21 replies to this topic

[HellJumper]

Hello

we are getting a couple of remakes of the old maps but not a new one..so ok..no worries.. i have three suggestions that imo will solve the whole map part for the non FW player base (which is the bigger chunk of the two as well right?)

1.Bring old maps back as well along with the remakes
2.Bring the FW maps as well.
3.Remove the voting for map and put everything in rotation. (i dont know if voting is still there as i havent played the game in some time now)

This for some time (maybe six months) will give them time to make maybe one new map for FW and one for QP and reduce the more maps cry for the forums...

[El Bandito]

I kinda like map voting.

[HellJumper]

El Bandito, on 11 August 2016 - 01:06 AM, said:

I kinda like map voting.

some like it..some dont.... but with map voting we are reduced to less maps i think...

[El Bandito]

HellJumper, on 11 August 2016 - 01:09 AM, said:

some like it..some dont.... but with map voting we are reduced to less maps i think...

Less map selection, yes, but more maps that I actually enjoy playing. That's the difference for me.

[HellJumper]

El Bandito, on 11 August 2016 - 01:15 AM, said:

Less map selection, yes, but more maps that I actually enjoy playing. That's the difference for me.

kills the diversity i think...limited same maps mean same weapon loadout and same mechs..thats why dont like the voting

[Alistair Winter]

I would not want this.

[dervishx5]

Make every map Canyon Network.

There, now you cut out the pointless waste of time between launching quickplay and the inevitable selection.

[HellJumper]

Alistair Winter, on 11 August 2016 - 01:23 AM, said:

I would not want this.

any particular reason? unless we are all happy with the maps we have now

[El Bandito]

HellJumper, on 11 August 2016 - 01:19 AM, said:

kills the diversity i think...limited same maps mean same weapon loadout and same mechs..thats why dont like the voting

I do not know who plays the same weapon load outs and same mechs, but you are too naive to think that bringing back old maps will make people change their mechs and builds. As for me, I play whatever mech and build I fancy at the time, preferably on maps I like.

Edited by El Bandito, 11 August 2016 - 02:28 AM.

[kesmai]

Yes to bring back the old maps.
No to remove voting.
Instead of removing the vote they should bring back the old maps and expand the vote to 5 or 6 maps.

Edited by kesmai, 11 August 2016 - 01:38 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

HellJumper, on 11 August 2016 - 01:27 AM, said:

any particular reason? unless we are all happy with the maps we have now

I don't want 12v12 on the old maps, and the FP maps are atrocious.

[Davers]

The old maps are gone.
Taking away map voting will cause more grief than it will fix.
FP maps would be pretty terrible for pug play in QP game modes.

[HellJumper]

then we will be stuck with what we have no and the way pgi has its attention on map making we all know where its going...

[Mechwarrior1441491]

map voting isn't going anywhere.

[Moonlight Grimoire]

Map rotation had the curse of no way of getting out of a rut if you get timed just right so you keep getting sent to say Tourmaline or Alpine and you dislike those maps. Map Voting allows you to break out of a pattern, eventually. I honestly would rather not bring back some of the old maps due to they are horribly drab or are far too small for 12v12 and were made for 8v8. We need more maps, yes, we do, but, maps aren't new shinnies for players to work towards or buy which is what keeps the game afloat for newer players. Older players it is less about what to play with and more of where to play and how to play. Sometimes something new comes out that draws attention like the Unseens did, like the Kodiak did, but, other times it doesn't do anything for us who already have plenty of mechs we like to play and aren't really looking for just something new to play, maybe something specific. Hence hype for if ever x IS/Clan mech shows up, x being personal preference threads showing up on the forum and going for quite a while.

Short of it is, players who already have their toys and have played to death on the old play mats with the old rules are burnt out and want a new way to engage with their stuff, sadly, this doesn't turn out money for PGI unless you wanted map-packs and further segregate the player base into different pools which if PGI thought it could do they would have.

[jss78]

I guess people's attitude towards voting depends on what they like vs. the majority.

By and large I agree with what people vote for, so I like the system. I haven't played Mordor for probably 2 months now, and I still don't miss that map.

My only peeve is that I actually like Caustic quite a lot, and it only rarely wins the vote.

FW maps -- I don't think these are at all suitable for the QP game modes. They even suck in FW.

Edited by jss78, 12 August 2016 - 02:46 AM.

[Kirkland Langue]

If it really does cost PGI $250,000 per map - then they need to ask the community to submit maps, and appoint a few community volunteers to be the first line of quality control. (I suspect PGI lied about the costs, simply so they could pocket the extra $200,000 for use on hookers and *******)

Even if they accidentally allow in some unbalanced maps - they could just remove those maps on the fly. It shouldn't be that hard to give it a 0% chance of appearing in the vote since they already give unequal chances for maps to appear.

PGI should be able to add maps, on a regular basis, for almost free. And then they can use their own internal staff just to touch up community maps that they like, but feel need tweaking.

Edited by Kirkland Langue, 12 August 2016 - 06:17 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Kirkland Langue, on 12 August 2016 - 06:16 AM, said:

If it really does cost PGI $250,000 per map - then they need to ask the community to submit maps, and appoint a few community volunteers to be the first line of quality control. (I suspect PGI lied about the costs, simply so they could pocket the extra $200,000 for use on hookers and *******)

Even if they accidentally allow in some unbalanced maps - they could just remove those maps on the fly. It shouldn't be that hard to give it a 0% chance of appearing in the vote since they already give unequal chances for maps to appear.

PGI should be able to add maps, on a regular basis, for almost free. And then they can use their own internal staff just to touch up community maps that they like, but feel need tweaking.

I wouldn't be so speculative of cost anymore. If you watch the Q&A's with Jordan and Mitch on battletech, they talk quite a bit about budgets. So I am gonna guess the cost are real.

[HellJumper]

BLOOD WOLF, on 12 August 2016 - 06:21 AM, said:

I wouldn't be so speculative of cost anymore. If you watch the Q&A's with Jordan and Mitch on battletech, they talk quite a bit about budgets. So I am gonna guess the cost are real.

that is sad to know

[Deathlike]

dervishx5, on 11 August 2016 - 01:26 AM, said:

Make every map Canyon Network.

There, now you cut out the pointless waste of time between launching quickplay and the inevitable selection.

GTFO.