105 replies to this topic

[evilauthor]

Lucky Noob, on 22 May 2018 - 01:46 AM, said:

It coud be so easy, give the Comunity the Tools and they will create Tons of Maps.

i mean Starcraft does it, Skyrim does it, Mechwarrior 5 does it, All Power to the Modders.

GTA Online does it.

Do you have any idea how effing long it takes to download a GTA map??? Long enough that I quit playing GTA Online because people kept leaving/quitting/disconnecting in the middle of the load screen, resulting in the map not even being played and all that loading time getting wasted.

If PGI allowed custom maps to be played, I'm pretty sure load times will be slowed to a crawl (even slower than they are now) because everyone would have to download a new map every time they start a match.

[Haipyng]

As much as I like the idea of third party development of Maps, there are roadblocks:

MWO is centrally hosted, so maps would need to be vetted by PGI. It could also open them up to IP liability since they didn't develop the map in the first place. I think all of the other games mentioned do private servers to get around that.

They would need to develop the map tools to allow for third party map making.

Their particular F2P model doesn't really allow for private servers requiring base control (hosting) of the servers.

and lastly, we would end up with maps with Mechs wearing party hats and shooting bubbles. (shudder)

[Tom Sawyer]

Sigh, said it before:

TEST SERVER. USE IT. Allow us rabid fans to police our own. Only the top voted map each month gets pushed to PGI to be vetted or reviewed.

Within 6 months TOPS the best map makers will become noted while those who produce monkey turds will be known for it.

But hey its PGI, lets all go buy a mech pack.

[50 50]

Tom Sawyer, on 22 May 2018 - 10:34 AM, said:

TEST SERVER. USE IT. Allow us rabid fans to police our own. Only the top voted map each month gets pushed to PGI to be vetted or reviewed.

Or have a function in the private lobby.
After all, you only use that area when playing by invite so it's not a stretch to ask those you are inviting to download a particular map.
Just need an option in there to use 'Custom Map' which then looks at a particular folder for the files.
Skirmish only.

That sort of thing engages the community in another way and would certainly be good for the game.
Whether they get moved into the regular rotation as 'approved maps' is another question but I would think this could be something worthy of announcing at the MechCon each year and make a bit of an event of it.
Hell, make it part of the world cup finals.

However, just getting 2 or 3 PGI created maps a year would be wonderful.
Be they brand new unique map designs with new tile sets.....
Or existing maps redone and tweaked a little for existing tile sets.

[Stonefalcon]

TheArisen, on 20 May 2018 - 07:01 PM, said:

I really like this farmland concept.
https://mwomercs.com...yyid-farmlands/

I'm also in favor of an Urban ruins type map.

That map looks sick, though to deal with the cover thing maybe throw around some farm equipment, groves of trees and add some larger rolling hills.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Nothing like a bunch of grain silos and huge barns that mechs could lay in wait. We don't have enough buildings that people can set up ambushes in.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Maps here a Theme since the Open Beta and we have many Maps ideas here in all the Years ...half ready Maps from Mappers with long Years of Experience here (many makes Maps since MW4)...PGI has nothing interest to it ..Russ say here wise the best what good is for the Players and MWO is the best Mechwarrior experience from all games ...cheers

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 22 May 2018 - 08:13 PM.

[Ensaine]

Haipyng, on 21 May 2018 - 06:29 AM, said:

More maps would be awesome, but...

• They are very labor intensive to make. If it bombs, it's wasted effort for the programmers.
  
• They are not currently monetized (they don't make PGI money directly, unlike Mechs)

I used to map for Quake, Counter Strike, and Unreal Tournament.....

Granted, maps now are richer, more high end textures, and I'm sure the mapping tools are way more complex......

That said: we'd have MANY, MANY maps if the community was allowed to make maps, and submit them for review and inclusion. Worked for so many games in the past, I'm not even going to try to list them.

Why on earth, has PGI shot that idea down, time, and time again, used to baffle me, but after so much time, I can't help but feel the pride level over there in VanC is the real blockage to community mapping.

I mean, really, what can it hurt, besides pride, to have maps submitted, tested, shot back for corrections, re-submitted, etc.

All that needs be done to the client, is allow Testing Grounds ONLY custom map loading for testing prior to submission......, or tweak client to run Testing Grounds ONLY locally.

It's 2018, and it's really silly at this point. This game should get a new map AT LEAST every quarter, if not more......

