| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
Natalie Herondale
Umbrella Logistics Inc
0
   |
Posted - 2013.09.05 18:38:00 -
[31] - Quote
The graphics are slightly improved and more realistic looking and, as far as complexity goes, the maps have much more depth to them. It's awesome to have stair wells to run in and it makes running around in itself more fun and staying alive more of a challenge, which in my case, I've been engineered to take the word "no" as "I dare you to."
Anything negative I would have to say is that ever since the update I've been getting glitched, so much so that it borders on ridiculous. Also, I don't know if you're aware of this but there's a Railgun Installation buried underground in some of the maps. I don't know if that's on purpose. but if there's no hidden stairwell anywhere the least you could do is supply me with a shovel. |
T8R Raid
BIG BAD W0LVES
17
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 18:54:00 -
[32] - Quote
environmental collsion needs a lot of work, i hit a lot of invisible posts, floors, and walls when flying in dropships, tight quarters are deadly because of invisible collisions. everything is shiny and gorgeous though i love that, planets in the sky are wonderfully detailed, new audio gonna take some getting used to. lighting and shadows took a major upgrade apparently :P |
KalOfTheRathi
Black Phoenix Mercenaries
644
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 21:50:00 -
[33] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote: -- snip details -- First I like the newer maps although their size is a problem with the loss of Free LAVs. I suspect they were made long before the decision to reduce their non-existing problem.
There are a few sockets, medium sized?, that have icons for neutral turrets that don't actually exist. I ran into it on Spine Crescent with the socket where Delta is. They actually look like they are underground. Oh yeah, they have the drive through drop down, not quite a tunnel as well.
Past that it is a much better representation of what these systems should look like, to me. And not being able to camp the actual Null Cannon control point with any Vehicle is good. The windows allow Infantry to exchange fire loosens it up enough that it is difficult to hold a dedicated push, which is right. A hard push by infantry that really wants the objective should feel difficult for both sides.
At some point you Designers really need to add the sockets in the Map Feedback section. Either that or put all the possible combinations as JPEGs to assist in problem reporting. With the Sockets up we can better explain the problems, like when we had all the little hills for Charlie in Manus Peak that would get Mercs stuck as they were trying to traverse it. That would have been easier to describe if you had Socket JPEGs available that we could reference. |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
779
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 00:12:00 -
[34] - Quote
Thanks to every one who has responded accordingly so far. We really appreciate it. What I am gathering thus far is that every one likes the new outposts and game play areas, and the complexity is mostly not an issue. Not to dismiss those who have a few minor concerns, and those concerns are noted.
We will continue to watch the responses that come in if they do. I hope that we can continue to keep this to the point of the topic, and a big thank you to all again who have responded up to this point. |
|
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders
1147
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 01:41:00 -
[35] - Quote
Background: I tend to play lone wolf and off team comms. It's just how I am. I also love complexity. The longer it takes me to learn the structures and terrain the better. My primary role is logistics although I do scout some. I like to pick an objective and defend but I will assault as needed.
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
So far it feels like there is plenty of complexity to this one and there should be plenty of potential variations to encounters that take place here. I've fought several matches in this facility and I still have no real idea of how its laid out even after looking over the diagram. Some have commented that there isn't any real 'research lab stuff' that we can access but overall the facility still has a great tech lab feel. Underground objectives are causing brutal firefights.
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
Some are fairly simple but not overly so. I just fought in a structure that had multiple underground levels which was a complete surprise. It was a medium that rivaled anything else we've had in the large sockets. I think it was the Relay Station. The fighting was good and I never left that area the entire match. I've also ended up defending around the Standalone Power Core. Despite its simple layout the fighting was good for one on one. There was a tank in one match that couldn't get a clean shot at me which helped too.
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
I've only fought one match in Border Gulch and it was Domination so I spent most of my time in D10. If battles can be focused on different areas for different matches I think the long term playability will be good. Only time will tell. If complexity means opportunities for engagements in different locations then I think this one is just fine.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
I've played this one maybe two or three times. There seems to be a fair amount of travel to this one making vehicles useful. I haven't spent enough time on it yet but due to its spread out combat areas this one may have the most replayability.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
I think I've only had one match on this map and it was in the Relay Station. I spent the entire time at E5.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?[/b]
There are a lot of railings that funnel traffic in these structures. I think we should be able to vault them in something other than a scout suit. Jumping take stamina but it shouldn't stop us and require us to find a way around.
