The idea was to create "phases" in a battle representing some continuum from start to finish. It's a good idea if done correctly with the right maps. You could indeed have maps in play for phases or for geographic type. The former might, for example, represent cracking the planet's heavy defenses, establish base of operation, advance through hinterland, close on objective, take objective. Alternately, if there was an actual planet map, maps could rotate based on ~where~ the fight is happening - wilderness, city, fortress, coastline. But...the maps have a small problem while the implementation has big ones.
1) The QP maps were never created with a mind that they portray some portion of a larger campaign. The Invasion maps do kinda hit the mark for cracking a planet. Why are they at the end? Shouldn't they come first? Break heavy defenses before further ops can be undertaken? Unfortunately, the QP maps just don't really line up convincingly with any battle phase.
2) Releasing a phased campaign while backing away from the planets doesn't make much sense. PGI zoomed out from planets, created an abstract, 8 planet tug-o-war. But phased or geographically selected maps need to be ~tied~ to something. A simple bar doesn't have phases or geography. As the OP says, we have a design which on a stagnant battlefield ends up stuck in one mode.
For what it's worth, in this poll, 44% favor some kind of mixing-it-up, 25% oppose and remaining are undecided/abstaining.
https://mwomercs.com...poll-version-2/
Edited by BearFlag, 04 January 2017 - 07:02 PM.