[PAYWALL]

Farmlands is good, but because it will be a bit like polar i would prefer another vertically map like rubellite oasis with moderate heat, so that it gets more votes. It could be the long wanted "mechfactory" or "caves" map, like the two in solaris mode, but just bigger and fitted for QP and FW. They also could reuse the assets, because they don't have much people working at MWO i guess. Maps, maps, maps! Give them to us!

[Mechwarrior1441491]

There is nothing wrong with Polar. It is one of if not the best map PGI have made to truly replicate a fluid battle without theme park lanes and central terrain features which dominate the flow of battle. People complain to high heaven about theme park lanes and when they give a truly open battlefield, people say it sucks. This isn't something to be critical of. It is a PERFECT tank simulator map. You can avoid LRMS if you want and if it's skirmish there are plenty of building compounds to hunker down in and lots of trenches. People choose to run at each other. The players are to blame how the map is played, not PGI.

Give us another polar. A nice green lush farm region with processing plants, silos big enough for mechs, a small spaceport to get the goods out. Give us ditches and rolling hills. Would make a great new map to give a great new mode "Smash & Grab". Raiding the supply depots for supplies and goods or destroying them to deny the enemy for extra reward. Defender gets more if they aren't destroyed. Attacker more if they are. It could even be a mode put on top of existing modes as a secondary objective.


They could even start padding their map count by changing existing maps slightly. Taking buildings out, adding buildings and other features in so you aren't truly aware what they map will be like until you start running around it. If they can't give us randomly generated maps this is the closest they can get.

Edited by Mechwarrior1441491, 23 May 2018 - 07:37 AM.

[Simbacca]

What I have suggested before, each map has 3 different sets of spawn locations (team location and depending on map base and resource points) which are randomly chosen. Different spawn locations should actually force the fight into portion of maps which effectively go unused. Thus this helps to increase replay value of existing maps. The old Forest Colony map for example had two different spawn locations for the resource points - so the coding for this already exists...

[generalazure]

Can I just have the old forest colony and frozen city maps back?

[Angel of Annihilation]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 20 May 2018 - 08:41 PM, said:

you can not change the assets with a handfull click . You must place all new changed Assets placed from hand like by a brand new map ...Making a New map its the same time as changing a Baseterrain with other Textures and Assets.UE 4 can make generic Maps , by assets (seeing HBS/Paradox BT or No Mans Sky) the problem thats many generic placed Single Objects (trees ...Lamps) not correct placed , flowing a Little in the sky or is half in the ground..by a Strategical game not really a problem ..by a FPS its looks terrible.

by Mapping you create with hand or Generic a Terrainmesh , now you can fill the full map with one texture (whats looks Terrible) or painted the Textures ( most up to 10 different detailed Textures) with Handbrush (what bring eyecatched natural Look)...now placing the Assets and you can placing the Vegetation with self made Layers, or thats you can painted with a Handbrush (treegroups ...grass ) or Handcrafted for eyecandy beauty look...for ideas the best try and use the cry Engine SDK (or UE4 SDK) to understand whats map making and the procedre to use the tools

Your missing the point though. When you have a map like Solaris, you have to hand craft all the assets on the map. The buildings are new, the elevated highways are new, the textures used by the buildings are new, everything is new and must be created before you start placing them on the map.

However, the trees from Forest Colony aren't new, they exist so all you have to do is plop them down on a map. Same goes for the rocks and shrubs, even the ground textures. All you have to do is create the base map than rearrange these assets all around that map and BLAMO, you have a new map.

I realize it is not that easy but using these existing 3-D assets to create new map would have to cut the time to create a new map in half or maybe even more as compared to the time it took them to implement Rubillite or Solaris. I don't know about the rest of the people other there but I would much rather have 4 new maps using existing assets than just 2 maps no matter how pretty or unique they look. Also using existing Assets is something that PGI can do cheaply with alot less resources invested so is something that they should be able to pull off even when it is all hands on deck designing MW5. I mean I don't really want to wait another year before we see another map. I want to see new maps every 2-3 months.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Simbacca, on 23 May 2018 - 07:57 AM, said:

What I have suggested before, each map has 3 different sets of spawn locations (team location and depending on map base and resource points) which are randomly chosen. Different spawn locations should actually force the fight into portion of maps which effectively go unused. Thus this helps to increase replay value of existing maps. The old Forest Colony map for example had two different spawn locations for the resource points - so the coding for this already exists...

This is a good idea as well.

I say each map needs three different versions of the map using existing resources to streamline the process, then give each several different random spawn locations to mix things up even further. Oh and get rid of map voting.