I'm absolutely in love with what you've done here. The feel is spot on. I feel like I'm in a Gallente facility. They are big and complex with many different elevations. The corridors and other tight areas have really changed the feel of combat. Most of the pre-1.4 structures felt very open.
Between the new structures and the improved hit detection I've noticed a change in fights. There is more realism as people take cover and others flank to break up defensive positions. When I go back to an older map the fights are more open and just charging at each other.
Excellent job. More of this. |
Lillica Deathdealer
Mango and Friends
356
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 03:14:00 -
[36] - Quote
-The research Facility has an amazing visual presence. I admit that it is complex, mostly because of the multi level aspect of it. This also makes for a much wider variety of weapon usage, spare sniper rifles and vehicles. The many bridges connecting higher levels of the map ensure a smooth and exciting flow of battle, along with easy navigation to any area you can see. As for the gates and guard posts flanking them, I have found most of the time its a none issue trying to breach them because the defense is so strong. Instead, it winds up with someone running around and dropping uplinks in back, which the defending team cannot reach in time because of how large and sometimes confusing the Facility is. Vehicles would be great for both breaching or defending the gates if it wasn't for the current state of AV, but the potential I see is amazing. After inside the vehicles become an easy target, so they are limited in use but incredibly powerful in their given situation.
-The smaller supporting sockets are fantastic. Once more they show multiple levels to fight on, reaching both underground and into the air on small platforms. The lowest levels sometimes appear useless as anything besides a trap if you spawn in them, but it still looks very nice.
-Border Gulch appears simple at first glance but turns out to provide incredible experiences. Its easy to predict the flow of battle for infantry, but the cover and limited pathways from one side to the other make each fight intense. It creates very complex vehicle gameplay because there isnt any high point to set up on. Instead tanks end up lobbing shot across the gap at eachother, or risk fighting across the bridge. This enables all turret types to maximize their given purpose and overtake rival tanks.
-Fracture road is hard to make sense of from map view at first. Orienting yourself can be difficult once on the ground, too. Even so the objectives are placed in good locations.
-I have not yet played this Impact Ridge enough times to make a proper judgement.
-The visual style is excellent, and use of multiple levels on structures are great. Border gulch in particular flows incredibly well for all vehicles and infantry alike, giving everyone a purpose on this map. |
Beck Weathers
High-Damage
17
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 03:42:00 -
[37] - Quote
Im not going to go into much detail because i dont really feel I need to because my response it all of them is
The are much much much funner than allot of the older maps, and i get stuck on poorly desined edges alllllot less too. I know that its kinda the "honeymoon phase" for me and the maps buuuut Im being 100% honest
Border Gultch - Not very complex, but in a domination match all the focus is on the objective so sneaking around the edges is rather fun and ISENT surounded by giant sniping towers to ruin my sneakyness.
Fractured Road - I think objective A could be shifted to the right a tad, "D" seams kinda lonely
Imopact ridge - To many CRUs |
IgniteableAura
Pro Hic Immortalis
135
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 05:23:00 -
[38] - Quote
Just thought I would update my thoughts on the new research outpost. I feel it could use more routes to get out of objective bravo. Currently there are 4 or 5 ways to get into bravo and only one exit. |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
780
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 05:26:00 -
[39] - Quote
IgniteableAura wrote:Just thought I would update my thoughts on the new research outpost. I feel it could use more routes to get out of objective bravo. Currently there are 4 or 5 ways to get into bravo and only one exit.
The power core objective? If that is the one you mean, there are actually 3 ways out. Though two of them lead to the underground tunnels. |
|
Torneido Achura
The Suicide Kingz
28
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 08:26:00 -
[40] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:IgniteableAura wrote:Just thought I would update my thoughts on the new research outpost. I feel it could use more routes to get out of objective bravo. Currently there are 4 or 5 ways to get into bravo and only one exit. The power core objective? If that is the one you mean, there are actually 3 ways out. Though two of them lead to the underground tunnels.
Yeah, thatGÇÖs where the dead end lies.. everytime time I see someone go there and return I lol so hard 
The mini signals are there too, some buff to their sizes/colors would be nice
|
|
|
I-Shayz-I
Forty-Nine Fedayeen
Minmatar Republic
811
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 08:55:00 -
[41] - Quote
Feedback time!
