67 replies to this topic

[Sjorpha]

Yeah, new maps and get rid of map voting, selection should be random so you see all the maps equally often.

Didn't they say more than a year ago that they had hired two new map designers? So far those seem to have produced exactly nothing...

[MagicIndex]

Illuminous Owl, on 06 August 2017 - 02:11 PM, said:

We actually got negative maps. I've been playing this game for over 1200 hours, and in that time they took the great original Frozen City and ruined it. Nice.

God Bless PGI they whiped-out that old crap as Frozen City. I hope River City face the same fate. Only thing that was don wrong... Bring Back Please OLD Forest Colony, new one is rubbish.

About new maps... I hpe we'll get something like this...

[lEAKYcUBe]

MagicIndex, on 07 August 2017 - 06:36 AM, said:

God Bless PGI they whiped-out that old crap as Frozen City. I hope River City face the same fate. Only thing that was don wrong... Bring Back Please OLD Forest Colony, new one is rubbish.

About new maps... I hpe we'll get something like this...

Its the 31st century not 1985.....

[QuantumButler]

It's not like the new maps would be anywhere near as good as the old ones they took out, like classic frozen city or forest colony.

They'll just be more lrmfests with very little cover and haze filters all over the place so you have a hard time seeing.

[Bigbacon]

there is no need for new maps when the vote system is in place. you'll still just see the same map over and over again.

I am also for removing the map vote but leave the mode vote. we need more terra therma so everyone can cry about it because they don't understand heat management and can't laser vomit to their hearts desire

Edited by Bigbacon, 07 August 2017 - 07:48 AM.

[WarHippy]

Papaspud, on 06 August 2017 - 02:04 PM, said:

The game is so stale right now= either new maps or let this thing die. I know there are a million other posts about the same thing, maybe if we can get 20-30 people posting everyday and filling the forums they might notice. I am ready to cancel my CWE order I am so bored playing the same maps, all the new toys can't make up for the same old same old game play on the same maps- which in reality there are about only 4-5 that get picked. I really want to continue supporting this game, but DAAAAMN it has gotten stale.

just my opinion........

You are asking for the wrong thing. you need to be asking for them to remove voting and just make it random at the very least for maps. Until voting is gone new maps are a waste of time and resources because even if a new map becomes a community favorite after its introduction(which has not happened in a long time) it will just be bumping one of the current 3-4 maps that always get voted on and we will be no better off. The staleness will persist until we lose the power to be repetitive through the vote.

[Helsbane]

lEAKYcUBe, on 07 August 2017 - 06:47 AM, said:

Its the 31st century not 1985.....

So every map has to look high tech? Crimson and RC both have streets and ground vehicles everywhere, stop signs, boats, buildings that have a distinct lack of floating in the air... Just because a setting looks rural that doesn't indicate its tech level inside the homes.

Someone, please help 'cUBe out here and photoshop a few solar panels on those rooftops, you know, for immersion....

Edited by Helsbane, 07 August 2017 - 11:32 AM.

[Its my first day]

I'm pretty new, and I'd like to see more maps, I'm already getting tired of some of them. I like the idea of putting the old maps in the rotation, and releasing a map maker. Releasing a map maker would also build some goodwill with the community.

As far as some maps getting over played, maybe make it an up or down vote, so you can vote for a map, or against one, or maybe be make it so you're able to do both-vote against one you don't like and vote for one.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

lEAKYcUBe, on 07 August 2017 - 06:47 AM, said:

Its the 31st century not 1985.....

and the most Worlds in BT more like the 18 Century , and never seeing Battlemechs , only Industrial Mechs and Tanks ..thats not Star wars or Star trek..no many High Tech worlds, Aliens ,Warpholes,Planetdestroyers and other Mainstream SF Crap

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 07 August 2017 - 08:02 PM.

[Accused]

A single new map is hard to make and take hundreds of thousands of dollars which is currently funding MW5. I mean maybe when MW5 is released "soon" (liek this gam was amirite guise) they can take all that sweet money and make a space shooting sim. Then maybe just before the heat death of the universe we might possibly be able to get to see a new map. Maybe.

[DaMuchi]

Viktor Drake, on 06 August 2017 - 05:20 PM, said:

But isn't that how change is enacted? I mean if people don't speak up about something then now one knows there is an issue. Also if only one or two speak up, then it is dismissed as nothing of importance but if the entire community speaks up, it becomes something they need to address.

Take the premium time removal from the mech packs. If the community hadn't spoke up and if there hadn't been 100 threads about it, we would still not have premium time in our mech packs.

So what you call disruptive is a mechanism for change more often than not. Therefore I don't think there is a problem with with there being a dozen threads about a topic that has the community polarized and requesting changes.

Honestly, this is where I think mods generally go wrong, they mistake a cry for change as something disruptive and an action that much be shut down which in turn is usually viewed by the community as censorship. This of course leads to even more negativity from those who feel censored which now starts to lead to real disruption as people begin to feel like their opinions are being suppressed.

Being a mod is a tough job with alot of slippery slopes. I know it isn't a job I would want. Then again I probably wouldn't be offered it either hehe.

People here want to talk and read about stuff other than new maps. So spamming the forums with the same topic IS disruptve. Grow up, the world dosent revolve around you and what you want.

