| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
low genius
The Sound Of Freedom
Renegade Alliance
421
   |
Posted - 2013.09.18 05:34:00 -
[91] - Quote
the new maps are great. 'too complex' should be a good thing. |
Ryno Zamayid
DIOS EX.
Top Men.
2
|
Posted - 2013.09.19 23:56:00 -
[92] - Quote
I find that all these maps to be great. I see a few complaining about getting lost or running in circles, but I found that if you pay attention it was very easy to get around after a round or two of playing them. Very sensibly done CCPjavascript:insertsmiley(' ','/Images/Emoticons/ccp_smile-big.png') I've been asking and wondering for new maps for a long time, thanks guys! I really enjoy them all, even on my vehicle toon. now.... if only we could get a vegetation map javascript:insertsmiley(' ','/Images/Emoticons/ccp_blink.png') Maybe a purple jungle? lol after all it is supposed to be an alien planet right? |
Nomed Deeps
The Exemplars
Top Men.
229
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 00:44:00 -
[93] - Quote
Research lab is cool but some openings were hard to find as they blended in. Also, there are a few things that look like doors but they don't move which was both bothersome and disappointing.
As for current environments, besides sockets, they appear mostly the same desert-scapes. What happened to the snow? Did I imagine it? Anyway, I like where maps are going and are hoping to see more.
BTW, if we can't have floating objectives, can we at least have rooftop objectives that are only accessible via dropship or tall tower objectives that take time to scale on foot where dropships would have a speed advantage? Would love to see actual dropship battles and such objectives would cause them. |
Melchiah ARANeAE
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar
DARKSTAR ARMY
27
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 02:40:00 -
[94] - Quote
1. I find it rather complex. It's easy to move around as there are lots of paths to go down, but rather hard to defend because of it. People just come from all angles and it's chaotic. But that's what makes it fun. :P
2. They're all pretty solid. Though it can be a bit awkward to find a way into the landing pad without having to move through a wall of bullets. It's really easy to lock down. Also, the relay station's lowest floor is a bit too easy to miss.
3. Border Gulch is easy to navigate. It's hardly complex at all.
4. Fracture Road is very simple. Though it makes a great domination map.
5. Impact Ridge is too spacious. There are a lot of sockets that are too out of the way to really matter. It's not quite complex enough.
6. The maps seem a bit too big for the current amount of players per match. Was it done intentionally to give LAVs and Dropships more purpose or to future proof it for when there can be more players per match? Or is it just unfortunate design?
Also, they don't seem overly sniper friendly. The only good sniper position I've seen is on top of the tower in the landing pad socket. Then again, I haven't been sniping a great deal so I might have just not found the good places. :P |
Draxus Prime
BurgezzE.T.F
Public Disorder.
1451
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 02:43:00 -
[95] - Quote
Aero Yassavi wrote:1. At first I got lost a bit, but I also got lost when I first explored the Orbital Artillery and Biomass too so it's all normal. After playing a few matches I would say it is at the perfect level of complexity, enough so that there are many ways to traverse but not confusing how to get from place to place.
2. Complexity in smaller sockets are not confusing at all, except that one medium socket - the landing pad I believe. It can be a little tricky trying to get onto a certain raised platform because there are very few ways up and they are all hidden.
3. Actually believe Border Gulch could of used a little more complexity, like a catwalk underneath the bridge to get by avoiding the craziness on top.
4. Impact Ridge is a fun map but no where near any sort of complexity.
5. Fractured Road again is also very simple, I mean how hard is it to follow a road that cuts through the entire map? However you do have those very high pipes that cannot be gotten unto unless you have a dropship. They do have a slanted part that extends to the ground, but you cannot use it to get on top on foot.
6. Hmm, I would say a lot of times what could be causing confusing with any complexity with new outposts in general is the stair cases are all too similar. I understand why that is and is usually fine with other assets, but since these are enclosed interior staircases you have no outside references so it can feel like you are running in circles, if you know what I mean.
Don't be afraid to add complexity, these new maps and sockets has made Dust infinitely more fun. The only time I get disappointed is when I get an old map or socket.
5. from my experiance climbing pipes on foot is possible even in assault suits |
843 Unorthadox Hunter
BurgezzE.T.F
Public Disorder.
22
|
Posted - 2013.09.21 14:38:00 -
[96] - Quote
1-5 All Great love them especially the Gulch map I mean great with the different ways you can battle on that map alone. But also just love how It has all kinds of high and low ground for crazy kinds of battles.
6. I think it would be really interesting if you had some kind of environmental kind of effects such as a sandstorm or it is snowing even fogging, raining, ash falling, etc. All would change how it works like raining and snowing causes vehicles to slip and slide around for a while, fogging and sandstorm make it hard for foot soldiers to say far away but vehicles can see better with their headlights, maybe even make a new sniper for this that doesn't have much range but has a sight that can penetrate the weather a bit. Which will have the game change add a bit of a more stealth kind of approach It would seem but you could also implant some kinds of new items that will make these maps a truly a dynamic map which players will love to play in but might cause so OH NO! moments. |
Idont Knoweither
Triple Terrors
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.23 05:06:00 -
[97] - Quote
So... it'snot allowed to camp objectives with a sniper rifle... but it's okay to camp them WITH TANKS??
I was just in a domination match, low player count.
Sorry, dont know the name of the map becase "last battle" doesnt seem to report that.
twisty mostly groundfloor mini-city, with an S type road going through it. one drinking bowl building.
After they took the single objective.. They just camped on it with a madrugar, fully buffed out.
The tank cant technically get next to the objective, but it has a nice wide open shooting alley on the objective.
At the same time... it is fully protected from any kind of long range attacks.. you have to get CLOSE, to attack it with swarm lauchers, since there's no line-of-sight longer than about 50m ? !!
Similarly, I cant tank-railgun it from a distance. no line of sight.
And up close its suicide.
|
deepfried salad gilliam
Sanguine Knights
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.24 01:33:00 -
[98] - Quote
I would really like a 3 story building map
Lots of halways twists and turns
Building should be in middle of map 1 underground level 1st floor having open bay doors 3 rd floor having plenty of windows and rooms
And scattered structures to give importance to area around |
Karl Koekwaus
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
181
|
Posted - 2013.09.24 23:40:00 -
[99] - Quote
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
it's no Los Santos, but it's pretty perfect as far as dust maps go
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
not too complex, although the Point C on Fractured road takes a bit getting used too since the capture point lies below the CRU if I remember correct, which can confuse people who rely on the radar to guide them to the capture point and end up at the CRU
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
it's balanced.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
This one is one of my favourite maps. It seems every playstyle can be usefull in this map.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
If I remember correct, point B in this map is some of the most fun one can have to defend as a shotty scout or heavy (the elevated point B with the 2 spiral 'staircases' comming up.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
All the maps we have so far could be placed on a Barren planet and they would fit perfectly. There is no folliage, no traces of other humans having lived or worked on the maps we play on. it's all so sterile and clean |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
6235
|
Posted - 2013.09.26 21:57:00 -
[100] - Quote
I do wish there were more rooms and corridors to explore in the research lab outpost. |
|
|
Mobius Kaethis
Molon Labe.
RISE of LEGION
835
|
Posted - 2013.09.28 14:41:00 -
[101] - Quote
Love the new complex sockets both large and small. The combination of tight winding passages with wide open areas is exellent in that it allows different weapon specializations the opportunity to really shine. Keep up the great work. |
Ludvig Enraga
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
541
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 01:33:00 -
[102] - Quote
All maps are fine as they offer good diversity in layout complexity. No map was too complex, though the research facility is the most complex of all and the best one - not only esthetically but also generating more diverse tactics and play style (it has a good mix of close to medium range settings as well as good hide and seek playground). |
Sylwester Dziewiecki
Beyond Hypothetical Box
178
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 12:49:00 -
[103] - Quote
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
- I think it is complex but instead of blaming layout, I blame our compass and what information it's provide. It was big surprise for me when I realize that there was underground tunnel at beginning - I saw red dots running 'somewhere' I just couldn't say where they are. Our scanning system should provide information about walls on our level distinguishing other levels, same as with red dots and where they are.
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
- Not very complex. I think that small, and medium sockets could be even more complex if future. It would be awesome to see underground structure as well some day.
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
- Red base is missing Supply Depot(it's hurt when you blow up every single SD because you know that there is one more at the base). Beside that I love this map. If I could I would add more rocks on column 14-15 next to 'bridge-cliff' to compensate rocks at other side and gives snipers and HAV some place to safely move to D or camp A. Tower next to B is missing ladders.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
- Complexity is ok here. What I do not like in this map: red base Supply Depot is unusable for dropship and HAV, that long pipe is missing leaders at both side where it comes in to the ground, big tower is missing ladders to.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
- One Supple Depot need to be outside of the socked at red base.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
- I would like to see the names of the various parts of the map displayed when ever we enter them(so far I do not know how to call up individual 'new' small/medium sockets) - the name could be show somewhere near compas on HUD. |
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Top Men.
1347
|
Posted - 2013.10.01 23:55:00 -
[104] - Quote
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
The complexity is actually good for the map. While I don't think all maps need to be this complex it works very well and achieves the objective of making you feel like you are assaulting an important space. While initially confusing I like it more than manus peak and such by a wide margin. More maps of this level of complexity and detail would be welcomed with open arms.
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 don't know enough about the smaller sockets to comment, or really worry about it, unless you speak of the older ones, in which case I suggest using them sparingly.
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
This feels like an outpost or travel route chokepoint map to me. Interesting design, and it works as long as it doesn't get repetitive over and over and over.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
This one screams military outpost, remote base or what have you. It works fine and allows vehicles to be used without creating impassable areas. Again, some of the simplicity is easy to deal with and it makes sense.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
complex enough, given the amount of obstructive stuff. It works.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
More dynamic battlefields with less cover-less open space work wonders. Previous maps were severely lacking in terrain and buildings that could be used as chokepoints to control the flow of battle. I'd say this is a much better start overall in map design.
Show a compass on the radar so we can orient and plan and react by direction please. |
Flint Beastgood III
GunFall Mobilization
Covert Intervention
189
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 16:04:00 -
[105] - Quote
I can find no real fault with the new maps. Have had so much fun playing them in comparison to the prior monotony of old maps/sockets. Adding the new sockets into the old maps have spruced them up a bit and made the battles more interesting. You have definitely done a great job with these new maps/outposts and I can't wait to see what you have in store for us next. Bring it on!
Cookies for the whole level design team! |
Shion Typhon
Intara Direct Action
Caldari State
290
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 06:48:00 -
[106] - Quote
1) The new Research Outpost is much better than the usual maps. It just feels like an old school Unreal map. I can't really specify why, I need to play on it more but I think it is partly due to the interconnectedness of the levels, Unlike the other maps where roofs and ground levels are disconnected and roofs just become cheesy sniper/uplink nests, this is actually full of connections, much better.
2) ??
3) The area around B is OK but the rest is terrible. Just too long and open and if you go off an edge you spend half the match running around trying to get back up or re-engage. This isn't just around the A bridge, its also around the two pyramid buildings on either side of B.
Maps need a mix of longer distances for vehicles and clustering for infantry but this one just has zero clustering. E & C need to be closer to B and A needs to be closer to D.
Only thing this map has going for it is that its not a bowl for redliners.
4) Haven't played
5) Played for like 2 mins (thanks matchmaker) so can't comment. |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
1070
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 01:17:00 -
[107] - Quote
Shion Typhon wrote:1) The new Research Outpost is much better than the usual maps. It just feels like an old school Unreal map. I can't really specify why, I need to play on it more but I think it is partly due to the interconnectedness of the levels, Unlike the other maps where roofs and ground levels are disconnected and roofs just become cheesy sniper/uplink nests, this is actually full of connections, much better.
I suspect some of my old Quake death-match roots seeped into the design. |
|
knight of 6
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
346
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 01:44:00 -
[108] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:Shion Typhon wrote:1) The new Research Outpost is much better than the usual maps. It just feels like an old school Unreal map. I can't really specify why, I need to play on it more but I think it is partly due to the interconnectedness of the levels, Unlike the other maps where roofs and ground levels are disconnected and roofs just become cheesy sniper/uplink nests, this is actually full of connections, much better.
I suspect some of my old Quake death-match roots seeped into the design.
then you need to let more of your quake deathmatch roots into all the designs. my favorite outpost by far. I love the verticality. |
Shotty GoBang
Pro Hic Immortalis
1483
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 02:09:00 -
[109] - Quote
Loving to changes to vertical design.
Fast slopes ... interior/exterior stair wells ...
Less getting shot the butt when halfway up a ladder :-) |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
1071
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 02:32:00 -
[110] - Quote
knight of 6 wrote:CCP LogicLoop wrote:Shion Typhon wrote:1) The new Research Outpost is much better than the usual maps. It just feels like an old school Unreal map. I can't really specify why, I need to play on it more but I think it is partly due to the interconnectedness of the levels, Unlike the other maps where roofs and ground levels are disconnected and roofs just become cheesy sniper/uplink nests, this is actually full of connections, much better.
I suspect some of my old Quake death-match roots seeped into the design. then you need to let more of your quake deathmatch roots into all the designs. my favorite outpost by far. I love the verticality.
Keep your eyes peeled for the Caldari Production Facility and the Minmatar Cargo Hub. |
|
|
|
lateris ablon
Commando Perkone
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 05:50:00 -
[111] - Quote
Would love to see battles within Cities of New Eden.  Cities are already half destroyed from Dust Bunnies. |
Shion Typhon
Intara Direct Action
Caldari State
295
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 09:48:00 -
[112] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:knight of 6 wrote:CCP LogicLoop wrote:Shion Typhon wrote:1) The new Research Outpost is much better than the usual maps. It just feels like an old school Unreal map. I can't really specify why, I need to play on it more but I think it is partly due to the interconnectedness of the levels, Unlike the other maps where roofs and ground levels are disconnected and roofs just become cheesy sniper/uplink nests, this is actually full of connections, much better.
I suspect some of my old Quake death-match roots seeped into the design. then you need to let more of your quake deathmatch roots into all the designs. my favorite outpost by far. I love the verticality. Keep your eyes peeled for the Caldari Production Facility and the Minmatar Cargo Hub.
As one guy said, maps need to move away from reliance on ladders and move to interior ramps, staircases and stairwells (although given the buggy grabby nature of Dust staircases, maybe ramps are better. I just wish you guys could fix this grabbing mesh problem, it really ruins even the good bits in maps.
If you have a roof, there should be a ramp up to the top, forces campers to defend their position. |
Xaviah Reaper
Nyain San
EoN.
105
|
Posted - 2013.10.10 13:02:00 -
[113] - Quote
I couldn't give a crap about your posts CCP. you seem to feel the same way about ours.
go f*** yourselves |
Baal Omniscient
L.O.T.I.S.
Public Disorder.
661
|
Posted - 2013.10.15 01:43:00 -
[114] - Quote
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
It was pleasantly complex, however more complexity would not be a bad thing.
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
Not overly complex, just a little difficult to navigate at first due to the places where you can drop to your death by going over the wrong railing.
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
Not quite complex enough, the open area under the bridge needs some usefulness.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
Complex enough for a map of it's size.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
Complex enough for a map of it's size.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
Though the sockets and facilities are wonderfully complex, the terrain between them could use a bit of a complexity buff to make the travel from place to place more interesting.
Sorry if I went off topic a little in that last one, that's a bit of a vague question lol |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
1114
|
Posted - 2013.10.15 03:05:00 -
[115] - Quote
Baal Omniscient wrote:1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
It was pleasantly complex, however more complexity would not be a bad thing.
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
Not overly complex, just a little difficult to navigate at first due to the places where you can drop to your death by going over the wrong railing.
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
Not quite complex enough, the open area under the bridge needs some usefulness.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
Complex enough for a map of it's size.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
Complex enough for a map of it's size.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?Though the sockets and facilities are wonderfully complex, the terrain between them could use a bit of a complexity buff to make the travel from place to place more interesting.
Sorry if I went off topic a little in that last one, that's a bit of a vague question lol
That's what it's for. More to mention anything you would like to about the newer maps. 
|
|
Shion Typhon
Intara Direct Action
Caldari State
305
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 10:12:00 -
[116] - Quote
Had a chance to play on Fracture Road a couple of times now.
On the face of it when you first examine it as an FPS map it shouldn't work, it seems too long and too exposed.
However, through some miracle it actually does work against all odds.
My theory on why it works is twofold. The terrain does two things, it curves in the long distances and undulates in the medium distances. What this does is break up the map into smaller chunks which you don't consciously recognise.
This design has a few advantages, the horizontal curves (basically the road path) prevent extreme long range fire, this protects vehicles from AV and infantry from vehicles and it does it without the bad effects of the bowl-maps littered with obstacles. A flat snake map works better.
Then, the vertical undulations (the actual terrain itself) do the same thing to infantry at medium range. You can still move freely but the undulations are just high enough to block sight and fire until you close in. The entire distance between each major piece of building cover is broken up by light curves and light changes in altitude. Once again, the frustrations of the bowl + canyon maps are removed but cover is maintained.
Additionally, these curves and undulations occur at correctly spaced intervals. If they were too far apart they would have no effect, too close together and it would start to cramp vehicles and create too much cover for infantry.
The other advantage this map has is that creates cover WITHOUT making excessive use of impassable terrain (cliffs, building walls, random rock outcrops, etc. You can move pretty freely at all times yet maneuver at all times without being channeled into some annoying cul-de-sac.
I also think it is vital that this map not have flat topped sniper towers, it would be destroyed if it did. The irregular pointy towers forces snipers to fight at ground level which is required by this map. A sniper can fire across multiple undulations without being given 100% dominance.
Anyway, just theory on my few games on this map. |
Aleksander Black
Immortal Retribution
193
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 02:58:00 -
[117] - Quote
1. About right, maybe could be a bit even more complex. First time I went in I was confused exploring all the entrances and the navigation paths, but after a while it all became clear. I guess you could add another floor or something simple, but if you try to add more complexity to the layout/navigation paths it could start to really get confusing even for people used to the map. About right I would say.
2. Medium Sockets give the same feeling as the laboratory - complex enough. The way the buildings, stairs and rooftops were interconnected was pretty interesting, not too complex neither too simple. At a first glance the small sockets seem too simple, but considering the limited space available I would say its good enough. Yeah, they look simple at first but they have their own perks if you look close. Could have more of them, maybe (hiding spots and alternative routes).
3. Layout seemed complex at first but fast to get used to. I particularly liked the way some objectives get pretty far apart, giving a reason for Dropships to be called. Once you get it, it's a pretty straightforward map with a few common strategy patterns to follow, which lead to a different game dynamic from maps like Manus Peak with objectives evenly placed around each other.
4. This one map, I'll admit, it's the only one I haven't mastered the outskirts layout yet. I mean, navigation is simple in paper, but getting around this map in a LAV is not really very intuitive at all (I ended up in the wrong place a couple times then gave up and kept wenting to the main routes in the center). Also, I guess it's how the map is designed but it would be more interesting if the sockets cycled. From what I understood this map is static around the objectives, so... could be more complex in this regard?
5. Also a pretty straightforward map. I liked to see the old sockets in this new design. Not hard to navigate or to grasp the layout. Just like in question 3, the layout of the CRUs positioned further away from the center allow for interesting strategic decisions, it could be more complex when you think about it, but for a map with 4 objectives it is in a good spot.
6. I like random sockets. Static maps are not as interesting as maps generated with random sockets. And I hope I kept this as you guys expected... ROOFTOPS. I read the post above mine and I have to say it, good job keeping the rooftops clean. It's not a layer of complexity, its a layer of idiocy to allow Forge Gunners, Snipers and people with Massdrivers spam the whole map below. Keep this up. |
Ryno Zamayid
DIOS EX.
Top Men.
10
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 22:22:00 -
[118] - Quote
I enjoyed all of you're maps, I have absolutely no problems with the facilities... It's off topic, but can you guys do something more interesting with the terrain? I understand that it's called "Dust 514" but can we get a little less of the open dirt plains on the maps? I'm taking into account both the old and the new, Both vehicles and infantry would probably appreciate having more cover to work with from point A to point B, instead of of an open mile of nothing but dirt, it would make it easier to sneak up on points as well, if you had a more dense map. Add some sci-fi trees or something... You could always give it a story of how it was made possible by terra-forming. Like I said, it was off topic. Just a suggestion. |
saxonmish
Third Rock From The Sun
7
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 08:26:00 -
[119] - Quote
i love these new maps, im a vehicle specialist and these maps make vehicles feel necessary and it gives an opportunity to have big tank battles. i was in my veyu on 'fracture road' just minding my own business then out of nowhere 4 madrugars came from all directions except from behind, but because i have my enforcer skill to level 5 i took them all out, i got some hate mail for that lol. but anyway the research facility is a massive step up from all of the old maps. The fighting on different levels is really fun and its easy to sneak around behind the enemy, the only problem for me sometimes is the FPS goes to an unplayable state, if im in a vehicle with bad FPS i dont dare go into the research facility because it has on many occasions blown up my veyu due to glitching. but i do love all of the new maps, Good Job. :D |
Jakar Umbra
Militaires-Sans-Frontieres
310
|
Posted - 2013.10.23 04:10:00 -
[120] - Quote
1. The Research Facility is complex in a way installations should be complex. Defined pathways, multi-layered combat, a decent combination of close quarters and medium range combat. It's lack of room for vehicles is a plus in such a way that the facility itself is not designed around it. As a research facility there is not much in the way of roadways outside of a few where deliveries of some form would be expected, hence the loading dock in the D4 grid area. In such a way it clearly places an emphasis on infantry combat, which is not necessarily a minus.
2. The supporting smaller sockets are appropriate; neither too complex nor too simple. They make for a decent mixture of combat according to the socket itself.
3. Border Gulch has quickly become one of my favourite maps to play on. As a person who runs support logisitics as well as dropship troop transport it's long ranges makes my ability to fly invaluable and makes escape from AV possible while still difficult. Combat around the B, A and D objectives require a varied approaches as their locations are different with B being both difficult to assault and defend. It is a far more open map with not much complexity in the structures themselves but the terrain itself makes engagements satisfying and rewarding.
4. Fracture Road has also quickly become a favourite map of mine. Once again it's extended engagement ranges between objectives and structures make assaults varied, while the close quarters feel of the structures themselves lends to a very appropriate combination of both vehicular and infantry warfare. The socket on the H3 square, where objective C is, is, to me, brilliant and makes for some very intense firefights. Objective B's socket, the landing pad, is great as firefights erupt between the two interior buildings as well as from the upper walkways and the landing pads themselves.
5. In short I am in love with Impact Ridge. I've used my Dropship to decent effect here, dropping squadmates both inside the facility and out. The outside objectives are good for vehicular warfare while the inside is fought for by infantry. Outside the facility the ranges are good and the structure placement is close enough to allow for quick movement without being too overwhelming. I've had some interesting chases when I've chased enemy LAVs through the craters with both Dropships and other LAVs. Solid map with clearly defined parameters which can occasionally be bent or broken.
6. In the game's current state of 16 vs 16 I think the ranges and distances put in place on these newer maps are just on the edge of what we need before an expansion into larger player counts in matches as occasionally even on these maps, players can easily get spread out. The sizes of the map make it somewhat difficult to be redlined, though not necessarily impossible as I've seen it happen, though less times on these maps than I've seen on the older ones. Names for areas in the maps add to immersion to give the structures a more human feel to them.
All in all, solid maps. Good work to the design teams. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |