29 replies to this topic

[KingDerp]

Repeating these same maps over and over is a bit mind numbing.

The maps are just terrain and statics, with an available trigger for base cap so no coding required.

Not that difficult to produce and needs to be done soon.

Let me guess, the coders are doing the art assets too ???

[Noth]

KingDerp, on 07 November 2012 - 02:47 PM, said:

Repeating these same maps over and over is a bit mind numbing.

The maps are just terrain and statics, with an available trigger for base cap so no coding required.

Not that difficult to produce and needs to be done soon.

Let me guess, the coders are doing the art assets too ???

Spoken like someone who has no idea how long it can take to model and detail a balanced map. A good map can't just be thrown together. BTW they have two new maps in the works.

[Hellcat420]

we need larger/longer matches. 8v8 feels like we are playing giant robot arena deathmatch. id really like to see at least 16 per team.

Edited by Hellcat420, 07 November 2012 - 02:52 PM.

[Davers]

We will have larger maps, and larger teams (12v12). But there is a point of diminishing returns on adding more players per side.

As a real question: How many games that have large battles (32v32 kind of stuff) have very accurate indirect fire weapons?

[Noth]

Funny, new starcraft maps used for official tournaments and so forth go through months of revisions and change before they are considered good for tournament use and they are often simple from a modeling standpoint. LoL has a grand total of 4 maps after a couple year after release despite being simpler designed maps with much less detail and realistic modelling involved (biggest game in the world currently). Again you aren't showing any knowledge of how long it can take to make a good balanced map.

Edited by miSs, 08 November 2012 - 05:22 PM.

[KingDerp]

Davers, on 07 November 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

We will have larger maps, and larger teams (12v12). But there is a point of diminishing returns on adding more players per side.

As a real question: How many games that have large battles (32v32 kind of stuff) have very accurate indirect fire weapons?

No diminishing returns.

Tribes 2, 32 vs 32 and 64 vs 64 (rare, but it happened), some of the most incredible game fun I have ever had.
Those games were a pure clusterfuuk but the fun went on for hours as the same people rotated map after map...
(T2 had over 400 user created maps)

BF1942

Planetside xxx vs xxx

Big games are hella fun.

Noth, on 07 November 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

Funny, new starcraft maps used for official tournaments and so forth go through months of revisions and change before they are considered good for tournament use and they are often simply from a modeling standpoint. LoL has a grand total of 4 maps after a couple year after release despite being simpler designed maps with much less detail and realistic modelling involved. Again you aren't showing any knowledge of how long it can take to make a good balanced map.

What a st.upid comparison.

Starcraft maps require pathing for the mobs...

[REDACTED]

Edited by RAM, 08 November 2012 - 04:15 PM.
Bypassing Profanity Filter

[Hellcat420]

KingDerp, on 07 November 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

No diminishing returns.

Tribes 2, 32 vs 32 and 64 vs 64 (rare, but it happened), some of the most incredible game fun I have ever had.
Those games were a pure clusterfuuk but the fun went on for hours as the same people rotated map after map...
(T2 had over 400 user created maps)

BF1942

Planetside xxx vs xxx

Big games are hella fun.



What a st.upid comparison.

Starcraft maps require pathing for the mobs...

Your comparison of apples to s.h.i.t. has invalidated your commentary.

lol dont forget mags 128v128 games. that game was a complete blast before they started screwing with the weapons.

[Noth]

KingDerp, on 07 November 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

No diminishing returns.

Tribes 2, 32 vs 32 and 64 vs 64 (rare, but it happened), some of the most incredible game fun I have ever had.
Those games were a pure clusterfuuk but the fun went on for hours as the same people rotated map after map...
(T2 had over 400 user created maps)

BF1942

Planetside xxx vs xxx

Big games are hella fun.



What a st.upid comparison.

Starcraft maps require pathing for the mobs...

Your comparison of apples to s.h.i.t. has invalidated your commentary.

Pathing is built into the engine. I've built a couple starcraft and warcraft maps, never once had to touch the pathing because it is built into the ai. The only time you have to mess with pathing is if you are making a special map, that gasp aren't used in tournaments so don't apply.

LoL has to do with pathing and a few other things but the pathing is easily done and the others are just tweaks in numbers.

I like how I provide proof that making good maps is not fast or simple and you just write it off because you don't agree.

Edited by Noth, 07 November 2012 - 03:12 PM.

[KingDerp]

Noth, on 07 November 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

Pathing is built into the engine. I've built a couple starcraft and warcraft maps, never once had to touch the pathing because it is built into the ai. The only time you have to mess with pathing is if you are making a special map, that gasp aren't used in tournaments so don't apply.

LoL has to do with pathing and a few other things but the pathing is easily done and the others are just tweaks in numbers.

I like how I provide proof that making good maps is not fast or simple and you just write it off because you don't agree.

