Competitive Map 1V1 Feedback Request
#1
Posted 07 March 2016 - 01:48 PM
I am looking for feedback on the small team competitive maps that are currently available in Private Matches only. It is imperative to get community feedback, especially the competitive teams, as to what is working and what isn't in terms of these map layouts. I have received feedback from a few of the top competitive teams already and am looking forward to more from everyone who is looking forward to what might be termed as the S-word 7.
Thanks in advance!
#2
Posted 07 March 2016 - 02:37 PM
I would suggest expanding the map and giving it some elevation changes. I've done this here and you can see how the player has a lot more options for kiting or sneaky approaches (I move the camera around the map to show sightlines and how they can be broken). Also with this expansion the map would even be large enough for potentially 3v3. I've also added some noise to the heightmap so that it isn't completely smooth and textured it to give an example of what it could look like when properly flushed out.
#3
Posted 07 March 2016 - 02:51 PM
#4
Posted 07 March 2016 - 03:43 PM
#5
Posted 07 March 2016 - 03:57 PM
Edited by TheSilken, 07 March 2016 - 04:00 PM.
#6
Posted 07 March 2016 - 11:23 PM
another thing the obstacles (those blocks) are to big - when the other guy gives chase you can't fade fast enough behind an obstacle - better to have multiple smaller obstacles (like the columns you have at the south westerns walls)
#7
Posted 08 March 2016 - 03:55 PM
TheSilken, on 07 March 2016 - 03:57 PM, said:
Just want to make one comment on this... we aren't going for a look/feel yet.. this is purely about the gameplay. Just wanted to notate that in your feedback. Rest is cool though.
#8
Posted 10 March 2016 - 04:54 AM
#9
Posted 10 March 2016 - 11:34 AM
You should make a 1v1 map based on the original MW5 trailer. Extreme urban combat.
#10
Posted 10 March 2016 - 01:49 PM
#11
Posted 11 March 2016 - 04:37 PM
Weapon loadouts will obviously determine how the match plays out but that may be something the competitors work out between themselves.
The lower water areas provide a nice trench and lane to move through should the fight run North South and there is a fair bit of cover in those lanes to advance through.
From a West East perspective there is a nice change in the elevation of cover from the large outer rocks, to the smaller ones and then the central hill.
This looks like it will provide some good points to poke from on both sides so there is opportunity for players to exchange a few shots until the centre can be rushed.
There is some opportunity for a long range North South battle in the centre where there is only the hills for cover, a potential lrm trading lane.
Keeping in mind that it is a map designed for 1v1 detection and positioning to get the advantage will be key but this looks like it covers a lot of bases, and allows for several different loadouts, mechs and tactics.
#12
Posted 14 March 2016 - 12:31 PM
My main frustration will be requiring both players to run premium time to launch it. I would think the idea of this is not only for 1v1, but for individual training of new players that may be doing F2P at the moment. Since you gain no CBills or XP, not sure why that was necessary.
#13
Posted 15 March 2016 - 01:38 AM
In my mind the only tweaks I'd look for to this map would be the inclusion of small obstacles to break up the terrain and sightlines (not loads, just a scattering, many of which might not block a full mech, so they're not full cover) and to slightly vary the height of the map. At the minute it's flat with some rises, I think it might be stronger if it featured dips with only a handful of small mounds/hills.
What I'd love to see is a suite of small maps like this (if we want big 1v1 maps we already have them!). My personal request would be for a sort of caldera, like the old Caustic, where players might start on an elevated rim that slopes into a central depression. Again, a few smaller obstacles, maybe some large enough to just provide cover from an elevated enemy. Such a map would translate very well (in my mind) into a free for all map as well.
Hope I've helped somehow! Really do love the inclusion of the tester maps and the suggestion of considering 1v1 and free for all!
Edited by Zimm Kotare, 15 March 2016 - 01:40 AM.
#14
Posted 15 March 2016 - 12:17 PM
this all looks a lot like the innuendo to something great at which i might rejoice beyound belief:
Solaris 7 matches.
let me put it this way: go PGI go go go !
thanks for the public test so far
#15
Posted 20 March 2016 - 09:53 PM
Now, I DID notice something on one of these maps (there are TWO 1v1 maps, right?). The brown pillars? I get no weapon explosion effect when a shot hits one of them. Not sure if that's currently working as intended, or what. Thought I'd mention it.
But DAMN they're cool!
P.S.- I'm now actually considering buying a CN9-YLW, because it could actually be pretty brutal in there. Just sayin'.
Edited by Sister RAbbi, 20 March 2016 - 09:56 PM.
#16
Posted 23 March 2016 - 04:19 AM
#17
Posted 24 March 2016 - 11:05 AM
#18
Posted 26 March 2016 - 12:30 AM
but the biggest thing these maps need is spectator value
would like to see each map have at least one spot where the temperature is very different from the rest of the map
why ?
if done right it would allow for much more dynamic game play from a spectators perspective
a hot geyser , a lava or water fall, a pool of water , steam vents, bright lights ect ect ect
these environmental items need to have significant impact on things like heat/night vision , enough to create interesting play opportunities as players try to take advantage or avoid them , it also gives commentators things to discuss
these are arenas right ?
what would happen if we used say... walls or barricade models instead of trees for some destructible cover ?
i would like to see the pillars moved closer to the center or have another set added
i feel being so far out on the edge they will not add as much depth as you might want
#19
Posted 26 March 2016 - 11:57 AM
"Each of the four maps are designed for limited player counts. Attempting to launch a Private Match with an amount of players that exceeds the maximum possible player count of the chosen map will result in a launch error. Each map is labeled in the Map Selection drop-down according to their intended player counts. "
Therefore they're would be no need for the option for no full teams... So..... WTF?....
#20
Posted 26 March 2016 - 12:32 PM
Heartless Saint, on 26 March 2016 - 11:57 AM, said:
"Each of the four maps are designed for limited player counts. Attempting to launch a Private Match with an amount of players that exceeds the maximum possible player count of the chosen map will result in a launch error. Each map is labeled in the Map Selection drop-down according to their intended player counts. "
Therefore they're would be no need for the option for no full teams... So..... WTF?....
You stopped reading after the first paragraph? Here's the second:
Quote
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users