Unhappy With Maps

[Bluedrake42]

But let me clarify, I'm not unhappy about the map quality, I'm just unhappy with how the maps are handled. I don't like fighting over the same areas of the map over and over again. AASv4 helped a lot, but seriously how often do you attack the castle in muttrah? Or North Outpost in Kashan? And even when you do, the enemy is probably bleeding tickets by then, so its usually a short battle.

I'm hoping that someone can help me brainstorm a solution, but I think have an idea, and maybe you all could take a liking to it.

We have AASv4 which randomizes the flag capture "routes", which is awesome. But maybe we could implement a mode (AASv5?) that not only randomizes "routes", but also randomizes the position of initial spawn points, FOB's, and also what flags are initially captured by which team.

For instance: at the moment kashan starts with both teams occupying a single objective, and all other objectives are neutral (north through south village). This means that the fight is almost always around bunkers, and rarely migrates to South Outpost, or either of the villages. In the new mode, there will be different randomized layouts that will maximize the playability of the map (since we all know there's a lot of underplayed potential in the surrounding areas of most PR maps).

So take for instance, a new randomized start: MEC occupies all flags up to North Village, there's a starting spawn @ North Village for MEC which lasts for 2 minutes allowing the MEC to spawn there and set up a quick defensive. Since MEC own the majority of the flags, USMC doesn't have any bleed flags, but now MEC has 2 bleed flags @ South Village and North Outpost.

So now the fight begins at North Village! Which totally changes up the map! There could also be different variants every time, maybe MEC has to defend South Outpost initially, or maybe USMC has to defend bunkers, or North Outpost ETC. ETC.

This not only changes up the order of flags captured, but also changes where the first frontline will most likely be. You could even take it further, and randomize starting FOB's like starting the MEC at bunkers with APC's Logi's Etc. (much like silent eagle and the missile Silo)

Tell me what you think, obviously this is just a quick sketch and I'm not even sure if its possible, but if you have any ideas to tweak it or make it better please tell me =)

[OldGoat5]

Very very good idea it seems possible but probably complicated to make. What do i know

[SGT.Ice]

Starting at NV and all would make quite a bit more sense and make the battle more intense. First hour sometimes can just be like walking through a ghost town.

[ledo1222]

The suggestion forums are not open for a reason.

But if you want to fight over Mec fortress and certain flags play as the commander and advice your team to fall back and set up a Plan to hold it.

[Bluedrake42]

Starting at NV and all would make quite a bit more sense and make the battle more intense. First hour sometimes can just be like walking through a ghost town.

well I mean it'd be random

[Bluedrake42]

The suggestion forums are not open for a reason.

But if you want to fight over Mec fortress and certain flags play as the commander and advice your team to fall back and set up a Plan to hold it.

are they? I'm sorry I didn't think of this as much of a suggestion, I'd want to think about it and make it a more of a solid idea before I submitted it through there

[Dev1200]

As 99% of the people who are told not to post outside of suggestions, they do say it's not a suggestion, it's "talking about an idea".

Which is what the suggestions forum is all about anyway xD Smells like suggestion anyway.



However, it would take a shitload of work to randomize the maps.
I don't even know if it's possible.

[goguapsy]

This sounds like a good idea at first. Gotta be thought out a bit more - say MEC starts at NV. They must have a couple of crates to request kits and set up a FOB, right? Otherwise it'd get steamrolled.

But then again, U.S. will not be able to take NV if they have 1 AA + 2MANPADS, 1 TOW + 2 HATs... Would it not be very overpowered on the MEC side?


I think what we need is more assault/defense maps. Say, Qwai: China starts with all flags, U.S. must capture all (starting with a lil' bleed to encourage an attack). China can spawn at flag closest to U.S., but there are no crates there to make a sup3r defense... Just some guerilla warfare until crates and heavy assets get to the flag...

[Celestial1]

Bases can't be generated on the fly. Moving the spawn point/main base is impractical.

The maps you are 'unhappy' with have not taken full advantage of AASv4. In fact, Kashan still uses AASv2, and Muttrah only barely taps into AASv4 by alternating between West/East city, and that's it.

If AASv4 were to be properly implemented on, say, Muttrah, you would probably see things like the Construction Site, Mosque, maybe some of the large compounds with multiple T-buildings, and prominent intersections/areas become flags, including Muttrah castle.

AASv4 in itself is the answer to all your main concerns, but you can count the number of maps that currently utilize it to it's fullest extent on a hand that has missing fingers. Once you see more maps using AASv4, things will be a LOT more varied. Go play Shijia for a day straight, and you likely still will not have seen the entirety of the map.

[Startrekern]

This could only be done in a particular style where only one team on the map was given the randomized spawning system. Let's take Kashan as our continuing example - there would have to more points of interest, militarized ones at that, to have this make sense. You're basically talking about having a randomized main base as well as randomized flags. I like this - it's conventional asymmetrical warfare at its finest.

But you'd still have to have an attacking team without randomized mainspawn.

Maybe a redux of Counter-Attack?

[Bluedrake42]

Bases can't be generated on the fly. Moving the spawn point/main base is impractical.

The maps you are 'unhappy' with have not taken full advantage of AASv4. In fact, Kashan still uses AASv2, and Muttrah only barely taps into AASv4 by alternating between West/East city, and that's it.

If AASv4 were to be properly implemented on, say, Muttrah, you would probably see things like the Construction Site, Mosque, maybe some of the large compounds with multiple T-buildings, and prominent intersections/areas become flags, including Muttrah castle.

AASv4 in itself is the answer to all your main concerns, but you can count the number of maps that currently utilize it to it's fullest extent on a hand that has missing fingers. Once you see more maps using AASv4, things will be a LOT more varied. Go play Shijia for a day straight, and you likely still will not have seen the entirety of the map.

You COULD actually move main base if you have have multiple main bases on the map at all times, and it only randomizes which one you start at, but they'll all be there either way.

But yeah, you could be right about AASv4 not being used in its entirety, which is why this is not a suggestion! and it IS in fact talking about an idea Dev1200 =P cause to be honest idk. I'm just throwing out things

[AFsoccer]

Hey Bluedrake42,

Your ideas are good and AASv4 can handle a lot of them... just give us time. As new maps are created, you'll see mappers thinking more and more outside the box because we've given them the tools to now do that. Yes, we could have gone back and implemented AASv4 on old maps like Kashan, Qinling, etc. but we felt our energy was better spent on more current maps and maps in development.

As for your idea of actually changing the main base, there are some technical issues with that. I'm not saying it's impossible but most likely it would have to be done using the different map layers. For example, Beirut has the IDF base for AAS64 (standard layer) in a different location than on AAS32 (alternate layer). You also see different factions now appearing on different layers, like Kokan with US on INS64 and Canada on INS32.

We're with you and we always welcome new ideas. I think you'll be happy to see some of this in upcoming maps... just be patient.

[Bluedrake42]

AFsoccer;1649393']Hey Bluedrake42,

Your ideas are good and AASv4 can handle a lot of them... just give us time. As new maps are created, you'll see mappers thinking more and more outside the box because we've given them the tools to now do that. Yes, we could have gone back and implemented AASv4 on old maps like Kashan, Qinling, etc. but we felt our energy was better spent on more current maps and maps in development.

As for your idea of actually changing the main base, there are some technical issues with that. I'm not saying it's impossible but most likely it would have to be done using the different map layers. For example, Beirut has the IDF base for AAS64 (standard layer) in a different location than on AAS32 (alternate layer). You also see different factions now appearing on different layers, like Kokan with US on INS64 and Canada on INS32.

We're with you and we always welcome new ideas. I think you'll be happy to see some of this in upcoming maps... just be patient.

I wish there was a "like" button on the forums =D

[Triggerfinger]

More hill to hill, bunker to bunker, trench to trench combat would be appreciated. And not just run to flag, cap flag, take heli to next flag.

[AFsoccer]

More hill to hill, bunker to bunker, trench to trench combat would be appreciated. And not just run to flag, cap flag, take heli to next flag.

I'm not sure what you mean. If the mapper did his job well, the flags should be the hills, bunkers, and trenches (on those maps with bunkers and trenches), as well as choke points, areas of strategic interest, cities, etc. Modern warfare involves lots of urban fighting now, so making each map a rendition of WWII bunker and trench fighting wouldn't fit this mod. Maybe try FH2? Or maybe you're saying you want more infantry layer options... that don't have transport helicopters?

[Bluedrake42]

I'm not sure what you mean. If the mapper did his job well, the flags should be the hills, bunkers, and trenches (on those maps with bunkers and trenches), as well as choke points, areas of strategic interest, cities, etc. Modern warfare involves lots of urban fighting now, so making each map a rendition of WWII bunker and trench fighting wouldn't fit this mod. Maybe try FH2? Or maybe you're saying you want more infantry layer options... that don't have transport helicopters?

Or project normandy ;D
But to be honest I think if the 128 player server source comes out soon
That'll fix a lot, cause everytime I play on Sisu
Its like the combat quality goes up 50 fold
It just feels right, like that's what PR was meant for

[Rudd]

keep in mind that randomisation is good, but it can get a bit hard to balance, especially if you start adding randomised spawn points.

Maps with large numbers of Points of ineterest are great, and thats the direction most PR maps have taken, which is why they work really well with AASv4, but maps like Kashan are very POI lacking, making their AASv4 potential very low.

Personally I like the variety in maps atm, some have trench warfare, some are wide open, some are urban, some are forested, some have lots of chokepoints, some are fluid...

that state of affairs is only set to become even more broad thanks to the excellent mappers that have joined the team and I hope you can see the fruits of their labours.

[Bluedrake42]

keep in mind that randomisation is good, but it can get a bit hard to balance, especially if you start adding randomised spawn points.

Maps with large numbers of Points of ineterest are great, and thats the direction most PR maps have taken, which is why they work really well with AASv4, but maps like Kashan are very POI lacking, making their AASv4 potential very low.

Personally I like the variety in maps atm, some have trench warfare, some are wide open, some are urban, some are forested, some have lots of chokepoints, some are fluid...

that state of affairs is only set to become even more broad thanks to the excellent mappers that have joined the team and I hope you can see the fruits of their labours.

My problem isn't over the variety or quality of maps
Its just I don't like how the frontline always seems to be near the center
There's lots of good parts of the map that never or rarely get played
Like on iron ridge, I never play the city near the militia base
It's almost ALWAYS at chemical plant or apartments

[Rudd]

^ I agree, I was considering adding duplicates of routes involving the 'premier' points of interest to increase the frequency of their use, but I think theres some technical issues regarding the numbers of routes or something there.

E.g. I've redesigned Burning Sand's AASv4 for the next version to be far more like Shijia Valley's, but the city gets a route through it in half the routes, meaning its a 50% that the city will be the battleground.

[Bluedrake42]

Rudd;1649729']^ I agree, I was considering adding duplicates of routes involving the 'premier' points of interest to increase the frequency of their use, but I think theres some technical issues regarding the numbers of routes or something there.

E.g. I've redesigned Burning Sand's AASv4 for the next version to be far more like Shijia Valley's, but the city gets a route through it in half the routes, meaning its a 50% that the city will be the battleground.

exactly