Once again, you miss the point.

Star craft tournament maps have to be tested because of mob pathing.

Every modern map editor that handles AI bots has built in AI pathing but it doesn't do
it perfectly by any stretch of the imagination.

And lastly, this is about the simple maps in MWO so save your meaningless and incorrect SC
analogies for another forum.



Your comment made me, literally, laugh out loud.

Your statement, the map editor handles the pathing, is true but that by no means indicates it does it well
so the maps have to be tested thoroughly to make sure the assets will not be obstructed and the game
can flow smoothly.

Just because you played with the SC map editor doesn't mean you know anything...

Edited by KingDerp, 07 November 2012 - 03:29 PM.

[White Bear 84]

Has anyone on this thread considered how much it would suck to be on a losing 32x32 team?? As soon as you lose a certain % of your team the match is almost guaranteed to go one way 10 on 3 mechs? Alot harsher and harder than 3 on 1, you would last like five seconds!

[ElCadaver]

OPEN UP THE GAME TO COMMUNITY MADE MAPS!!!.

DO IT

DO IT

[KingDerp]

Since it is pretty much just a 8v8 TDM shooter, and they are WAY behind on everything, they should
seriously consider accepting submissions for communjity made maps.

DO IT !

Seriously, do it.

ElCadaver, on 07 November 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

OPEN UP THE GAME TO COMMUNITY MADE MAPS!!!.

DO IT

DO IT

White Bear 84, on 07 November 2012 - 03:24 PM, said:

Has anyone on this thread considered how much it would suck to be on a losing 32x32 team?? As soon as you lose a certain % of your team the match is almost guaranteed to go one way 10 on 3 mechs? Alot harsher and harder than 3 on 1, you would last like five seconds!

Dead is dead.

Doesn't matter how many bullets killed you.

Edited by KingDerp, 07 November 2012 - 03:34 PM.

[AC]

Yes, Do it!

My only complaint with the maps is that they keep adding geometry. I liked Caustic BEFORE it had all those damn pipes. It looked a lot like Yellowstone National Park. Now it just looks crowded and kinda crappy. Which is unfortunate, because I can only imagine all the time that went into it. Caustic is now one of my less favorite maps because of all the clutter. And it is clutter without a purpose. Not like you can hide behind the pipes or towers....

The maps don't need something to trip over every few feet, they just need to be larger with well thought out terrain. Destructable terrain would be even better! Why predestroy River City when we can do it ourselves!

Edited by AC, 07 November 2012 - 03:35 PM.

[Noth]

AC, on 07 November 2012 - 03:34 PM, said:

Yes, Do it!

My only complaint with the maps is that they keep adding geometry. I liked Caustic BEFORE it had all those damn pipes. It looked a lot like Yellowstone National Park. Now it just looks crowded and kinda crappy. Which is unfortunate, because I can only imagine all the time that went into it. Caustic is now one of my less favorite maps because of all the clutter. And it is clutter without a purpose. Not like you can hide behind the pipes or towers....

The maps don't need something to trip over every few feet, they just need to be larger with well thought out terrain.

Hey those pipes have saved my butt plenty of time. They have a purpose.

[KingDerp]

MORE MAPS.

NOW.

I really don't care if they are bad maps, just need variety.

Edited by KingDerp, 07 November 2012 - 03:37 PM.

[KingDerp]

Hol s.h.i.t.

Just read the dev q&a...

1, count em, 1 new map on Dec 18th.

You have got to be kidding.

6 more weeks of these same 4 maps.

/bullet through brain.

Edited by KingDerp, 07 November 2012 - 03:46 PM.

[Asmosis]

Yep and all the Dev's need to do is pull an all-nighter "hacking code" to fix all the issues with net code and such, because seriously these things are childs play. Testing and balancing is for chumps.

[KingDerp]

Asmosis, on 07 November 2012 - 03:46 PM, said:

Yep and all the Dev's need to do is pull an all-nighter "hacking code" to fix all the issues with net code and such, because seriously these things are childs play. Testing and balancing is for chumps.

Maps are not code blocks.

Bad analogies do not make good excuses.

[Noth]

KingDerp, on 07 November 2012 - 03:48 PM, said:

Maps are not code blocks.

Bad analogies do not make good excuses.

Maps do require balancing and checks. You'd be amazed at how unbalanced maps can be from even the littlest thing, or how easily and invisible wall can slip into them without anyone actually knowing. This is why good maps often take months to complete.

[Hellcat420]

White Bear 84, on 07 November 2012 - 03:24 PM, said:

Has anyone on this thread considered how much it would suck to be on a losing 32x32 team?? As soon as you lose a certain % of your team the match is almost guaranteed to go one way 10 on 3 mechs? Alot harsher and harder than 3 on 1, you would last like five seconds!

welcome to warfare. the games would actually be exciting!