Is There A Reason Why Maps Are So Small?
#1
Posted 05 June 2015 - 04:58 AM
Is there a reason that the maps can not be made to be 4 to 5 times the size of Alpine, Tourmaline or Terra?
As in system issues memory issues anything?
When you have have mechs literally shoot each other at the start of the match there is a problem.
I believe that larger maps will diversify game play at least a little and hopefully break up the monotony of the center fights. Adjust this and the way radar works and we might actually have better matches?
Thoughts?
#2
Posted 05 June 2015 - 05:06 AM
- There would be HUGE downtime between where your mechs spawn, and where you fight. Thats a lot of waiting if the end result is you running into a much better player and getting stomped within a minute of the first engagement.
- Assaults would be terrible to play. Ask any Direwolf that spawns the far side of alpine. You can go the entire game waiting to get into the action and have all the other players finish off the opposing team before you even touch them.
- Light mechs would be a nightmare to root out. You think a 1v12 skirmish where the light is content to run and hide is annoying now, if the maps where 5 times bigger, this would be a nightmare.
- It wouldn't change anything. Just look at Alpine itself. For all of its size, the map only revolves around a single terrain feature, EVER. Changing the map size means NOTHING unless there was some physical game play reason to spread your force out as opposed to just camping the best spot on the map.
#3
Posted 05 June 2015 - 05:06 AM
I'd love bigger maps but there are too many in the community who wants pure pew pew and zero tactics.
#4
Posted 05 June 2015 - 05:10 AM
Zeusus, on 05 June 2015 - 05:06 AM, said:
I'd love bigger maps but there are too many in the community who wants pure pew pew and zero tactics.
3 Words for that
THINKING MAN"S SHOOTER
#5
Posted 05 June 2015 - 05:16 AM
SpiralFace, on 05 June 2015 - 05:06 AM, said:
- There would be HUGE downtime between where your mechs spawn, and where you fight. Thats a lot of waiting if the end result is you running into a much better player and getting stomped within a minute of the first engagement.
- Assaults would be terrible to play. Ask any Direwolf that spawns the far side of alpine. You can go the entire game waiting to get into the action and have all the other players finish off the opposing team before you even touch them.
- Light mechs would be a nightmare to root out. You think a 1v12 skirmish where the light is content to run and hide is annoying now, if the maps where 5 times bigger, this would be a nightmare.
- It wouldn't change anything. Just look at Alpine itself. For all of its size, the map only revolves around a single terrain feature, EVER. Changing the map size means NOTHING unless there was some physical game play reason to spread your force out as opposed to just camping the best spot on the map.
I have a feeling that all of those issues could be solved if given the proper focus of the devs. But thats probably wishing too much.
#6
Posted 05 June 2015 - 05:28 AM
#7
Posted 05 June 2015 - 05:55 AM
SpiralFace, on 05 June 2015 - 05:06 AM, said:
- There would be HUGE downtime between where your mechs spawn, and where you fight. Thats a lot of waiting if the end result is you running into a much better player and getting stomped within a minute of the first engagement.
- Assaults would be terrible to play. Ask any Direwolf that spawns the far side of alpine. You can go the entire game waiting to get into the action and have all the other players finish off the opposing team before you even touch them.
- Light mechs would be a nightmare to root out. You think a 1v12 skirmish where the light is content to run and hide is annoying now, if the maps where 5 times bigger, this would be a nightmare.
- It wouldn't change anything. Just look at Alpine itself. For all of its size, the map only revolves around a single terrain feature, EVER. Changing the map size means NOTHING unless there was some physical game play reason to spread your force out as opposed to just camping the best spot on the map.
Yeah not so much. Random Spawn Locations could really come into play here for maps as large as I am thinking. Not the same 3 drop sites for every match. All we have now is deathball vs deathball, that's what this game has turned into. Personally I would not mind much more variety. Different objectives that have to be completed or something. Anything
Well I keep hearing "Lights should suck, this is a game of Big Stompy Robots" Well put your money where your mouth is. You want to play a Big Stompy Robot, then Play one. But don't come crying just because an ankle biter is harrassing you. Put with the mobility of Heavies and assaults it should not be a problem for ya. The Heavier chssiss can twist almost as quick as a light. The problem with Alpine is that's just where folks go because its the centerish of the map. I have fought in other areas of the map and its great.
The problem is people do not want to Play Mechwarrior. They want to play Robot CoD. That is the mentality of today's generation.
The fact of the matter is the maps are to small for 12v12. When you can spot the enemy team within the first 30 seconds of the match starting there is a problem.
Edited by Darian DelFord, 05 June 2015 - 05:57 AM.
#8
Posted 05 June 2015 - 06:07 AM
4vs4 maps were much smaller.
8vs8 maps got adjusted (made them a bit larger, some not)
12vs12 put in the same map was 8vs8.
Basically we were still playing 12vs12 on a map suited for 8vs8.
#9
Posted 05 June 2015 - 06:16 AM
Sarlic, on 05 June 2015 - 06:07 AM, said:
4vs4 maps were much smaller.
8vs8 maps got adjusted (made them a bit larger, some not)
12vs12 put in the same map was 8vs8.
Basically we were still playing 12vs12 on a map suited for 8vs8.
Yup
But even the bigger maps are to small for 12v12
#10
Posted 05 June 2015 - 06:18 AM
Plenty of other games have objective based game play that change dynamically as a team take objectives. I also don't see why MWO has to follow the old CS method of one spawn per match instead of following a Battlefield approach based on respawn tickets. Tickets give the opportunity to balance mechs by having some mechs cost more to spawn.
#11
Posted 05 June 2015 - 06:25 AM
I'd say, make maps the size of Alpine with more possibilites to engage and generally more diverse approaches to get into combat. Tourmaline Desert is a good example IMO. Or maybe think Alpine with thick forests and a bigger city in the middle.
#13
Posted 05 June 2015 - 06:31 AM
As for Alpine, I find it to be a great map. But, the problem can be traced back to the source of 50% of all problems facing MWO. 99% of the player base act as if they're nothing but mindless zombies, with Derp Mountain as a giant human brain calling them forth.
Edited by Mystere, 05 June 2015 - 06:40 AM.
#14
Posted 05 June 2015 - 06:43 AM
And so they don't care about strategy, and whatsoever related to combat simulation.
In tiny maps you can drop, pew pew in 2 minutes, and repeat.
gg close
Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 05 June 2015 - 06:44 AM.
#15
Posted 05 June 2015 - 07:22 AM
Sarlic, on 05 June 2015 - 06:07 AM, said:
4vs4 maps were much smaller.
8vs8 maps got adjusted (made them a bit larger, some not)
12vs12 put in the same map was 8vs8.
Basically we were still playing 12vs12 on a map suited for 8vs8.
This is why, Bur RIver City is already being redone and should be out soon.
8v8 maps dont play well with 24 mechs.
#16
Posted 05 June 2015 - 07:24 AM
#17
Posted 05 June 2015 - 07:56 AM
#18
Posted 05 June 2015 - 08:40 AM
The only practical way we'd have random maps is if PGI generated ome and then tweaked it, but that's not what you mean.
#19
Posted 05 June 2015 - 09:03 AM
#20
Posted 05 June 2015 - 09:13 AM
I do not mean lets make it easy for all, but more like lets not keep throwing new players in a std engine firestarters against fully leveled mechs.
Honestly if folks can not handle being an effective deathball, a bigger map will make this worse not better.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users