poesel Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Just over half a year ago there was only the demo and the demo had two maps: raid and ice. It was rather boring with only these two but we still had lots of fun, especialy (IMHO) with raid because of one thing: everyone knew the map in and out. Most tactics were well known and you didn't need much words to explain. Still someone found out something new. Now, I don't want to go back to two maps, but I would like to have a set of 'standard' maps we can do battle regularly on. Develop and discuss fancy tactics or have some prepared and trained teams to pitch against each other. We have some very beautiful user created maps. Wy not discuss about them and evolve them further? For example sea cliffs has this really postcard worthy setting but large parts of the map are never used as are the two bases. Some ideas how to make more parts of the map worth conquering shouldn't be too hard to come up with. We have currently more than 40 scenarios but our sunday games usually last maybe 4 or 5 scenarios. Wouldn't it be better if all those were well known and balanced maps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilibird Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 There is that, and the other thing is that I don't like Sea Cliffs. Nothing to do with it's creator, as a map, it is amazing. However, it is near unplayable on my Mac. (FPS will drop into the <10 range in spots) So personally, I would also like to see some less processor-intensive maps for those of us with lower end CPU's However, I do like your idea.. clipping down the rotation a bit, so that everyone knows it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bboyle Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by IcemanUSA: There is that, and the other thing is that I don't like Sea Cliffs. Nothing to do with it's creator, as a map, it is amazing. However, it is near unplayable on my Mac. (FPS will drop into the <10 range in spots) So personally, I would also like to see some less processor-intensive maps for those of us with lower end CPU's However, I do like your idea.. clipping down the rotation a bit, so that everyone knows it. Seacliffs is a great map but it is a serious resource hog...I have a PC with decent ping yet it stutters terribly on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aittam Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 well I'll play the other trumpet and say that alternate more the rotation will be better going back to tactics: the best defensive tactic has always been to funnel the enemy down one or two directions with antitank and mines but also AAA is emerging since when the cobra was added to the arsenal, actually is an area denial weapon even better then mines-> it force you to drive a long way to get there, bacchuse docet, I personally like to drop one and keep in at the edge of the engagement area as attacker I always like to scout a little the enemy defenses, and still a spotter function to direct mortars fire would be great once detemined how the enemy is placed I like to attack with a pincer manouver: a main attack supported by artillery if possible and ews; and a second attack usually from behind with either a 76 or a hermes to force human player to deal with me first and/or kill bots that usually aren't that good at perceive my presence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imperial Grunt Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I like some of the maps that are never on the server. Especially "Unexpected Reserves", "Treachery", and "Hot Drop Zone". And more urban and restrictive terrain maps would be good too. I am hoping a "Stalingrad" style urban map finally gets made. Old cites and industrial areas would have the most tech to be salvaged anyways. A more challenging game is to hold several objective areas and not just one. Maybe the scenarios for those type missions would be a little longer. Capturing towers with cutters is not fun and kinda stupid in my opinion. While I really like the "House to House" map (althought I wish it had even more buildings), spending the game capturing towers with the cutters makes it alot less fun for me. I just want to fight and hold ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toby Haynes Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Originally posted by Imperial Grunt: A more challenging game is to hold several objective areas and not just one. Maybe the scenarios for those type missions would be a little longer. That was something I did with Desert Mesa - there are four bases to control in Territory mode so you have to work out what you wish to hold, what you wish to attack and what you want to destroy. Hopefully everyone can have a hack at Desert Mesa when the next release is rolled out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imperial Grunt Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 That sounds like a challenging scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarquelne Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 I wouldn't want intimate ("This is Betty, my favorite crease in the terrain.") knowledge of the map to become a dominant factor in games. But, OTOH, that doesn't sound like what poesel71 is proposing. Last time a checked (no DT for me for the last/next few days) two servers were up. I think it'd be nifty if one server were given fewer maps of the sort p., t.h. and i.g. describe . Maybe with longer play times, too. As long as I'm here: I'd also like to see restricted inventories on a few maps. Nothing heavier than a Paladin, or few or no light units, or "Mainly Inf"... Stuff like that. Dropship Demolition Derby... Maybe not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toby Haynes Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Originally posted by IcemanUSA: There is that, and