AM talking about "Quick-Play". CW is indeed for longer engagements, that's why they take a half an hour. This game is a time investment. Get over it.

PS. You're obviously new the THIS game.. not mwo in general. Anyway i've done every build, range, brawl, lrm-cheese.. this new map favours the cheese/troll builds way too much.. it caters to the tier 4 and 5's and was likely created for the newcomers off the steam-boat.. so that they can do well and sleep cozy in bed with thoughts of high damage from raining lrm's from 800m.. this is not a jab or anything but are maybe you a steamer?

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 09 February 2016 - 04:53 PM.


#25 Azurhoden

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 57 posts
  • LocationWestern U.S.

Posted 09 February 2016 - 04:55 PM

No, CW is NOT your Long Game Catch-all. Nice Try. MechWarrior as a title is NOT, in any incarnation, meant to be a tin-plated shooting gallery, which is what the LCD players are trying their very hardest to make it. Something fast and easy that anyone can get into. This game is not for the impatient, this game is not for just wiping out what ever is on the other side of the field. If you step out on to any battlefield, anywhere, with the sole intention of slaughtering the other side, then you should LOSE everytime. This is not about being a better shark, cuz we have seen that before in a MechWarrior Title. At the end of Mech IV, everything was about how may pulse lasers you could stack on a mech, i.e.: the better shark. Every game came down to who could get the most alphas off first, and nothing else. If you don't support variety then you will ultimately kill the etire experience. That's why I didn't complain back in the BETA days, when there were only two modes, and Skirmish wasn't one of them. Because Skirmish never made any sense in context of this game and its fine history. When skirmish was added, I tossed up a note of concern, but, as it added another element to the game, I quieted down relatively quickly.

But now, the "time-whiner" crowd wants faster matches, because they can't afford the time? Fighting, Combat, War. These things take time to do right. Ever notice how some people get killed by impatience, charging into situations alone when they shouldn't? Please just go play something else and stop ruining it for the rest of us. If you don't have the time to play, then you just don't have the time to play. So take your time and do it right, or go do something else.

#26 DAEDALOS513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 2,636 posts
  • LocationKingdom of Heaven

Posted 09 February 2016 - 04:58 PM

View PostAzurhoden, on 09 February 2016 - 04:55 PM, said:

No, CW is NOT your Long Game Catch-all. Nice Try. MechWarrior as a title is NOT, in any incarnation, meant to be a tin-plated shooting gallery, which is what the LCD players are trying their very hardest to make it. Something fast and easy that anyone can get into. This game is not for the impatient, this game is not for just wiping out what ever is on the other side of the field. If you step out on to any battlefield, anywhere, with the sole intention of slaughtering the other side, then you should LOSE everytime. This is not about being a better shark, cuz we have seen that before in a MechWarrior Title. At the end of Mech IV, everything was about how may pulse lasers you could stack on a mech, i.e.: the better shark. Every game came down to who could get the most alphas off first, and nothing else. If you don't support variety then you will ultimately kill the etire experience. That's why I didn't complain back in the BETA days, when there were only two modes, and Skirmish wasn't one of them. Because Skirmish never made any sense in context of this game and its fine history. When skirmish was added, I tossed up a note of concern, but, as it added another element to the game, I quieted down relatively quickly.

But now, the "time-whiner" crowd wants faster matches, because they can't afford the time? Fighting, Combat, War. These things take time to do right. Ever notice how some people get killed by impatience, charging into situations alone when they shouldn't? Please just go play something else and stop ruining it for the rest of us. If you don't have the time to play, then you just don't have the time to play. So take your time and do it right, or go do something else.

Why isn't cw the long-game catch all? Maybe because you don't have a unit? Maybe because you want something fast/easy to satisfy your needs for your game-style of choice? Your no different than me.. except I have a solution.. get in a unit, get on teamspeak, and drop CW.

#27 Azurhoden

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 57 posts
  • LocationWestern U.S.