1. The new research facility is a bit hard to navigate if you don't know where you're going. I've played on it a ton so far and still get lost and confused as I usually try and use objectives as my "compass". Either way, keep building UP. The way this facility has multiple levels, and even an underground level is awesome. However, it needs to be less complex to get out of the facility, as it works very much like a bee trap. The bee goes in, but can't find its way out.
2. The smaller sockets are definitely easy to understand, but some feel very "one way in". It almost feels like I have to drive around in circles just to find the entrance. It doesn't necessarily make them complex, but does confuse the heck out of me sometimes.
3. Border Gulch is a great map, but the middle of the top of the 'T' objective is really hard to get in and out of quickly. One of the only supply depots is here, so as a heavy it took me away from the rest of the game just to switch my suits really quick. I also feel like the bridge isn't complex enough. it's hard to maintain a position on the bridge, and I've been in multiple games where the entire match was just trying to push through it, with no way to get players to coordinate a vehicle assault across the map under the bridge.
4. Fracture Road is surprisingly simple. The domination map (king of the hill!) is hillariously fun too. Skirmish is where things get iffy. Most of my experience on this map felt like I was just driving around from point to point hacking an unguarded objective every time. Each socket doesn't have a lot to offer, and the map is really too big for 16v16. If there were more players this map might be amazing, but right now it's more of a bunch of 1 on 1 encounters.
5. Impact Ridge is probably my favorite map so far. From the MCC/ground spawn, you can go to any of the 3 areas. which really balances things out very much. getting from the main compound to the outside objectives isn't a very long walk at all and is easy to understand where things are.
6. I briefly mentioned this in #1, but I'd like to expand on it a little more. The Research Facility is somewhat confusing in terms of direction. Multiple times I will go down a hallway towards an objective, and then the hallway leads me in a completely different direction than I wanted to go in the first place. The underground section of the map only has two ways out and a lot of ways in, which can often result in spawn traps because of player confusion, and the fact that all spawns on that underground objective are in clear sight of camping players.
Some portions of the facility are slightly confusing too as there are stairs leading upwards in some areas, yet they don't go anywhere...or there are high platforms on one side of the base, but not the other. The "exit" signs are very handy, but there should be more arrows maybe to let players know which hallways are going to lead them up and out, and which ones are just going to lead them in circles. |
NoxMort3m
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
61
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 10:19:00 -
[42] - Quote
anything new is confusing untill it becomes normal routine , but i think the level of complexity was great, it was amazing to have such unseen interiors , the new troop oriented feel is really nice |
RydogV
Shadow Company HQ
282
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 12:33:00 -
[43] - Quote
1. The layout detail was a very nice change. Of course it is a bit confusing right now, since we have not had the chance to play on it as often as most of the older maps. But in time it should become a favorite for sure. I love the verticality the map offers and the various passageways make for some tight firefights. However, the structure is a bit larger than most installations and it almost seems you could create a standalone map using just the Research Facility for a 3-point close quarters Skirmish area. That would be really fun to play in.
2. The addition of more sockets is always welcome. They are especially welcome when integrated into older map layouts to jazz them up a bit. I was pleasantly surprised to find a few older maps with different Null Cannon stations and such. I encourage more "layout" updates for these older maps. Even having a the same game mode area, each with say 3 different Null Cannon placement variations, would provide the kind of variety the game really needs right now.
3. I have played on Border Gulch a few times. I like the layout a lot. Battling on the large span of bridge is especially fun.
4. I have only played Fracture Road once I think. By looking at the map layout it seems the defending team would have somewhat of an advantage with the proximity of C, B & A to their spawn noticeably closer.
5. As stated before the new Research Facility make playing on Impact Ridge fun. But it almost seems it should be a 5 point map with an additional point in the Research Facility.
6. I will just reiterate my request for more variation on each game mode area in an effort to provide variety. For instance, the valley area of Line Harvest could easily be modified to provide two addition Skirmish layouts. All areas could. And while it may not be considered a new map, by moving sockets and null cannon placement/numbers around, it would certainly feel like a different experience. Manas Peak is a perfect example. The 3-point layout for that map used to be significantly different. Bring back the old one, keep the new one and create even more variety. |
Niuvo
The Phoenix Federation
444
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 13:18:00 -
[44] - Quote
Vrain Matari wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:Well, it would greatly help me if you identified the maps that we play on. I'm not angered, I just cannot identify the maps that you are referring to. However, in terms of the Underground A map connected by the long corridor, that map is my overall favorite. It is a wonderful place to drive all the action and go full Proto for the most kills, as well as numerous ambush points. For the map that has a large facility above A point in a type of spire fashion, that is also impressive based on how the avenue's all lead to A. All maps in Dust are very exsquitely done in terms of texture. As far as complexity, if I understand you right, then Dust is still great. Adding too many knooks and crannies will detract away from the game as players try to explore them, and until the feature to train on abandoned maps/ planets is added, 15-20 minutes while being shot at will make any more access tunnels or high rises harder to discover. Hope this helped. I'd like to reinforce the request that map names be displayed - in the respawn screen would be the ideal place. You will gett a lot of feedback mileage out of that one simple tweak, CCP. I feel like I've played the majority of the new maps and facilities at this point, and I'm satisfied with the level of complexity of them all. Navigation required a bit of work but was not frustrating, and the gameplay was hella fun. Had some great cat-and-mouse 1 vs. 1 encounters, some great 1 vs. many encounters and some great squad vs. squad encounters. There seems to be just enough space, just enough cover, and just enough access routes to keep things very interesting. Players learn maps so quickly that a bit of complexity is welcome.
Or you can show the map and the name in the MQ! |
Niuvo
The Phoenix Federation
444
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 13:29:00 -
[45] - Quote
Everything does look nicer, and I enjoy new maps.
Small, but big problem is the objects I can use cover in. I don't feel they cover me at all, when I hug the walls my character gets stuck on the walls. On one wall, my character was shunt forward as I was walking hugging the wall.
If I try to use cover I SURELY DIE. Grenades ruin a lot of my gameplay because they are so prolific.
I want to use cover. If nobody is urged to use viable cover, you might as well strap guns to chickens because that's what this game is looking like. |
Kekklian Noobatronic
Goonfeet
Top Men.
383
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 13:30:00 -
[46] - Quote
The complexity is outstanding. I love having ~options~ and different routes for attacking people. I especially like the new large socket research station.. I think that's the one.. Anyway..
Only problem is, stuff is *so* large, that on the larger maps I spend most of my time running around! They feel like they were meant for double the amount of players.. Although *chuckle* we all know the PS3 hardware couldn't handle it.. I get laggy just looking from the outside into the center of some of the larger socket bases.. |
Aighun
Zumari Force Projection
Caldari State
871
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 13:47:00 -
[47] - Quote
Overall none of the new maps are too complex. The way players fight it out on these maps will change over time and the new maps have the potential to remain fresh for longer than the old maps. I am looking at "complexity" as something that will result in a variety of strategies where each match on the same map can play out in a number of different ways. If a map is too complex you will spend more time fighting the map than the other team. Many of the old maps were cluttered without really offering much variety match to match.
1. Complexity for the new research facility is just right. Very well done. Seems like this map will always be fun, even after we all have every angle of every hallway memorized. There is a stairway that leads to nowhereGǪ would say the logic of some of the passageways and how you access certain areas is a little off. You expect to be able to get up to a higher level using those stairs but they just stop.
2. The facilities for smaller sockets serve their function well as supporting elements on a map. Not really complex enough to be stand alone "maps".
3. Border gulch feels somewhat sprawling in skirmish. Especially with half filled matches. So it is possible to feel lost, and frustrated, not so much because the map is intricate, or maze like. But because of sprawl. Really important to have full teams for these this map to work. Complexity of the areas around the objectives is about right. There are interesting lines of sight and vertical gameplay without it feeling too cluttered. This map still seems to encourage the roving squads rushing from point to point tactics we see on most previous skirmish maps. But domination is more interesting so far, well balanced and there are more strategies you can use to win than team who hacks point first throws down most uplinks gets automatic win.
4. Fracture Road also feels sprawling. But hey, we have vehicles. The transitions between the terrain and sockets are varied and there are enough options for getting from place to place that navigating does not feel empty. Some interesting and unexpected options for vertical gameplay.
5. Impact Ridge. Typical bowl style map much like all of the previous maps. Complexity of this map really depends on the outpost in the large socket.