the other thing is that I don't like Sea Cliffs. Nothing to do with it's creator, as a map, it is amazing. However, it is near unplayable on my Mac. (FPS will drop into the <10 range in spots) So personally, I would also like to see some less processor-intensive maps for those of us with lower end CPU's Both Volcanic Deposits and Sea Cliffs have twice the dimensions of "standard" DropTeam maps, so that four times as many vertices. Coupled with the vertex distance is reduced from 30m to 20m to keep the maps a sane size, and you're pushing a lot more polygons. Now, both maps play fine on my system (AMD64 3400+ 1Gb GeForce 6800GT 256M) but I concede that this may be a problem for older machines. You will be relieved to know that both "The Dam" and "Desert Mesa" use the same dimensions as the other DropTeam maps, so hopefully they will play better for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imperial Grunt Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Looking forward to playing "The Dam"...is that kind of like a "Bridge to Far" scenario? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted January 14, 2007 Author Share Posted January 14, 2007 While you are (hopefully) blowing each other to bits I have tried to make something useful I whipped together a small script which creates an overview over the available scenarios. You can find the result here: Scenarios You can click on the small maps for more information about the scenario. Comments welcome. Edit: forgot to say: the maps are not the same as what you see in the game - they don't show buildings, roads or water. This make some maps look strange. Sorry, can't do anything about that. Forgot another thing: I suggest to add a 'Creator' tag to give due praise to those who made those scenarios. [ January 14, 2007, 01:27 PM: Message edited by: poesel71 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imperial Grunt Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Hey this is awesome work Poesel, thanks. One thing that the game needs is a small map that displays as as you scroll through scenarios. Never seen the "Where Eagles Dare" map before. Looks cool. Are you going to keep this updated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted January 15, 2007 Author Share Posted January 15, 2007 Yes, I will keep that updated. So, now, what is your favourite multiplayer map? I'll start with: Slug Fest, House To House and Hot Drop Zone Slug Fest because of the rolling hills, House To House because its the only city map and Hot Drop Zone because its a good mixture of open space ad hills. OTOH I noticed that there are some scenarios I've never played. I'll try to change that so my vote may change too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toby Haynes Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Originally posted by Imperial Grunt: Looking forward to playing "The Dam"...is that kind of like a "Bridge to Far" scenario? Actually, you can read all about it on the Wiki because it's the one I built for the tutorial on map design. Nexus 6 Map tutorial Note to self: finish tidying up the tools and release them pronto! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__Yossarian0815[jby] Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Originally posted by poesel71: So, now, what is your favourite multiplayer map? I'll start with: Slug Fest, House To House and Hot Drop Zone very useful, Poesel, thx My favorites: despite the hardware issues: sea cliffs every game is different on this one. the defenders can channel the attackers to a certain extent, but there is always a weakness left to be exploited. also due to the rocks, the "new" turrets can be used properly and infantry also has a role to play. bloody iwo apollo 120mm heaven, also the bots can be used more efficiently because there are no obstacles that make them do strange things. treachery (sort of) i liked this one when the game was young, it would be interesting if it still is fun with the new units/deployables maps I don´t like: house to house much too open to be a real urban warfare map. what would be needed would be streets where a thor could barely squeeze through, places for roadblocks etc. volcanic deposits this map doesn´t really allow for any variation. the defenders have to hole up behind mines and hermes´. thats it. the map is too large for accurate supporting fire (either the attackers or the defenders) from the other volcanoes. [ January 16, 2007, 04:07 AM: Message edited by: __Yossarian0815[jby] ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aittam Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 I like: death gulch house to house raid two peaks(?) not sure of the name it's a while that's not on rotation the swamps black canyon don't like: volcanic deposit where eagles dare Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imperial Grunt Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Favorites: 1) House to House (although I could do without the cutter/capping part and just make it an objective game.) 2) Swamp (but change start points to opposite sides in the beginning, and it needs alot more trees, gullys, and vegetation). 3) Raid. 4) Sea cliffs. 5) Slug fest (although the AA tower in the middle should be turned down a little). I hate the Ice map with a passion. Ditto with the moon map. My wish is for more restricted terrain maps. Dense urban areas, dense forest or jungle (with some roads and open areas cut through it), and a dense "crystal" map ala..Total Annihilation. A map that had good terrain and gave the defenders some deliberate defensive positions, at the cost of a reduced inventory, would also be fun and challenging. It would also be a good map to practise against bots. I am not a fan of capture the flag and I prefer objective (or mulitple objective) type games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts