57 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Tarogato, on 28 February 2016 - 07:52 AM, said:

If you're talking about this community, yes. All of those things. All of them.

I'm just flabbergasted that you don't see the problem with the map design. You think it's okay and the players are at fault. That is just incredibly ignorant and in line with a lot of PGI's own train of thought and hands-off approach. Or maybe you just don't see people rush I9 hill every game. You must be a special snowflake, because in my 10,000 (~500 Alpine) matches I've had maybe 20 matches at most that didn't revolve around I9 hill in Skirmish or Assault.

You're not going to fix a problem by ignoring it. And if you don't see the problem you must be part of the problem.

Considering you agreed with the entirety of my list, are you saying that the game should be dumbed down even more to account for player deficiencies?

And yes, I am a special snowflake.

Edited by Mystere, 28 February 2016 - 08:38 AM.

[Tarogato]

Mystere, on 28 February 2016 - 08:34 AM, said:

Considering you agreed with the entirety of my list, are you saying that the game should be dumbed down even more to account for player deficiencies?

No, I'm saying that map design shouldn't have glaring flaws that lead to players fighting over a postage stamp areas and ignoring the majority of the map.








^ THAT is a problem.

[MeanFacedJohnny]

Tarogato, on 28 February 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

No, I'm saying that map design shouldn't have glaring flaws that lead to players fighting over a postage stamp areas and ignoring the majority of the map.


^ THAT is a problem.

Excellent way to highlight the problem. I would love to get into fights down in the lillypad forest of the bog. It's one of the best looking parts of any map and gets completely ignored for the hill fight.

[Mystere]

Tarogato, on 28 February 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

No, I'm saying that map design shouldn't have glaring flaws that lead to players fighting over a postage stamp areas and ignoring the majority of the map.

<3 heat maps>

^ THAT is a problem.

And therein lies the difference between us, and it's a difference in perspective. You see on the heat maps where people go and kill each other. I, on the other hand, also see where I can set up fights and at the same time exploit the weakness of most players -- lack of patience.

Yes, it takes effort. Yes, many times not everyone listens. But when you do get to set it up, it's usually a win. And that is what gives me satisfaction.

Edited by Mystere, 28 February 2016 - 08:59 AM.

[Tarogato]

MeanFacedJohnny, on 28 February 2016 - 08:51 AM, said:

Excellent way to highlight the problem. I would love to get into fights down in the lillypad forest of the bog. It's one of the best looking parts of any map and gets completely ignored for the hill fight.

I actually am in the process of working on this so I can forward some ideas to PGI: https://www.reddit.c...diting_the_new/

Some screenies of the various options I've been messing with:

[Tarogato]

Mystere, on 28 February 2016 - 08:54 AM, said:

And therein lies the difference between us, and it's a difference in perspective. You see on the heat maps where people go and kill each other. I, on the other hand, also see where I can set up fights and at the same time exploit the weakness of most players -- lack of patience.

Yes, it takes effort. Yes, many times not everyone listens. But when you do get to set it up, it's usually a win. And that is what gives me satisfaction.

You're thinking like a competitive player. Which is funny, because I'm fairly certain you don't play competitively. (I've never seen you on any rosters, what unit are you with btw?) Map features that encourage nascar and mindless deathballing aren't really a problem in competitive play - you see a LOT more variety there. But in the group and solo queue where 90% of the game is played, this is recurring problem that needs to be addressed.

[Bud Crue]

Tarogato,

That is some impressive work with those map designs and improvements. Very cool.

As to the general discussion of tunnels:

I don't really think adding tunnels to an existing map would do much for game play on those specific maps. I would however like a new map that is underground and has an interactive environment. What I am thinking is something along the lines of the level from MW3 (I think it was an escort mission maybe?) wherein there were columns that could be destroyed (by accident or purposefully) that resulted in parts collapsing on adjacent mechs. This sort of thing could feel really claustrophobic and add an interesting (I think) feel if not a dynamic.

The tunnel/cavern with the river/waterfall in old forest colony had that sort of feel (minus the interactive environment). Something like that on a grand scale could have some very cool game play possibilities (stalactites and stalagmites to hide behind and interfere with missiles, holes to the surface providing limited areas of bright lighting), etc. Lots of possibilities for map design and game play potential with an underground theme.

[Mystere]

Tarogato, on 28 February 2016 - 09:53 AM, said:

You're thinking like a competitive player. Which is funny, because I'm fairly certain you don't play competitively. (I've never seen you on any rosters, what unit are you with btw?) Map features that encourage nascar and mindless deathballing aren't really a problem in competitive play - you see a LOT more variety there. But in the group and solo queue where 90% of the game is played, this is recurring problem that needs to be addressed.

It's a state of mind. And MWO really has nothing in terms of real "competition" (i.e. real tournaments with real prizes and real recognition). It's not even a blip in the real competitive scene.

LOL!

[MeanFacedJohnny]

Tarogato, on 28 February 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

I actually am in the process of working on this so I can forward some ideas to PGI: https://www.reddit.c...diting_the_new/

Some screenies of the various options I've been messing with:

I would love for the bog to be like this. Nice work.

[Tarogato]

Bud Crue, on 28 February 2016 - 10:10 AM, said:

Tarogato,

That is some impressive work with those map designs and improvements. Very cool.

As to the general discussion of tunnels:

I don't really think adding tunnels to an existing map would do much for game play on those specific maps. I would however like a new map that is underground and has an interactive environment. What I am thinking is something along the lines of the level from MW3 (I think it was an escort mission maybe?) wherein there were columns that could be destroyed (by accident or purposefully) that resulted in parts collapsing on adjacent mechs. This sort of thing could feel really claustrophobic and add an interesting (I think) feel if not a dynamic.

The tunnel/cavern with the river/waterfall in old forest colony had that sort of feel (minus the interactive environment). Something like that on a grand scale could have some very cool game play possibilities (stalactites and stalagmites to hide behind and interfere with missiles, holes to the surface providing limited areas of bright lighting), etc. Lots of possibilities for map design and game play potential with an underground theme.

There's actually some official PGI concept art for a map that features underground...

[Bud Crue]

Tarogato, on 28 February 2016 - 10:39 AM, said:

There's actually some official PGI concept art for a map that features underground...

Wow! That is to an even greater scale than I had in mind.

Hey PGI, I've thrown a ton of money at you, and you given me some lovely mechs in return. Now, how much more do you need to make that map a reality? I'll start a fund.

[Volthorne]

Tarogato, on 28 February 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

I actually am in the process of working on this so I can forward some ideas to PGI: https://www.reddit.c...diting_the_new/

Some screenies of the various options I've been messing with:

I would love to try my hand at something similar. Except on Alpine/Terra Therma. What do you use to do that?

[wanderer]

Mystere, on 28 February 2016 - 06:00 AM, said:

I've said it before and I will say it again, Alpine Peaks is a patience game.

Terra Therma, for that matter.

There's literally nothing forcing you to attack a clearly superior position other than PUG impatience.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

I actually suggested to Paul one time that running a tunnel network throughout Canyon Network would make that map more accessible.

His response was "I don't want to completely negate LRMs."

[Novakaine]

I can see after pgi puts a tunnel on some map.
"Aw der tunnels suck all they ever do is pile up at the exit and shoot us."
"It's called a choke point ya putz."
"Der der those choke points are op nerf em."

[Mystere]

Novakaine, on 28 February 2016 - 03:52 PM, said:

I can see after pgi puts a tunnel on some map.
"Aw der tunnels suck all they ever do is pile up at the exit and shoot us."
"It's called a choke point ya putz."
"Der der those choke points are op nerf em."

"Hurr! Durr! Drible! Drible! Wut's a choke point?"

[Tarogato]

Volthorne, on 28 February 2016 - 03:25 PM, said:

I would love to try my hand at something similar. Except on Alpine/Terra Therma. What do you use to do that?

I create the heightmaps by hand in GIMP (or Photoshop) and import them to CrySDK. Unfortunately, doing a map like Alpine would be nigh impossible, because we plebians don't have access to PGIs original heightmaps and I haven't discovered a way to extract them from the game files. So while a map like Bog is easy to copy because it has hard edges and flat surfaces, doing Alpine and Terra Therma would take more work. I've been playing around with the new private lobby TestMaps though, since they are simple.

[Chuck Jager]

Design is about compromises, because people are predictable while also being different.
Many times extra features turn into extra problems. In many of the maps we have it is the times we have these features that the other teams knows that they are a NOOB trap. The more features the harder it is to balance drop locations and pathways without turning them into exact mirrors. CW is a prime example. We have an decent balance in tech but because of the factions and lack of MM it is still easy to exploit the map. The player base requested a campaign that had these features, but they are also the first to abuse it. (not syaing the issue is out of PGIs hands)

Fighting is about killing the enemy quickly. In solo Q all you need is folks to advance together into the enemy. Usually the loosing side is the one with the most virgin nerds who have never been in a real fight sitting in the back plinking away or wearing tight jeans and playing "unique" crap builds. All you need to do is see a weakness and hurt them as a group. If folks have not played together it is always best to use the most simple plan (their are exceptions and oddball lucky wins).

In solo Q when 2 or more people start talking about firing lines or defending an area, I am pretty sure we are on the losing side.