8 replies to this topic

[Mad Dog Morgan]

The reworked maps from early beta have an incredibly large amount of unused or wasted space, leading to less focused engagements.

The map I've been analyzing most lately is Frozen City. The wastes on the back edges of the map, the I line and the 9/8 lines are a huge waste of space.

My other criticism of the map is that there are very limited avenues of approach for engagement for mechs. Huge sight lines have basically turned the map from a brawler's paradise to a sniper's haven, leading to peek-a-boo sniping that doesn't allow for other styles of play thanks to the massive sight lines.

What I propose, is that there be multiple obstructions in the 'valley' or 'depression' to the lines of sight, at least enough to mask movement from one side to the other. This is why the new Frozen City isn't as good as it could be.

The River City rework actually works because there's enough LoS obstruction to make going in the water a tactical choice. This is not the case for Frozen City.

Another simpler proposition is starting the teams at either end of the valley instead of the opposing cities, in the grids C3, C4, and C5, and for the opposite team, G3, G4, and G5. The present spawns simply don't allow for other styles of play aside from long-range.

More terrain features should also be in the D4 quadrant. If there were avenues for movement in the depression itself, the snipers would still be able to fire over the top of it, but may not be able to all fire down into the depression.

Since maps are generally out of one group's control, brawling styles of play are excluded from being viable on this map. At least in Polar Highlands, the avenues of approach are shielded because the depressions and hills are just high enough to conceal movement for all but the tallest of mechs.

Edited by Vaskadar, 22 July 2016 - 12:04 PM.

[Yellonet]

Everybody knows this, even PGI. I'm just waiting for randomized spawns and objectives, that would solve many problems in the game.

[ScarecrowES]

Designs maps large enough to support mech combat on a massive scale with terrain to support multiple playstyles. Designs game modes with 4 flavors of skirmish for small teams and emphasis on nothing but deathballing.

Yup, sounds about right.

[Elizander]

Yellonet, on 22 July 2016 - 12:06 PM, said:

Everybody knows this, even PGI. I'm just waiting for randomized spawns and objectives, that would solve many problems in the game.

Even if it's not totally random, they can set several spawn configurations (and randomly select which 'set' to use per drop) to alter when and where player engage on the map. This can make some maps seem like 2 or 3 maps with how different the experience can be.

Edited by Elizander, 22 July 2016 - 12:13 PM.

[Yellonet]

Elizander, on 22 July 2016 - 12:12 PM, said:

Even if it's not totally random, they can set several spawn configurations (and randomly select which 'set' to use per drop) to alter when and where player engage on the map. This can make some maps seem like 2 or 3 maps with how different the experience can be.

Yeah, complete randomness would not work, but I envision something like what you describe, randomness with a set of rules to make lances not spawn too close to each other and so on.

This:


would play quite differently from this:



A key point though is that you should never know where the enemy has spawned.

Edited by Yellonet, 22 July 2016 - 12:59 PM.

[cazidin]

Yellonet, on 22 July 2016 - 12:56 PM, said:

Yeah, complete randomness would not work, but I envision something like what you describe, randomness with a set of rules to make lances not spawn too close to each other and so on.

This:


would play quite differently from this:



A key point though is that you should never know where the enemy has spawned.

In the second scenario it would appear that red has a distinct advantage over green, being closer to their base with two units AND close to our base, with only one unit defending the other two... off in the corners. Did they talk back to the teacher?

[Aiden Skye]

This is a player problem more than a map problem. Fastest way to earn Cbills and not have to worry about pesky things like making new tactical decisions, scouting, baiting, etc, is to just run to the middle of the map where you will most likely meet the enemy cuz they are probably thinking the same way. It doesn't matter how large the maps are players are always going to run to the middle of the map.

[process]

Multiple spawn and objective variations would immediately solve a lot of the large maps issues. As it stands, I'd say 90% of all matches happen in the same 6-9 squares, regardless of map size.

I think PGI should also try the Mechwarrior 3 approach, basically segmenting these large maps into smaller arenas.

Edited by process, 22 July 2016 - 03:25 PM.

[Moonlight Grimoire]

We already have random objective points thanks to Scout Mode in CW, so they have shown that they can do this already. Throw in random spawns and set up random objectives or at very least have objectives be situated in drastically different locations than currently to cause each mode to at least be different. I would still prefer objectives and spawns being pseudo random, more or less 10-12 different possible locations on the larger maps, and of course less on smaller ones that just can support it.

Honestly having randomized locations is like rolling off on deployment, objectives, and terrain (or in BT's case more often than not, mapsheet) so you mix things up, that way Forest Colony isn't a fight over the same area due to it is where people will naturally bump into the other team proceeding to the next objective or the primary objective. Mixing things up will make people have to learn instead of just operate off of muscle memory for the first minute of the game.