0.5 Larger maps with more options as how to manouver

Hx.Clavdivs · Post by **Hx.Clavdivs** » 2007-03-02 08:05

In short, I would like to see more maps with wider areas around flags and flag placement further apart.

Most maps have placed the flags in such close proximety or centralized hotspots that how we choose to manouver or place our rallypoints (hence just RP) are forced upon us rather than freedom of choice. Offcourse, some people have learned to compensate this by beeing clever and exploting redzones or getting into areas that we are not supposed to access to accomplish surprise attacks. I feel strongly that this is not a good solution, but rather a signal that something should be changed.

I want to give examples to clearify my point and have choosen two maps. I do want to make it extremely clear that I do not dislike the maps, but they are good examples to my point.

EJOD:
What is great with this map is the two variation of gameplay that it brings. One is the wast desert area allowing tank combat. The other is the urban enviroment that allows for a more concentrated infantry combat.

The map starts out fine with the two first flags far from each other and a wast area to cover on both sides. This gives room to manouver or/and outflank or change your approach to a target. Since they are the two first flags to capture most fights are fought inside the city in the area West/East or Gardens/Ruins. Because of them beeing cramped onto each other, there are not that many choices to place your RP or your APC. It becomes extremely predictable where one would put down a RP or where one hides the APC. There is also little ground to cover before you get from A to B, making people rush of to the one point towards another without feeling compelled to think tactics and how to approach. Or to seriously consider defence as an option instead.

I like the fact that Gardens is on the west flank and west city is the natural selection to go to when you are MEC, and on the reverse, Ruins to East. The one point I would like to make is that the East/Ruins flag gets just as much manouvering space on the east side of the map as does the west side. I have no trouble with east beeing more urban enviroment, but it gets very crowded very fast on that side. Again forcing the RP to becomming clustered on top of each other and very little choice of how to manouver to get the flag.

Hamgyong Hill:
The map idea in itself is a stroke of pure genious, but there are some things that I feel should be adjusted. This time its because all the action is concentrated in one sector. South flank, Forrest (is that its name?) and Central Defence flags overlap each other in the 65meter radious, so that as an officer you are forced to place the RP's in the exact same location each game.

This ruins some of the gameplay. It gets predictable and repetative and you have very little movement or choice of how to proceed. As an officer in the PLA I kept exploiting my knowledge of the map and repeatedly requested artillery from Radio Dugout area towards the british only position to place RP to attack South Flank. As a british officer, beeing clever you can reverse the artillery to the only sector where the chineese place their RP. Then we have the gauntlet that is the Radio Dugout. Once again, little variation is allowed and the same gameplay is repeated again and again.

You can however make a blitzattack across the ricefields and just proceed straight in as a british soldier, but when you have finally crossed that field and start your climb, you are once again forced to take the same routes or place an extremely vulnerable RP.

Then we have the two last flags for the chineese. Once again the south side is very cramped and one does not have that many options on how to proceed without just rushing in and hoping that a stray nade or a marksman/sniper/support gets to you before you get to them.

I have concidered if we should remove some of the urgency in this map that forces players to repeatedly just rush towards a point without ever concidering where to move, how to move and what objective should be prioritized. The verdict is not in on that point yet.

I feel very strongly that after the 0.5 the gameplay has changed. It has changed more in increase of rushing after one goal after the other without any time to stop, rethink and redirect your troops. Not unless you are dead or you are hiding out well out of the combat hotzones. I also feel that it is wrong to just chalk this down to that it is the invasion of the noobs that are doing this. With the new gameplay implemented like APC and RP's maps need to be adjusted to this. Gameplay is now beeing forced on the gamer, rather than the gamer dictating how to react or to force an reaction. This is one of the main reasons why I want to write as to why I want some changes and how to do it.

Not all to familar with how to map in BF2, I have some experience how to make maps in other games. This has taught me where to make chokepoints, where to keep objects limited, where you can bump it up, how and where the gamers should be given the freedom of choice.

With larger areas to cover and flags set wider apart, you might argue that we are forcing gamers to slow things down. It can also be argued that we allow the gamers time to rethink their strategies and give officers and commanders time to see how the round develops for a more richer and rewarding game.

Disclaimer: This was originally 1/3 of a larger suggestion that I played around with. After some consideration I chose to devide it up to 3 different parts so when people responded to the post they would just respond to one spesific section without any confusion and therefore promote coherrent and fruitfull debate. I have to my best ability tried to check my grammar and spelling and to tie up loose ends. If you find one sentence that clearly is untelligeble, it could be because it is taken out of context.

Even though this text contains mapchanges for two different maps, I have choosen not to write a post in each respective thread in the 05. Feedback forum. The point would be lost if I spread it too thin, and most of the text would be repeated in both threads.

If you do find a section you would like to be corrected, you can PM me and I will change it accordingly. Turning a suggestion over to an debate about the deteriation of the english language is not going to make this game greater, but generally just insult and piss me off. I might want to remind you that even though the english language is considered as one of the international languages, it is not the native language for the most of us. Not everybody is blessed with the oppertunity having to learn how to express yourself correct in a second language. Least of all written. So loose the smug arrogance and try to do something productive and argue your point of view instead.

Soulis6 · Post by **Soulis6** » 2007-03-02 08:11

I agree completly. my favorite map right now is Jabal because of the massive size and the squad tactics that it allows.

Post by **Rhino** » 2007-03-02 08:15

in time we will be making our maps much larger, way more space to move around. A map im develpoing at the mo for v0.7 (if its lucky) will on avrage, have its CPs 1km apart from the next, nearest CP

=Romagnolo= · Post by **=Romagnolo=** » 2007-03-02 08:21

'[R-DEV wrote:Rhino']in time we will be making our maps much larger, way more space to move around. A map im develpoing at the mo for v0.7 (if its lucky) will on avrage, have its CPs 1km apart from the next, nearest CP

Nice, I was expecting something like it. If possible, show us a picture of this new map (or maybe 2, why not ?)

Post by **Rhino** » 2007-03-02 08:31

=Romagnolo= wrote:Nice, I was expecting something like it. If possible, show us a picture of this new map (or maybe 2, why not ?)

at the moment the Dev rule is to not release anything unless its been officaly aproved. I've put up a topic thou on if we want to make our maps "open project" as such so we can keep you guys update as they go

=Romagnolo= · Post by **=Romagnolo=** » 2007-03-02 08:35

Ok, waiting...

is it done now ?

Hx.Clavdivs · Post by **Hx.Clavdivs** » 2007-03-02 08:36

Great!

But will we in the future in time for ... say 0.6, have a small mapfix adjusting those maps that we love to hate, or hate to love? (uhm? ... oh well)

Post by **Rhino** » 2007-03-02 08:49

I need to get the aproval from egg etc that its ok to do open project maps, then we would need to make a new sub forum for it etc.

KP · Post by KP » 2007-03-02 08:54

Sounds good to me!

And completely I agree with Clavdivs' first post.

Post by **eggman** » 2007-03-02 09:57

I think we have maps that are too small for the number of CPs on them and a good fix would be to remove / relocate some of the CPs.

I also personally think that in general .. even after v0.509 .. that flag radii are still far too small. Al Basrah's flags, for example, could (imo) supporting 100m radii and I think it would improve the game play.

Hx.Clavdivs · Post by **Hx.Clavdivs** » 2007-03-02 10:09

Well this is ... dissappointing. We all agree. Hmm. Okey.
Now to be a pain in the butt and repeat what I said: Is there any chance that someone will take a closer look at the current maps and fix, according to for example eggman, and release, before 0.7?

Post by **eggman** » 2007-03-02 10:20

Not sure what is dissapointing ??

wrt maps .. they make / break the mod. We have made *radical* changes to the underlying game systems. And the recent server patch addresses a couple of the obvious errors we made. But some of the maps need changes that go beyond a server only update.

And with some of the other game play changes coming in v0.6 I think we will definitely need to open up some space on some maps by removing some CPs.

As for larger maps, we're working on them .. big maps take time hehe.

Hx.Clavdivs · Post by **Hx.Clavdivs** » 2007-03-02 10:31

Big maps on 0.7
Quick fix on flag amount and radious in 0.6?

To explain: I was hoping for a more heated debate about me beeing wrong in my views. But everybody seems to agree. *Sigh* So much for a "fruitfull discussion".

Post by **eggman** » 2007-03-02 10:57

oh .. yeah fewer CPs .. larger radii .. good quick fixes for v0.6 (in addition to some balancing issues).

Post by **bosco_** » 2007-03-02 11:02

More Jabals? Please, no

Big maps arent bad in theory, but they can get frustrating on publics.

Post by **eggman** » 2007-03-02 11:07

Ideally we would get a strong enough library of maps that we could have servers with "large maps" and servers with "medium maps" in their rotation.

Post by **bosco_** » 2007-03-02 11:11

That would be good indeed.

Hx.Clavdivs · Post by **Hx.Clavdivs** » 2007-03-02 11:19

Cheers!

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-03-02 13:46

large maps are ok but only fi you put enough vehicles on it , jabal only has 3 jeeps :/ .

Darkpowder · Post by **Darkpowder** » 2007-03-02 13:58

The norsk scout forward observer makes some good points in terms of freeing up space to make for more free movement and strategy....

What eggman said, i think the exploitable areas have been brilliantly removed from EJOD for example, and they have opened up one of the flanks of the city well.

It's the large degree of AAS2 groups and the close grouping that needs the improvement.

I put Clavidvs's points down to the sparse population of her native land

(of course i'm allowed to poke fun here cos of my norweigian connections

she likes her space.

5 million people.... is that all?