Sometimes it is difficult to find an objective on the map when you play it for the first couple of times. A lot of that for me has to do with the HUD as much as it does the map itself. Even showing something like distance to objective when a capture point is on screen would help.
|
Michael Epic
Universal Militia Contractings
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 14:40:00 -
[48] - Quote
I love all the new facilities and map designs and all of your CCP'ers are a bunch of bosses for working it out....lets get more maps! moar! :) |
IgniteableAura
Pro Hic Immortalis
135
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 17:23:00 -
[49] - Quote
Torneido Achura wrote:CCP LogicLoop wrote:IgniteableAura wrote:Just thought I would update my thoughts on the new research outpost. I feel it could use more routes to get out of objective bravo. Currently there are 4 or 5 ways to get into bravo and only one exit. The power core objective? If that is the one you mean, there are actually 3 ways out. Though two of them lead to the underground tunnels. Yeah, thatGÇÖs where the dead end lies.. everytime time I see someone go there and return I lol so hard The mini signals are there too, some buff to their sizes/colors would be nice
Hrm....Guess I will need to do some more exploring. Usually Im chasing, being chased, finding a flank route. So usually in a hurry. Ill see if I can find them. |
Theresa Rohk
The Cuddlefish
Templis Dragonaors
37
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 17:55:00 -
[50] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?.
1. I felt it was about normal, once you play on a map a few times you get to learn it. In that sense I like that it's not simple, even it takes a few plays to get the hang of it. So, yes-ish.
2. I didn't think they were that complex, you can get the idea of the general layout just by looking at it.
3. Complex, no, but I have found it's a bit of a pain if you get stuck in the trenches that you can't get back out without going to either end.
4. Not sure I've played that one.
5. Not sure I've played that one.
6. YES! New maps and sockets are great, and I like the multiplicative effect that the new sockets make the old maps feel new again. On some of the larger maps however it feels a bit too sparse for the 16v16 games. That could just be the matchmaking issues though, so.. |
|
|
Mc Ribwich
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
364
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 19:18:00 -
[51] - Quote
if anything the new maps are the breath of fresh air that Dust needed. I was getting tired of fighting in mostly outside areas like the null canon map, finally having new stylised inside/underground sockets to fight in made Dust feel like a proper Sc Fi shooter.
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
I found that the research facility wasn't very complex to navigate, sure it might of been a tad confusing to navigate at first, but I did have a lot of fun exploring the complex and got used to the layout after one game or two. Still though, this was a very fun and cool map to play on.
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
I didn't find the medium and small sockets very complex, although the first few times I the underground sockets I was confused about where the null canon hack was, until I realised it was underground. This isn't a problem with the sockets as the HUD should notify people that the objective is below you.
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
I played this map for the first time last night and had a lot of fun, the complexity was just right, it wasn't too complex or not complex enough. At the same time the map reminded me of Planetside 2 because of the fights that took place on the bridge at A.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
Same with the other maps, it was just right.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
Navigation and complexity was fine, although sometimes it feels like the red side has to make more of an effort to get inside the research facility at the start of a match.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
Not really.
Sorry if my spelling or grammar is off, I typed this from my phone.
|
SILENTSAM 69
SONS of LEGION
RISE of LEGION
530
|
Posted - 2013.09.07 01:11:00 -
[52] - Quote
I love the improved complexity of the layouts. Having tunnels and bridges and such really help. It makes the maps feel more tactical, and gives us more option. This makes the game play much more fun.
I want more complex structures. Lets go even more complex. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis
1680
|
Posted - 2013.09.07 05:42:00 -
[53] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:Hello community. With the release of the new Surface Infrastructure (Sockets) set, and the new terrain with game modes. We want to get some very specific feedback. All the positive feedback is greatly appreciated. And we are all excited to hear you love what we have done. However, we have one topic we have not seen a lot of comments on yet and that is the topic of complexity. We want to know how you feel about the complexity of these maps. It would help us greatly to answer the following questions. 1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?We primarily want to find a general consensus on if the players are getting easily confused by the maps or not when it comes to navigation so we can take it into consideration as we continue to develop more game play areas for you. Thanks you for taking the time to answer these questions.
1. While the new sockets have a higher level of complexity than the old sockets, and there is some adjustment to the fact that they are new I do not find them to be overly complex. In fact the increased complexity is refreshing.
On a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the most complex I'd put the new sockets at around a 6 and would happily play on Surface Infrastructure as complex as an 8. In my experience, and that of my corp and squad mates, the increased complexity of the new Infrastructure actual adds play value to the game and more would be welcome.
2. They are less complex than the larger sockets and thus be a bit more complex on average without issue. On balance the same assessment of them applies as above.
3. Border Gulch is pretty solid but on balance a slight increase in the complexity of navigation would be enjoyable. Something which bends the symmetry of the map a bit with regards to paths.
Initial impressions lean towards saying such elements could be added around F & G on the 8 & 11-12 bands.
4. Fracture Road does a good job at driving diverse force deployment and movement. The use of elevation both within physical terrain and buildings - some raised areas, some subterranean - creates a more satisfying play experience which is much more dynamic based on the actual players as opposed to predicable based on the map set, al la Manus Peak.
Fracture Road, displays a level of complexity which would be a good baseline around which to work.
5. Impact Ridge, this may well be my favorite rendition of the new sockets due to the expansive feel of the map. The central compound offers great options for tactical game play and the distance between hackable assets provides tactical value to both the vehicle and the sniper roles.
That being said the complexity could be increased a notch or two with positive effects. Slightly more asymmetry to the pathing could increase player engagement while navigating the map.
6. I have heard Merc from essentially every role expressing approval of the new Surface Infrastructure or talking about specific areas which they've found where their tactical assets can shine. This is exactly what a new play area should do, provide support for every role but do so in a diverse way which emphasizes the value and effect of coordinated game play over "lone wolfing" or "blobbing".
Within the new sockets various areas clearly bring home the advantages and drawbacks of mobility, range, et al.
Please continue or even expand on this level of complexity, it will improve both enjoyment and replay value of the maps.
0.02 ISK
Cross |
RKKR
The Southern Legion
The Umbra Combine
349
|
Posted - 2013.09.07 06:50:00 -
[54] - Quote
The new maps are much better than the old ones, I hope the old ones get an update too.
One concern: some maps seems to be too large for ambush game-mode. |
KaTaLy5t-87
Shadow Company HQ
108
|
Posted - 2013.09.07 17:58:00 -
[55] - Quote
1) I love the facility and I hope you will add more like it in the future. It is a welcome change from the wide open maps that we have had up to now. Even in the installations on the old maps you never truly felt that you were "indoors". I like all of the little tunnels, corridors and rooms.
2) I thought the smaller sockets were nice as well and I would to see more of these types of sockets or even more complex sockets added in the future.
3) I haven't played on this map yet but I am looking forward to playing on it soon.
4) I enjoyed playing on this map but I feel like it could have more indoors areas, most of the objectives are outside and there is little reason to go inside many of buildings on the map.
5) I also enjoy playing on this map and would like to see more maps of this type in the future.
6) I would like to say, great job! I really like all of the new maps and I hope you guys continue along these lines in the future. I'd even like it if you could revise the older maps to contain similar enclosed spaces in their installations and sockets. I would also like to see more variation on game modes, I came to Dust from Battlefield 3 and I really enjoyed playing both Conquest (Skirmish) and Rush game modes. I would love to see something like the Rush game mode added to Dust and I think these new maps would be great for that type of play. You could use the consoles from the null cannons instead of the M-COMs that were used in BF3. The defending team would have to defend a "base" area that contains 2 consoles, the attackers have a limited clone count and must hack both of the consoles before their clone count is depleted. The current maps would allow for 3 or 4 of these "bases". If the defenders deplete the attackers clone count at any stage then they win, if the defenders successfully hack all of the consoles on all of the bases then they win. Just a thought but keep up the good work! |
Vell0cet
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
136
|
Posted - 2013.09.07 19:01:00 -
[56] - Quote
The complexity is fantastic! It really helps combat the feeling of burnout since it changes gameplay so much. I love the look of the new structures. By far the best attribute of the new Research Facillity is the verticality. Having multiple tiers of platforms (with multiple access points) adds a lot of depth to gameplay and enhances team strategy. I also like the nooks that make for great hiding spots for surprise attacks. I've had some interesting firefights in a few different stairwells.
The larger maps really encourage vehicles, which is a lot of fun.