Posted 09 February 2016 - 05:17 PM

LOL, wut? You make an aweful lot of supposition there lad. I've had my fair share of CW, both with and without my unit, and, so what? CW is not the long game catch-all for the same reason that packing three different playing styles into a terrible voting system has damaged this game: We, each of us, taylor mechs toward what we can. We'd taylor mechs to specific maps if we could, but PGI doesn't want anyone getting to comfortable. See, the four different play styles have different loadouts. CW are primarily brawler loadouts with a few long range exceptions like the dual gauss monsters. Which means I nailed it, you a short ranger... no wonder you don like the big open, huh? You in CW all the time. Cuz, see, if you can't taylor a mech to a map, then you taylor it to the play style. But each of the play styles have differnt loadout types. Your Skirmish loadout will look nothing like your conquest loadout, except of course now. Now that they changed it with the voting and the exploiting of the mini-game, all the loadouts are just Skirmish oriented, because who cares about objectives? Oh, but the new map puts those things back in the game, if only on the one map. When the other side can leg you light mech and then run off to capture your base, and your slow 100 ton assault, nor any of your heavies can move fast enough to do anything about it. That's called being out whitted. But, again, you have to think beyond the end of your gun, and you don't like that. To quote John Stewart, "Learning Curves are for p u s s i e s", and you be a macho-macho man... HA!... How's that for supposition?

Edited by Azurhoden, 09 February 2016 - 05:19 PM.


#28 DAEDALOS513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 2,636 posts
  • LocationKingdom of Heaven

Posted 09 February 2016 - 05:38 PM

View PostAzurhoden, on 09 February 2016 - 05:17 PM, said:

LOL, wut? You make an aweful lot of supposition there lad. I've had my fair share of CW, both with and without my unit, and, so what? CW is not the long game catch-all for the same reason that packing three different playing styles into a terrible voting system has damaged this game: We, each of us, taylor mechs toward what we can. We'd taylor mechs to specific maps if we could, but PGI doesn't want anyone getting to comfortable. See, the four different play styles have different loadouts. CW are primarily brawler loadouts with a few long range exceptions like the dual gauss monsters. Which means I nailed it, you a short ranger... no wonder you don like the big open, huh? You in CW all the time. Cuz, see, if you can't taylor a mech to a map, then you taylor it to the play style. But each of the play styles have differnt loadout types. Your Skirmish loadout will look nothing like your conquest loadout, except of course now. Now that they changed it with the voting and the exploiting of the mini-game, all the loadouts are just Skirmish oriented, because who cares about objectives? Oh, but the new map puts those things back in the game, if only on the one map. When the other side can leg you light mech and then run off to capture your base, and your slow 100 ton assault, nor any of your heavies can move fast enough to do anything about it. That's called being out whitted. But, again, you have to think beyond the end of your gun, and you don't like that. To quote John Stewart, "Learning Curves are for p u s s i e s", and you be a macho-macho man... HA!... How's that for supposition?

You're as guilty as I making false suppositions about the other.. see we really aren't that different after all except that I'm wise enough to see it. What does that have to do with anything? I dunno, maybe nuthin.. maybe everything.. I'm tired.. i'll rest when i'm dead.

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 09 February 2016 - 05:40 PM.


#29 Malavai Fletcher

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 143 posts
  • LocationErrrrr....C3?

Posted 09 February 2016 - 05:41 PM

In my opinion CW is horrible,there is no tactic beyond open gate and deathball in,i played it alot a year ago and it made me take a long break because the game became meh.

Polar is such a breath of fresh air,scouting is now relevant(somewhat),fast skirmishers have ample room to reposition and gain surprise.It feels alot more like the MW4 maps,which i really miss.

People have been spoilt with the maps so far,little to no effort to make a shot or get shot within the first minute of the game starting,never a need for scouting,as alot of the time you can see the enemy by just running forward for 30seconds.And i hardly ever have a WTF moment,when i get surprised by the enemy,because you know,on nearly every map there is only 2 or 3 places the enemy team is going to be.

You see people using this playstyle on Polar,instead of letting the scouts scout they form a nice orderly line and run straight at where the scout has gone,stretching themselves out over 3 grids and letting the enemy scout see where they are.But there are cases where teams let the scouts do their job,while they stay concealed in the gullies and move around without being seen.

I hope we see more maps of this size and bigger so i can get the feeling of actually hunting the enemy team instead of bum rushing the middle to nuke it out.

#30 Azurhoden

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 57 posts
  • LocationWestern U.S.

Posted 09 February 2016 - 08:24 PM

So, you noticed me doing that on purpose did you? I would hate to think I was under doing it, other wise you might have missed it. (BTW that is sarcasm, just wanted to be clear). That's what I love about those subjective terms like "wise". It can literally mean anything you want, depending on which set of semantics you want to use. The wisest dirt farmers are still living in the stone age, but they are the wisest of thier kind, and you wont find anyone "wiser" in their lands, and yet clearly they are archaic and even barbaric, so again talking about wisdom, which has yet to be defined or displayed, rather than being "reasonable" might infact be a major part of the disconnect here. Especially when obvious things are obviously being missed by the "wise" ones. Sigh.

LOL, but I will make one addmission here, you're right, I am too tired to waste anymore time on you.

Peace out...

#31 Pskonejott

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 36 posts

Posted 09 February 2016 - 08:35 PM

The new maps are larger than the older maps because they are designed for 12v12, the older maps like frozen city were designed for 8v8.

The other aspect is to eliminate a single fight area per map and add more variation to play.

Many of the points made about what we have ended up with are valid and I'm not disputing them. But you can go back through Russ's announcements, the town halls etc. and he talks about why they made the newer maps larger.

#32 Tarogato

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 6,558 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 09 February 2016 - 10:06 PM

Small maps have several downsides:

1. not many places to go - people go to the same places every match and gameplay is very stale. Example: Frozen City, Viridian Bog, Canyon Network, Caustic Valley, old River City, old Forest Colony, and to an extent HPG Manifold

2. teams meet each very other early in the match, so areas of engagement are heavily dictated by the spawns and there is no time for the teams to deviate and engage from different unique locations

3. scouts (and really all lights mechs) are marginalised. Speed isn't as important and since the map is small you'll always know where the enemy is, so light mechs are relegated to the same duties as mediums and heavies, which is simply laying down firepower.

4. not much space means that weapons like the AC/2 are going to continue to be useless and weapons like the ERLL and ERPPC won't be viable (notice how ERLL spam is prevalent in CW and competitive matches, but never in group or solo queue). Maps like Mining Collective, Viridian Bog, Caustic Valley, Canyon Network, Frozen City, HPG Manifold... don't offer any sightlines long enough for long range weapons to be valid.



So what's the problem with large maps? When they break any of the above rules.

New Forest Colony - it's huge, but rules number 1 and 3 above: not many places to go, the enemy will always be in one of two locations and lights have no role to fulfill. So you end up walking forward toward the enemy several minutes and engage in the same locations every match. This is because there are so many large obstructions and out-of-bounds areas cluttering the map and funneling teams straight into each others. These massive obstructions need to be removed (the mountains) and the map needs to be opened up so that more avenues can be explored.

New River City - it's somewhat large, but rule number 1 - since there is a river running down the middle of the map, there aren't very many options. You either fight over the bridge/park area, or the citadel. The rest of the map is completely underutilised and a complete waste because there's not enough avenues to make use of that area except for weird stuff that happens in competitive matches. (hint PGI: open up the north end above the dam, the ten grids squares from B2 to C6 and suddenly we'd have more options on this map)

Crimson Straight - it's a decently large map, but only two avenues: saddle and not-saddle. Everything in group and solo queue basically revolves around controlling the general area surrounding D4. Rarely do you see matches deviate from that because that's the place where teams meet if they just press W from spawn - there's no meaningful alternatives.

Caustic Valley - it's okay-sized, but fighting only happens at the caldera! Only nine out of the whole thirty-two in-bounds grids on the map are ever visited! 72% of the map is completely wasted! Because there is a nascar feature in the middle.

Terra Therma - lovely large map! Spawns are far away, gives teams plenty of time to diverge and meet in different locations and have exciting battles all over the map, scouts are important because you can't see where the enemy team is headed without them. But wait. Actually, everything I just said is a complete lie because the center of the map is dominated by a caldera that everybody auto-pilots toward every single match. That centrally-placed caldera ruins EVERYTHING. No point in scouting ... you know where the enemy is going to be every single match - the caldera. No need to plan anything out tactically, there is a default strategy every match - go to the caldera and be better at it than the enemy. We use four grids on this map out of the forty-nine(!!!!!) that are available. 92%(!!!) is completely wasted because there is a central features that draws everybody toward it.

Alpine Peaks - another lovely large map! Spawns are decently far, so teams have plenty of time to adjust and go to new locations and engagements could happen at any location on the map. Except they don't... because just like Terra Therma there is a dominating feature on Alpine Peaks - the I9 hill which draws EVERYBODY toward it. Going anywhere else is useless because I9 hill is the stronghold that can control the rest of the map. The fighting only occurs in six grids regularly, the other one-hundred-and-one (!!!!!!!!!!!!!) grid squares are completely useless ... well except for the seven other grids that are fought on during Conquest, so let's go ahead and include those. 13/101 means 87% of the map is going almost completely unused. The main fight only ever happens in 13% of all space on the map. A complete waste... all because of a central dominating feature.

Polar Highlands - amazing large! Long sightlines, but ample cover throughout the rolling hills to break the sightlines everywhere. Spawns are very far away so teams have time to diverse and meet each other in vastly different locations every match. Scouts are actually important! Without them you'd have a hard time actually finding the enemy, and once you do find the enemy, having the lights flank them is that much more valuable because of how large the map is and how you can come from unsuspecting angles or create brutal crossfires. AND THERE'S NO DOMINATING CENTRAL FEATURES, E-GADS IT'S AMAZING! I've seen main engagements that can occur in any of thirty-two(!) different grids. That is a LOT of variety. About 66% of the map goes somewhat unused, but holy crap 32 grids worth of places to fight over? That's amazing and that's what this game needs more of. Flippin' VARIETY.

Edited by Tarogato, 09 February 2016 - 10:13 PM.


#33 B0oN

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,870 posts

Posted 10 February 2016 - 04:06 AM

Daedalos, as good as your argumental standpoint is, I have one simple question to undermine it .

Why should people in Quickplay queue get less challenged by mapdesigns than CommWarfare players ?

-If people were having time issues they shouldn´t play at all and manage their precious time in other ways .
-If people were just playing because of "quick mech-experience" then they should account for an average timespan of about 13-18, or even better let´s be generous and say 20 minutes from match to match (searching matches, fiddling in mechlab, etc...), shouldn´t they ?

And as a last pointer as to why I support this "trend" ...

Players NEED challenges, otherwise they just stay put in their evolution, grinding trenches of "this is the way it´s to be done" into the bedrock of gameplay, which surely will leave it brainfree, repetetive and boring, which ultimately could destroy any given game and it´s playerbase .
I dare saying that nothing would have been the same in the world around us, be it the real or the digital, if people had never faced the challenges they were facing and instead just budged and folded .
I think we would have a radically different world and wouldn´t even sit here and discuss growing maps and if that was good or bad .

And in the same mood as thelast lines above and a backhook on the Vulcan joke I say
Adapt, overcome and prosper as a mechwarrior

#34 Mr Gibbins

    Rookie

  • 1 posts

Posted 10 February 2016 - 04:07 AM

You have a vote multiplier, use it when you don't want the maps you don't like.

If people are voting to play on it they like it.

If you find it gets voted for more often than the smaller maps then there is the community decision on which maps they feel are more fun.

#35 Archie4Strings

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 659 posts

Posted 10 February 2016 - 04:31 AM

Most posters already said it:
Its about the larger variety of tactics which the large maps provide us with. I agree that for Pugs, the size should be small because it is just a random nascar match as on every map. So for sure you wanna keep it short !:D

But as a player who is playing in a unit with organized drops, loadout, ts etc., these new maps are just awesome!

So the solution:
People who dont want the map, should vote for another one!
Bang! Thats it!
And if the majority of the players of one match prefer a large and new map such as polar or forest colony? you got it.., democracy!

#36 General Solo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • 3,625 posts

Posted 10 February 2016 - 04:56 AM

I remember people asking for larger maps and PGI delivered.
Thank you PGI

#37 Roughneck Cobra

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 462 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 10 February 2016 - 05:40 AM

You guys all seem to fail realise half this games income is based on being able enjoy the variation between QUICK MATCHES, its in the name, and it doesnt just mean sign up time, versus the long fights of Warfare and such.

Larger maps might seem a good idea but when this 'F2P' game needs pay the bills, it needs consider who its rivals are, and there are a few if you count things like World of Tanks, some will argue its a different type of game, but do remember not everyone who plays and pays for MWO is a 1980's born and bred mechaverse addict and simply want to break metal.

Quick matches are just that, and Polar Highlands is just a sign the developers are struggling make maps to satisfy both parties, its not a crime to struggle, but just increasing a map size isnt an answer, thats my approach to it, Highlands would be fun if it was shrunk a third in size.

Try playing Conquest mode on it, no matter what you do, team with the fastest lights win it!

Edited by Stryker Ezekiel, 10 February 2016 - 05:41 AM.


#38 General Solo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • 3,625 posts

Posted 10 February 2016 - 06:46 AM

I hear what you're saying.
But in my view the problem is not the map.
Causal players want certain things
Harder core players want certain things
No map is going to completely satisfy all parties, all the time.

#39 DAEDALOS513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • Death Star
  • 2,636 posts
  • LocationKingdom of Heaven

Posted 10 February 2016 - 07:01 AM

View PostAzurhoden, on 09 February 2016 - 08:24 PM, said:


LOL, but I will make one addmission here, you're right, I am too tired to waste anymore time on you.

Peace out...

Another admission, you take things way too seriously (and personally).

#40 Archie4Strings

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 659 posts

Posted 10 February 2016 - 08:22 AM

View PostStryker Ezekiel, on 10 February 2016 - 05:40 AM, said:


Try playing Conquest mode on it, no matter what you do, team with the fastest lights win it!


Well, finally a map on which light mechs gonna win the game. Usually they are far less important compared to heavier mechs, just because on most maps their mobility isnt important enough to outweight (can i say it like that??? otherwise i take "compensate" - sorry i am german) their lack of firepower.

What you probably want to have is a narrow and small map,. Just one direction to go, and that is where the enemy is.
1 front line, 12 vs 12... Sorry dude. But that is not what the game is meant for. It is about tactics, moving into the right spot, regretting false maneuvering, finding a good spot to fight before the enemy does it.
I like that "sneaking" around, scouting for the enemy, feeling the tension of not knowing where they are and what will happen next. That is the truly important part!
Once the enemy is in front of you, you just need to aim and press fire. But we all know that this is not that hard. All decisions are made. If you randomly end up in front of a direwolf, you are dead. If you are a direwolf and you end up in front of 4 heavy mechs, you are dead. There often are not many opportunities left to fall back again and to correct a mistake (i know i am pointing it out a bit to much, but i think you guys know what i mean)
You should probably go and play another game.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users