That would improve this game 100x more than adding an over engineered, 1 vs 1 dueling mode called Solaris.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Viktor Drake, on 23 May 2018 - 04:18 PM, said:

Your missing the point though. When you have a map like Solaris, you have to hand craft all the assets on the map. The buildings are new, the elevated highways are new, the textures used by the buildings are new, everything is new and must be created before you start placing them on the map.

However, the trees from Forest Colony aren't new, they exist so all you have to do is plop them down on a map. Same goes for the rocks and shrubs, even the ground textures. All you have to do is create the base map than rearrange these assets all around that map and BLAMO, you have a new map.

I realize it is not that easy but using these existing 3-D assets to create new map would have to cut the time to create a new map in half or maybe even more as compared to the time it took them to implement Rubillite or Solaris. I don't know about the rest of the people other there but I would much rather have 4 new maps using existing assets than just 2 maps no matter how pretty or unique they look. Also using existing Assets is something that PGI can do cheaply with alot less resources invested so is something that they should be able to pull off even when it is all hands on deck designing MW5. I mean I don't really want to wait another year before we see another map. I want to see new maps every 2-3 months.

yes the modelling and texturing from new Models make a Lot Time and using old assets spare a Lot Time. other side the most of the Assets in Solaris only effects thats you can very fast making a new billboard or a new texture is not a big hassle for simple effects or simply textured buildings, and the buildings in Solaris are not very detailed.By the elevating Highways only the railways new (and not very good modelled) and many Models long never used (or only in Background)in the library with new Textures

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 23 May 2018 - 08:15 PM.

[50 50]

Simbacca, on 23 May 2018 - 07:57 AM, said:

What I have suggested before, each map has 3 different sets of spawn locations (team location and depending on map base and resource points) which are randomly chosen. Different spawn locations should actually force the fight into portion of maps which effectively go unused. Thus this helps to increase replay value of existing maps. The old Forest Colony map for example had two different spawn locations for the resource points - so the coding for this already exists...

Having a bit more randomness to the maps would certainly give each a bit of a different experience when played.
Take this a step further as well and use a bit of a fog of war for the objectives in the mode and random placement of the objectives.
Eg:
What if the base in Assault on River City was in one of those mountain alcoves or way at the back of the air strip or the beach but you don't know until you go and scout it out.

LordNothing, on 21 May 2018 - 11:22 AM, said:

we have been down that road before, its not pretty.

new maps with new texture sets (at least 50% new content, minimum).
new layouts with the same tile sets like grim portico/plexus are acceptable if they play differently from other maps, and so long as you dont overdo it.

I don't feel we need new assets added, but more maps based on the existing tile sets using existing assets I'd definitely be keen to see, particularly for the following reason:

Jettrik Ryflix, on 21 May 2018 - 07:42 AM, said:

I like this idea, but in the opposite direction, if you will.

Take some of the maps we already have, and create adjoining maps, as if they were in the same area. Kind of like in MW3 where you do multiple missions across a certain terrain type. This way they can add map diversity without having to create as many new assets.

Being able to have this sense of progression or that we are fighting on a particular planet by having all the maps fit a theme would be nice.

[Moldur]

Have a map exactly like old Frozen City, and have it replace current Frozen City.

For real, having a funnel-like long and slightly narrower map would be fun just to be a meatgrinder.

[50 50]

Moldur, on 01 October 2018 - 11:19 PM, said:

Have a map exactly like old Frozen City, and have it replace current Frozen City.

For real, having a funnel-like long and slightly narrower map would be fun just to be a meatgrinder.

What might be really interesting to find out from the devs is whether it's possible to just change the out of bounds areas along with the drop zones.
Maybe that would be an easy development option to use a single map multiple ways.

There was a bit of discussion about trying to have a 'Rush' (Refer to the battlefield series for how that works) mode added to the game but there were a few hurdles to overcome. Maps big enough was one of them.
However, we do have some pretty big maps in game already so maybe by using the out of bounds area or using it more dynamically would work?
Perhaps an out of bounds that functions according to the side you are on? ie. a Team 1 out of bounds and a Team 2 out of bounds and you have to capture and hold certain objectives to alter that zone.

@Paul/PGI any chance of some feed back on that?

[Khobai]

what we need is an entirely new gamemode built around one or two brand new huge maps. With forward bases, repair bays, and respawns. And other capturable strategic objectives.

[TheArisen]

There was talk of jjims farm map getting looked at but I haven't heard any news on that.