[Vyx]

I think what might breathe new life into the existing maps, with very little effort, might be this:

0) Map chosen, game starts, everyone ready
1) Each map has 6 pre-defined spawn points for each side. These are known, designer-placed, defensible locations: A-F
2) Dropship randomly drops each team's Alpha lance at a random spawn point for their respective side
3) 30-45 seconds later dropship drops each team's Bravo lance at a random spawn point for their respective side
4) 30-45 seconds later dropship drops each team's Charlie lance at a random spawn point for their respective side

This would make each engagement somewhat more dynamic; there would be an element of excitement when you landed in an advantageous dropzone, or gritty determination if you landed in a "hot" or dangerous one. You would see the dropships carrying your arriving allies as well as the enemy's. You could strategize accordingly.

It might be that during a skirmish "reinforcements" drop in nearby, tipping the balance heroically.

Either way, it would promote lance coordination as well as team coordination. And it would make the same, familiar maps play differently every time.

Very little would be needed to make this happen: designers choose 6 good dropzones per side for each map, and the staggered drop of the lances would need to be coded.

Thoughts?

Edited by Vyx, 07 August 2017 - 08:28 PM.

[Christophe Ivanov]

I have made maps for IL2. If it's anything like that, it's NOT HARD. It does take time yes, Hard NO...unless the software is some ungloly super duper hard to use map maker. IL2 actually gave you the very same tools they used to create the maps. I spent about 3 to 4 months creating a nice decent sized island map I called Atlantis. Had a Volcano, mountains cities, rivers, lakes, etc. Plus the all important air and naval bases too. Totally fun and it increased the immersion and game play options for maps. Bored? Hell no! Created my own skins for the airplanes and I could go on and on.

PGI needs to loosen up and let the fan base HELP them keep Mechwarrior alive by not controlling everything and let the fan base help out. That way, they can concentrate on new content such as Mech and weapons and TRUE balancing based on historical lore .

my 2 C bills worth.

[ocular tb]

Not sure why they don't just do a spawn change every quarter or so. Only need a few preset spawn configurations for each mode and just rotate them around every few months just to break up the monotony. Could even change which lance spawns where on occasion too. This of course isn't a replacement for new maps but it would be nice to change the spawns on occasion.

[Khobai]

and whos gonna pay for all these new maps?

the mechpacks that arnt selling nearly as well as they used to?

[Bluttrunken]

CS players were on Dust for what seems an eternity. Give me 3 great maps and 1 decent game mode over 300 average maps and 100 superfluous game modes any day.

I'd rather see PGI optimizing the gameplay, flow and geography of existing maps instead of creating new ones.

Edited by Bluttrunken, 07 August 2017 - 09:01 PM.

[Carl Vickers]

Khobai, on 07 August 2017 - 08:57 PM, said:

and whos gonna pay for all these new maps?

the mechpacks that arnt selling nearly as well as they used to?

Short sighted view, more people will buy mech packs for more development, i.e maps

Edited by Carl Vickers, 07 August 2017 - 09:02 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Short sighted view, more people will by mech packs for more development, i.e maps

what development? there hasnt been a new map since january 2017. and does polar highlands even count as a map? probably not...

people arnt going to buy mech packs for development that doesnt exist

and pgi isnt going to put any considerable development time into a game thats near the end of its dev cycle and already in a state of perpetual decline.

PGI needs to roll out MW5 to survive at this point. MWO cant be saved right now. If MW5 does extremely well maybe then PGI can port MWO over to a different engine and try to save it.

Edited by Khobai, 07 August 2017 - 09:15 PM.

[Carl Vickers]

Khobai, on 07 August 2017 - 09:03 PM, said:

what development? there hasnt been a new map since january 2017. and does polar highlands even count as a map? probably not...

people arnt going to buy mech packs for development that doesnt exist

and pgi isnt going to put any considerable development time into a game thats near the end of its dev cycle and already in a state of perpetual decline.

PGI needs to roll out MW5 to survive at this point. MWO cant be saved right now. If MW5 does extremely well maybe then PGI can port MWO over to a different engine and try to save it.

Not disagreeing with you, just pointing out the short sighted view PGI has taken.

Tis a bit of chicken/egg scenario though. If PGI had spent money on maps, people would have been happier and still buying mech packs. Instead, people got bored and looked at other games.

[Khobai]

Quote

Tis a bit of chicken/egg scenario though. If PGI had spent money on maps, people would have been happier and still buying mech packs. Instead, people got bored and looked at other games.

The real question is why supply caches arnt monetized properly.

1) they should give out way more supply cache than 1 per game
2) supply caches should have unique cosmetic items, champion mechs, hero mechs, etc... and actual decent rewards not just garbage you can buy with cbills anyway
3) there should be a pity point system like hearthstone so youre guaranteed to get a rare reward after opening X supply caches

They could probably make more money off supply caches than mechpacks if they did it right.I mean thats such an obvious revenue stream thats been completely ignored

PGI needs to turn supply caches into a revenue stream.

then they need to do some kindve mechpack kickstarter where theyll promise to make X new maps/add 1-2 new gamemodes/fix CW if they sell Y number of mechpacks.

and if MW5 does well maybe we can get MWO2 ported over to unreal engine

Edited by Khobai, 07 August 2017 - 09:35 PM.