The team behind this deserves a lot of praise. Now get them back to work on the next one! |
RydogV
Shadow Company HQ
297
|
Posted - 2013.09.07 22:55:00 -
[57] - Quote
I already completed the survey but I wanted to come back, after getting considerably more playtime on the new maps, and say Bravo CCP. If these new maps are any indication of the kind of battlefields we have to look forward to down the line then I for one cannot wait for each and every new map/installation.
The map design has made a significant improvement to overall gameplay in that battles are a lot less one-sided. Each battle on a new map seems to come down to the wire with either Clones or MCC level. And the skirmishes around each objective are great too.
These maps, combined with the changes in signature detection and improved aiming mechanics have made for much better matches. It would be great if Team Knee 101 could push out a map or two each update for the next several months. That and some new game modes would keep people playing and bring back others who have drifted away.
Great job  |
Cornell 77
royfatybatybrigade
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.08 07:10:00 -
[58] - Quote
Two things:
!. I really like the new maps and all, but I also liked how in one of the older maps there was a semi-destroyed area that was on fire and the wall was broken down. I'd like to see more areas that look like fighting took place there because, well, there are tanks and turrets and all kinds of things going off all of the time, and it would be more realistic if there were some areas that were somewhat destroyed, maybe even like a Stalingrad WWII kind of place: mostly destroyed, yet, there we are fighting for it. Ideally, you could take existing maps and have various versions of them where some look like battles have been taking place there. Even better would be some kind of interactive landscape where fuel tanks massively explode, killing those nearby. You could have walls that could be penetrated with demolitions and buildings that collapse and possibly harm players while we are playing. Weather and dusk/night effects that really effect gameplay would also add unpredictability and awesomeness to the game.
2. The big white grid table in the lobby area! What's up with that?!? When is that going to be a map of the place we are about to fight over? That would be a perfect place for players to circle around, get on their headsets, and talk strategy in the minute and a half before deploying. It would at least make logical sense that the players would have some clue as to the terrain they about to fight in before appearing on it. Right now it feels like we have all of this technology, yet there is no forewarning whatsoever of the map we are about to fight on, which makes no sense. The table would be the perfect place for it.
Thanks! I don't mean to be critical, I'm just trying to be helpful. The game rules! |
Zeylon Rho
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
2302
|
Posted - 2013.09.08 23:33:00 -
[59] - Quote
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
I like most of the area with respect to complexity, more so around the capture points. The somewhat "looped" building structures that comprise the slightly enclosed areas with staircases that don't go anywhere don't seem to serve much purpose though - or they seem less integrated with the rest of the structure lets say. In that sense, they're too "simple".
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
I would prefer more complexity here.
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
The sub-structure makes the bridge more interesting than the prior bridge structure. E/C come off overly simple in layout, and the stair structure is probably part of that. D's area seems more unique because of the sunken structure nature of the area, though I wouldn't call it complex. B's area seems the most complicated because the surrounding structures on either side make a sort of super-structure/area around it, which makes it the most interesting. In conclusion, A and B hit an ideal level of complexity, and the other areas are comparatively simple.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
I've already commented on structures previously encountered, but the overarching pipe and long scope of this level do a great job of making it more interesting and giving depth to the nature of play without putting players using the large structure out of reach like the skyscrapers did on previous maps.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
A and B have the majority of the interesting content here, in that the research facility is the more complex playground. The outer objectives are more exposed and have less in the way of structures. They're simplistic, but the open-ness of much of map makes me think that outside of A/B is intended for more vehicle play? It winds up being less interesting for infantry though.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
I think the attention paid to verticality, structures, and other elements make for a more interesting CQC game in the new structures. In general, the maps prior to 1.4 lack many structures that force or involve internal combat dynamics. The ones that did often invited the most interesting choke-points and combat. In that sense, many of these maps are a great improvement.
I do think that the manner in which the research facility's roof has been walled off makes that area less interesting to utilize in combat, or for anything else. Perhaps that's meant as a pointed restriction against the dropship & attack from above tactics seen on other maps, but it would probably be more interesting to have at least a little more of it open to combat.
|
Monkey MAC
killer taxi company
General Tso's Alliance
326
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 09:40:00 -
[60] - Quote
Thevresearch facility is perfect, it appears a little complex to begin with, but you learn it easily enough, its important that in new map designs you keep the multilevel combat, choke points are intuitive to both breach and defend while there is too many places to defend all the time!! |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |