| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
738
   |
Posted - 2013.09.05 03:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
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. |
|
|
CCP Frame
C C P
C C P Alliance
1447
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 03:59:00 -
[2] - Quote
Glue applied!
After answering these, you can visit our Map Feedback forum section for all the map goodness! |
|
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
1531
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 04:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
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. |
Starfire Revo
G I A N T
EoN.
103
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 04:20:00 -
[4] - Quote
1. Love the complexity, makes things really interesting. Defence is challenging but manageable through the use of scanners.
2. SI Set?
3. Only played the ambush version of this map. Aside from any bugs that might crop up, it's the easily the best map in the game right now.
4. I couldn't find the hack terminal at C when I played, also jumped over a ledge inside the building there without any warning that it was dangerous. Map is generally huge and feels more suited for 24v24.
5. Only played ambush variant, not much to say. Centre point seems really easy to defend.
6. Some maps (Fracture Road) need a smaller play area for game modes at this size. Many Ambush maps feel too large in general. New maps seem vastly superior to older maps, so it's really annoying to get old maps when you're playing. Would be nice if older maps could get some love. |
501st Headstrong
Super Nerds
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 04:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
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. |
Heinz Doofenshertz
BetaMax.
483
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 04:41:00 -
[6] - Quote
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation? Almost perfect, the signs, the stairs, the insanity. MORE WE NEED MORE
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex? They were great
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough? Have not played on, sorry
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough? it was insane, the ups, the downs, the really downs. love it.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough? Have not played on sorry
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say? MORE PLEASE
|
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
738
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 04:44:00 -
[7] - Quote
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.
The links to the images of the gameplay areas did not help? |
|
Heinz Doofenshertz
BetaMax.
483
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 04:48:00 -
[8] - Quote
if IRC has taught anyone anything, it's never clikc the links |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
795
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 04:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
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. |
501st Headstrong
Super Nerds
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 05:00:00 -
[10] - 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.
I second that notion. Perhaps in the next update, the name of the map could be displayed over the WarBarge's Map? It would be nice to finally be able to use that piece of equipment.
|
|
|
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
740
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 05:03:00 -
[11] - Quote
I would appreciate if we keep the requests out of this thread. We are trying to collect specific information. If you would like to make a request, feel free to start a new thread for it.
Thank you.  |
|
501st Headstrong
Super Nerds
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 05:05:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:I would appreciate if we keep the requests out of this thread. We are trying to collect specific information. If you would like to make a request, feel free to start a new thread for it. Thank you.
My apologies. |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
740
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 05:11:00 -
[13] - Quote
501st Headstrong wrote:CCP LogicLoop wrote:I would appreciate if we keep the requests out of this thread. We are trying to collect specific information. If you would like to make a request, feel free to start a new thread for it. Thank you. My apologies.
Not to worry. Just do not want this topic to lose focus.  |
|
True Adamance
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
1612
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 05:41:00 -
[14] - 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- It is not about complexity for this socket you have given is absolutely fantastic is design. The multi tiered levels allow for a fantastic array of manoeuvres, and combat scenarios which actively makes the combat deeper, more interesting, and in many cases more of a thinking mans game. These sockets you have given us are not complex at all and are reminiscent of the original 2009 trailer that drew in much of your original fanbase. if anything I am sorely disappointed to have to play on the old sockets, when these new glorious sockets are available.
2- Again no none of the smaller complexes are too complex if anthing they are improving the quality of the game in terms immersion and dynamic gameplay. I do not want to be forced into contact with my enemies. I prefer the new sockets because they allow for me to select how I will approach my enemies. Same level, lower level, flank, breach through, etc.
3-BORDER GULCH IS AMAZING! I like Border Gulch how it is. Especially the Domination formations
4- Fractured Road it nice. I very much so like how it can incorporate Armoured Warfare and Infantry onto one map. Very Good effort.
5-I love Impact Ridge especially the Ambush variant of it, with the Caldera it is perfect infantry and tank oriented map.
6- Personally all I can say is that all of the current skirmish and domination map varients could all accommodate a large number of player per team, while the size might be an issue I low populated games, the complexity and size would be a huge boon to greater numbers of players per side. In all the complexity of the maps was what I feel dust was lacking, each map was perfectly fine for a shooter, but not necessarily and enjoyable of engrossing map that had replayability. However I can say the new sockets give existing maps and new maps a much greater replayability factor.
Newer content balances vehicles and Tank combat very well. Also I greatly appreciate the greater sense of defensibility of the new sockets and interior spaces. It feels like I am attacking a massive sprawling complex of importance. Keep to this level of map design and I cannot fault you of the teams developing them at all. Please put the same effort into Amarrian sockets. Great jobs guys, Map design IMO is the best aspect of the update. |
Soraya Xel
New Eden's Most Wanted
Top Men.
517
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 06:14:00 -
[15] - 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 perfect. A worthy map on it's own, rather than a mere plug-in that depends on the overall game to carry it. It wasn't too complex at all, and the navigational signs are excellent.
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 maybe would like to be able to reach higher levels on the Energy Core, but in general, they seemed just right. What we'd expect from small/mediums.
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
I can't comment yet, as I haven't been able to play on it yet.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
I thought it was just about right as well. It's a more elongated map than a lot of the others we're used to, I think, and I appreciated the unique qualities of it.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
I can't comment yet, as I haven't been able to play on it yet.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
Please do more. |
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
1533
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 07:09:00 -
[16] - Quote
6. (addition to previous) In regards to anyone saying the maps and sockets are too large or the compexity giving them too much space I would have to disagree. You do not need to have every part of a map or a socket occupied by players every single moment. It is great to have large empty areas for us to sneak and flank as well as allow the combat to naturally progress through the sections. One thing I very much hate about simple outposts like the Communications outpost and every single previous small and medium socket (excluding Consolidation Matrix) is that everywhere you went you were forced into combat, no real tactics with assaults. |
Fizzer94
L.O.T.I.S.
77
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 08:56:00 -
[17] - Quote
I do have a opinion on one of the small sockets actually. It is the Reactor Core I think, the one that has a railing going mostly around it and has a small building in a concrete depression in the middle. I feel there are not enough exits from this socket and it can be kind of a deathtrap, which can be bad because oftentimes there are CRUs and spawn points inside them. I don't know how this could be changed but you could just remove the CRUs and put them on the exterior of the socket. |
crazy space 1
Unkn0wn Killers
1676
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 09:55:00 -
[18] - 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.
my big issue is too many spawn points. Makes those cool inside areas under used. There is no reason to hide spawn padsbecause there are more spawn points than players on my team. Please reconsider. and it's not a request I mean with so many spawn points you neevr EXPLORE the map which makes these larger maps confusing... Look at other maps, there are not 12 spawn points you have to run around to get places, use LAVS to get from point to point or to defend/attack. None of these happens but the map design itself is fun.
the map is awesome , if you want to be lazy *but effective* think about using the same model and putting a new skin on it for each race... becuase you've got tons of spaces you could put objective points, I really like the design of the front gates. The way you can shoot out the windows at tanks is awesome. I really like the size but we need more things to take control of. How will defense relays work in to the map I mean the maps should be more complex since you have so much planned for them.
Also I like how big all the small and medium stuff, It makes me feel like it will be useful space once PvE makes it's way in
this isn't very good feedback but I just got home and I'm sleepy I will write a read feedback thing later. |
Torneido Achura
The Suicide Kingz
27
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 10:59:00 -
[19] - Quote
So far it has been a blast to play on those maps, the interiors are doing wonders to injecting new gameplay and are funtimes every time, but feels empty at times (we need more players on every match)
Also I do think we could use more to the point signals: some sort of "exit/stairs(up/down)/reactor(Alpha, Delta, etc) and such", certain outposts/maps/watev are like mazes but I like it
btw: I've encountered a few dead ends, some sort of hint on those is required  |
shaman oga
Nexus Balusa Horizon
DARKSTAR ARMY
558
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 11:08:00 -
[20] - Quote
The new maps are awesome, but they are a little bit too large for 16 vs 16, i like the new buildings and all i can say is that we need a better mini map to help us to find the way out/in of certain buildings, rough shapes of the structures would be perfect.
Another point is that the new maps are too big for ambush, please give us a tiny part of the map, as playable.
I also like the roof that damage people, no more roof campers. |
|
|
Ghural
The Southern Legion
The Umbra Combine
123
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 11:31:00 -
[21] - Quote
Personally, except for some frame rate issues with the new large installation I get when flying round it I a dropship, I think all the new maps are brilliant.
Pease continue to use the same design magic in the future. |
dinkum tachyglossus
Red and Silver Hand
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 12:09:00 -
[22] - Quote
I love the new maps and sockets.
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
The Facility could be a little more complex in layout . The third floor in the complex ends in a small platform with no reason adding a room or roof access would be good.
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. more cover to shot through as a sniper would be good. An ability to get on top of the structure without a dropship would be good.
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
Border Gulch could be a little more complex as it seems that the sight lines are too long when using a dropship to fly in.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
This is 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?
This should be far more complex in layout and navigation. There should be more of everything in this area as the two start zones are close.
This would be a nice area for a more urban warfare complex. More roads and streets with frequent intersections. With buildings breaking any sight lines
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
Could the red line be expanded for dropships. It does not allow you to fly easily into the creator on the northern side of Border Gulch . Also could the research facility have rooms with doors that can be opened and shut. Adding machinery that moves and elevators to the top of some of the complex would be good. Also crawl spaces in the complex would be good.
|
Icedslayer
SVER True Blood
Public Disorder.
116
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 12:10:00 -
[23] - Quote
1.I Absolutely love the Research Facility and i found that while the first time going in was complex for getting around, after learning the layout it actually pretty simple. But there's a few issues i've found with the new outpost. First off on the letter E5 the Enemy spawns literally 3m away and most the time looking at the letter, this makes any solo or even team hacks on that letter a real pain. Second the letter that's in the underground around J7, it seems there's alot of ways into that letter but only 2 ways to get out of the letter that ive been able to find and those points are the K4 Stairs and the road access at I8-9. I think if there was third way out maybe around the D7 or B7 it would make things more interesting and allow heavies to move up towards the top point (E5) but using the uderground as cover. Other than that i think Scale and Complexity as well as the multi level fighting really adds that deepth to the game.
2. Ive yet to fight in all of them but the ones i have fought in are well layed out and still provide that multi level fighting as well as providing protection from tanks, but it also provides great protection for tankers if they use it right.
3. I've only played this map 5-6 times and i love the scale of it. The areas i fight in the most are B, A, D. The Letter A just reminds me of a Bridge you would see in PlanetSide 2, it massive and great fun especially once you get around the letter. B has to be my favorite Letter on this map, its right at the center of the action and theres a resupply right next to the letter, if you stealth take that letter and you have there whole team spawning around you, combine that with the resupply on the roof and you have some alamo action . Over All i felt like this map was more of a vehicle map and actually required a LAV to get around, which is a good thing, but it also has areas we're vehicles wont work or be as effective and i think that's a good combination. On a side note, i think this map would be insane fun with 32v32 or 64v64
4. I haven't had this come up in the rotation yet so i can't comment on it, but it looks really fun
5. Since i posted about the compound in 1 all i can comment on are the outer points and to be honest i spent most my time while playing this map on the compound around B and A so i can't really comment to much on the outside points
6. What i would love to see in the future would be more gameplay options, Generators for example if you took out the generator in a compound the the lights would go out and and anything that it powered such as anti-vehicle shields would go down, allowing vehicles into the compound. This would be more for Skirmish 3.0 where you have a attacking and a defending side. This could also work in PVE and have a spec ops drone be able to get through to destroy the generator |
King Bolly
Hostile Acquisition Inc
The Superpowers
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 13:59:00 -
[24] - Quote
i love the new maps. |
S Park Finner
Guardian Solutions
DARKSTAR ARMY
250
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 14:23:00 -
[25] - Quote
I'm a little torn about the research lab interiors. On the one hand the clean design is excellent. On the other hand I relate to the comment above about being lost in them.
It seemed to me that some interior objects -- a machine, a desk, a console -- that gives different locations different signatures would be a help. More interior signage could help as well. "Lab 02 Stairwell 1, Level 3" I really like the "Exit" signs and arrows you've provided so far.
Right now it looks like the scientists packed everything up and got out of Dodge before the fight started.
All that being said I haven't checks out all the structures in detail. |
Draco Cerberus
Hellstorm Inc
League of Infamy
272
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 14:53:00 -
[26] - Quote
I have certainly enjoyed having different areas to explore. These maps are a great addition to the game. Please continue to add more complexity to new maps and continue to create more of them. I like being a mouse in a maze going after the cat  |
IgniteableAura
Pro Hic Immortalis
131
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 16:24:00 -
[27] - Quote
1. I think the new research facility has the right amount of complexity. I really enjoy maps that allow you to flank or take different routes to the various objectives. Its wonderful when you find a "secret" route that is not often traveled. It give you a sense of exploration. Whats also nifty is that you guys added directional signs so people who are lost can find their way, also allows us the ability to use callouts for specific sections of the map. Also there are some staircases on D6 and F4 that have the top staircase leading to a dead end. I think you should instead have a catwalk that joins the two staircases. I was excited to get to the top, only to be like.....oh thats it? A dead end.
2. I didn't feel the small sockets were as complex or not enough for my taste. You also need to make sure the railings are not so difficult to vault over. OR if this is intended, leave some space where there are no railings so heavys can get down more conveniently.
3. I havent had the opportunity to play this map yet.
4. I think this map was a little too spread out. I feel we need an avenue to get from the different objectives faster without having to call in a LAV. I am hoping the new speedster vehicles will alleviate this problem. Also there is a problem with a turret on the west side of Alpha objective where it is underground. The ambush for this map was a little slow, difficult to find people. Either needs more people or the space needs to be smaller. I overall like the idea of this map. I think it could use some underground tunnels that allow infantry to stay safe from snipers/vehicles. Would up the "complexity" of the map.
5. Impact Ridge is my favorite of the new maps so far. It has plenty of options for all types of roles. Vehicles can defend outside objectives but fear the interior. Interior research outpost is awesome as stated earlier. The only thing I worry about is the uplink spam that could happen on the top of buildings with dropships. There is no means to get on top of the buildings besides via dropship. Could be intended, but I do worry about the spamming of uplinks on such a key facility. ITs quite easy to defend both B and A if you get uplinks on the top of the buildings. Again the railings issue happens on the Charlie objective and its quite difficult to navigate. Strategic placement of railings should allow people access in different ways. But no a SOLE means of access.
6. Overall I am impressed by the new map layouts and sockets sets. I really like the verticality and the different options and means of access. I really enjoy that I can bypass a route by using a scout to jump into an air vent. ITs just freaking brilliant. These sorts of options need to become frequent, but not always obvious.
Thanks again for all your hard work |
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
241
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 17:11:00 -
[28] - Quote
1. Research Facility
There are many nooks and crannies in this outpost but it's not too complex to navigate. With the current number of players I consider it much too large, but I don't consider it too complex considering it's size. Most of it's just empty, that's all. Even after just like 30 minutes of playtime in this outpost I managed to connect the dots and navigate the layout proficiently. I'd just like to have more players here.
2. Supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set
Not at all complex. These could handle more buildings, routes, verticality, etc.
3. Border Gulch
Not at all complex.
4. Fracture Road
Adequately complex. It took me a while to connect everything into one mental map because there are many ways to get from one point to another. If it was less complex I'd be afraid of getting bored later on.
5. Impact Ridge
Not at all complex.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
If maps have a complex layout they may be intimidating at first, but in the long run this complexity turns into depth as the player becomes aware of the tactical advantages and disadvantages of the different approaches the map has to offer. This is under the condition that the maps are adequately sized for the playercount.
|
JP Acuna
RoyalSquad514
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 17:20:00 -
[29] - Quote
I'm not used to them yet to recall specific differences, but in general they're all very complex and offer a lot of possibilities indoors and outdoors.
-They're some kind of labyrinthine, which allows attackers to infiltrate more than in older maps. The new difficulty to find uplinks is very helpful at this.
-Fire can come from any floor, it's not so linear or predictable as before.
-Outdoors encounters are a lot better, with more cover and bumpy terrain to hide or flank enemies without being too exposed to snipers.
The most valuable aspect of 1.4 update by far, good job!
PS: I do miss the ditch under the bridge in the small city (older maps) where now there's a pipe. |
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
4007
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 18:00:00 -
[30] - Quote
Overall, I found it challenging but in a stimulating sense as that is a good thing. I also like the fact that you posted signs throughout the major facilities so that squad leaders can have a general idea on where everyone is. Instead of saying "northwest entrance" I can just say "gate 01". |
|
|
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!! |
|
|
Bettie Boop 2100190003
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
147
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 07:41:00 -
[61] - Quote
I must say, in the research facility I LOVE the art work giving direction in the facility!
It would be nice to see more of this; artwork, signs, propaganda posters, graffiti, KEEP OFF MY LAWN signs, and fan art. Keep it appropriate and tasteful on maps, but its nice to have maps that aren't just a facsimile of 5(ish) textures applied to every surface. Lived in > Sterilized Even a ruin with furniture and detritus would be nice.
When the citizens of New Eden hear / see an enemy invasion coming do they comely pack their bags clean their house make sure they got everything before leaving the war zone? (I always imagine them sitting just outside of the redzone eating popcorn and betting on whos lab/office gets trashed the most) Or is it supposed to be a fast 'shock and awe' ship full of clones arrives with just enough time for the population to grab some precious items and clear out before the clones start killing everything that isnt friendly. |
Iskandar Zul Karnain
Hellstorm Inc
League of Infamy
1689
|
Posted - 2013.09.11 16:37:00 -
[62] - Quote
This is from an infantry perspective.
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
This should be the average level of complexity for large sockets. I particularly enjoy the tunnels and the underground supply depot.
Restricted rooftop access restricts snipers and MD spam for greater combat variety.
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
Support sockets do not necessarily need to be complex however there should be a lot of variety for support sockets.
I would like to some see very simple support sockets such as half walls, craters, burned out hulls, etc.
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
This map could be more complex. The bridge is lots of fun. The supporting sockets are simple but cater well to mid-long range combat. A few tunnels would be cool in this map. This map could use a bottomless pit under that bridge.
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
This map is just right. Socket complexity, sniper perches, and sprawl are very well balanced.
The map needs a few broken half walls along the roads and in the hills.
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
This map is just right. Socket complexity, sniper perches, and sprawl are very well balanced.
I like that this map really encourages personal transportation.
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
I like complex maps. I like variety. I like the feeling of being lost in a new location.
Maps and tactics get stale when everyone know the map inside and out.
I would love some sort of labyrinth socket.
Overall great job! I'm personally impressed with the overall quality of the new maps and am particularly excited for what your team will produce in the future. |
Protected Void
STRONG-ARMED BANDITS
87
|
Posted - 2013.09.11 23:45:00 -
[63] - Quote
I thoroughly enjoy playing on the new sockets. I've yet to build a full mental picture of the new large socket, but I love it nevertheless. Great work!
Also, I kind of like that some of the maps are large and that all parts aren't necessarily within reach for infantry in a matter of tens of seconds. This provides an opportunity for scouts and other sneakers to move around and set up distractions. Makes for a far more varied and dynamic battlefield. |
Sirpidey Adtur
Aloren Foundations
49
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 00:06:00 -
[64] - Quote
1.) While I got lost the first few times I went through it, the research outpost is well designed, and fun. Further, it's layout tends to make Gallente weapons shine. This is quite appropriate for gallente architecture.
2.) Great job, just the right amount of cover/complexity. Despite what some of us say about how the game is incomplete and a lot of things aren't implemented, your team, along with the sound team does an amazing job keeping the game fun.
3.) This bridge is a deathtrap for tanks. There are lots of areas that you can get stuck on... that don't LOOK like obvious stuck zones. Especially in E10 through F12.
4.) Another fun map, this one will become a well loved classic.
5.) I have not had the opportunity to play this map. I look forward to it.
6.) No, Everything I've said is covered pretty much. Thank you for listening. |
Admonishment
The Enclave Syndicate
Dark Taboo
11
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 00:47:00 -
[65] - Quote
Loving the new multiple layered maps it brings more diversity for the game. Definitely look forward to seeing more of these map types with even more floors to attack from different angles. Whoever came up with those ideas did a really nice job. Took some time getting adjusted to the new maps but as I played them more I enjoyed them much more after getting used to them. |
dw ad
Phantom Universe Task Force
Orion Empire
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 14:31:00 -
[66] - 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.
None of your maps is too complex or not complex enough. I like them in a "3D CAD Viewer" without FPS action.
But I the framerates in Research Facility are awfull. With or without the wind. With or without enemies
And framerate becomes worst with skilled scanners in your squad. Choosing weapons depending on framerates is really awful.
|
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
883
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 01:09:00 -
[67] - Quote
dw ad wrote: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. None of your maps is too complex or not complex enough. I like them in a "3D CAD Viewer" without FPS action. But I the framerates in Research Facility are awfull. With or without the wind. With or without enemies And framerate becomes worst with skilled scanners in your squad. Choosing weapons depending on framerates is really awful.
Yes, I have brought this up recently. My question I had asked was (and maybe you can answer this for me yourself) if you noticed this frame rate hit after the last patch or was it from start of release on 1.4?
We are trying to figure this one out, because it does meet our technical budgets. |
|
Bettie Boop 2100190003
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
149
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 02:06:00 -
[68] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:Yes, I have brought this up recently. My question I had asked was (and maybe you can answer this for me yourself) if you noticed this frame rate hit after the last patch or was it from start of release on 1.4?
We are trying to figure this one out, because it does meet our technical budgets.
I noticed it with the release of 1.4. Specifically when the active scanner hits more than 4-6 players (depending on map) it seems like the engine starts balking at the extra data processing load. Ive had my frame rate drop to around 10-20 when a group of 10 players was scanned. I dont know if it works the other way, where if my enemy scanns me if my team gets a decrease to FR, but Ill ask my corp to keep an eye out.
Hope that info helps! |
Powerh8er
Norwegian Dust514 Corporation
Top Men.
67
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 02:15:00 -
[69] - Quote
6. I love bunkers. |
Gilbatron
Circle of Huskarl
Minmatar Republic
122
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 02:40:00 -
[70] - Quote
please identify the maps ingame <3 |
|
|
D legendary hero
THE WARRIORS OF LEGEND
996
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 04:34:00 -
[71] - Quote
the new maps are all great. and should replace all the old ones EXCEPT the one with the green galent research facility in the middle. |
The Robot Devil
Molon Labe.
RISE of LEGION
982
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 05:44:00 -
[72] - Quote
I don't think that the levels are too complex at all. Sometimes those bunkers are hard to pop but the that is my problem. I have had a lot of fun on them. There are plenty of different types of environments to fight in and I have really been enjoying some of the narrow passages. If the points are defended by good squad it takes teamwork to move them out. Been having some good close quarters battles where heavies were doing well. |
Chief-Shotty
Planetary Response Organization
Test Friends Please Ignore
20
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 08:53:00 -
[73] - Quote
I wish i could be more specific on details on what things i like and don't by each map. However the new map designs are superb. I think any new maps should take on this new design philosophy. Plenty of angles of approach, choke-points, and the angles of fire you can achieve with a little exploration really makes fighting intense but in depth if you plan ahead.
3 things that i would like to see
1. Some more bunker style warfare! (Its awesome)
2. Would like more urban feel to environments perhaps fighting inside a large metropolitan area with buildings that would provide close quarters inside buildings but bring a 3D feel to if you are outside in the streets. More vertical style combat is perhaps what i would like to see.
3.One thing i didn't like is on "Fracture Road" when you play on domination the objective(A) is at the bottom level however there is no cover whatsoever if anybody comes down the 3 roads that lead to it or catwalks that overlook above it. I would like uplinks to not be in a location where that if an enemy catches or see you, there is no cover nearby or escape routes that could break the line of sight. I almost feel like it is a deathtrap attempting to hack it even if you are not under duress. Just a pet peeve. I'm sure some people like it because it requires a team to provide cover but even if you just happen to be down there, if an enemy is near you you cannot run. I have been trapped by tanks and LAVs like crazy. |
KingBlade82
The Phoenix Federation
188
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 08:59:00 -
[74] - Quote
1. For the new Research Facility. Overall, did you feel it was too complex or not very complex in layout and navigation?
A: I felt it was complex at first but easy to understand after and I love city areas we need more
2. For the supporting smaller sockets (mediums and smalls) in the SI Set. Did you feel these were too complex or not very complex?
A: a little complex but id say the right amount of complex
3. For the new game mode area Border Gulch, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
A: REALLY REALLY BIG in my opinion too big for only so many vehicles and current amount of players but fun map to play on none the less
4. For the new game mode area Fracture Road, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
A: again a large map too big for only so many vehicles and current amount of players but I do enjoy it
5. For the new game mode area Impact Ridge, did you feel its layout and navigation was too complex or not complex enough?
A: this one was the right size and complexity I enjoy it
6. Do you have any other comments or concerns not covered in this short list you would like to say?
A: don't make such large maps for only 16 vs 16 people unless we have more numbers in battle it becomes very agitating |
DAMIOS82
Unkn0wn Killers
44
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 10:20:00 -
[75] - Quote
1. the first few times around its allways a bit confusing, but after a while you know the maps and there choke points. So for me personally, the more complex the better. The fun part about these large maps is that, after a while you see battle's beeing fought on different places of the map. For where the main focus of conquest will lie. So again for me the more complex, the better.
For the reasearch station the only thing i would like to see is by opposite of B on the top. You have the two stair cases and they don't lead to anything other then a small platform. So perhaps it could lead to a room that's connected between the two stair cases and perhaps over looks B. Would make a nice fighting area.
2. The smaller sockets are good. the best one beeing the bridge on its own. Now that one is alott of fun. Perhaps a few more walk ways underneath the bridge, with good defendable positions. And perhaps a small bunker and/or tower on either side of the bridge, so that if you do get pushed to one side of the bridge atleast you can still try and defend that position. The way it is now, is that ones your pushed away from the end of the bridge you end up in a large open area where its just duck hunting for all those running around.
3. see the above
4. As fracture road is now is good. I don't now how complex you can make maps, but i would like to see some kind of underground tunnel connecting A and B locations, so that you can go over the top, but also underneath.
5. see 1, just the bit by the staircase.
6. These maps are alott better then the older ones. i'm not saying the old ones are bad and you do need variety. But finally we have the feeling of fighting in so called buildings/city's. So the more complex the better. And hope to see alott more of them. Just don't forget you also need the ability to defend your positions. So don't be to scarce with boxes, vehicles, rooms, bunkers, towers, ditches, etc. |
Dimitri Rascolovitch
The Immortal Knights
40
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 13:27:00 -
[76] - Quote
Domination on border gultch is unbalanced, all the southern spawn side eam has to do to win is hold the CRU on tile C 12
and with as small as the maps redlines are, it is nigh impossible to uproot them once they have taken hold of it, |
Funkmaster Whale
Daedali Inc.
582
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 13:45:00 -
[77] - Quote
The framerate issue is most evident when you have Logis crowding the supply depot in the Gallente Research Facility and subsequently proceed to drop an uplink/Nanohive in every corridor and hallway in that map. Trying to walk through the hallways with so much equipment on the map turns the game into Microsoft PowerPoint with guns.
I think the map is probably meeting technical budgets but when you throw in players, particle effects, tons and tons of equipment, vehicles, and network latency the game slows to a crawl. This has been a problem in outposts since the games inception but it seems more and more evident as the outposts get bigger and more complex. I know it's not your territory, LogicLoop, but if you could ask the DEVs about equipment spam's relation to performance loss that would be really appreciated, because I seriously think it's one of the biggest factors.
I only say this because the facility isn't all that laggy in the beginning, but once you start seeing all that equipment start popping up it destroys performance. |
CELESTA AUNGM
Kang Lo Directorate
Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 14:43:00 -
[78] - Quote
As an architect (when not playing video games at home), the layout, sightlines, and vehicle-vs-pedestrian paths always define my impression of any place or map. Hence my crit of these 5 maps are related to these same factors.
1- The Research Facility is an excellent example of a place built with CIVILIANS in mind, and therefore has increased complexity and difficulty when trying to acheive a MILITARY capture of null points. It is the most complex of any of the maps, but is NOT too complex
2- The Small Support Sockets have a more military feel, and are NOT too complex. Their separation from the main socket causes squads to often overlook them, allowing individuals to sneak in and win a match by capturing as many of the small sockets as possible. Further separating them by depressing them several meters into the earth is a great addition to the challenge.
3-- Border Gultch is NOT too complex. It is an example of a good MILITARY-minded map, because the famous bridge is a "choke-point" or avenue of approach that can't be easily snatched by HAVs. Some of the finest team matches occur at this bridge, and it should remain a tight bridge that requires infantry to take.
4-- Fracture Road is NOT too complex. Again, a terrain that is simple for a military to assess and navigate.
5-- Impact Ridge is uncomfortably tight to maintain control of, even after your force has captured the null points. It is NOT too complex.
My only suggestion is to follow through with the success of the "Research Facility", and utilize that "civilian" style layout (of wide paved roads with many inticing doorways and hard to defend areas) in a few of the maps to come (while the majority of maps should NOT be civilian in my opinion).
Presuming that EVE capsuleers will have a choice of "sockets" with which to plant their districts, it would be exciting to give them the intricate choice of a "Military-and-easy-to-hold" facility design versus a "Civilian-and-easy-to-take" design.
|
Jathniel
G I A N T
EoN.
913
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 18:30:00 -
[79] - 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.
Actually I don't find any of the maps too complex. In fact, they are decent, but I wish they were MORE complex. It would be nice if we were able to have foot and ladder access to more of the general superstructures.
Essentially, people are using dropships to deploy uplinks on top of the superstructures, but you only have people running around at ground level, and you have ALL this structure in between that isn't being used.
Basically, put some more interior. Let the buildings have multiple floors. Let them have multiple basement floors as well.
You also have a lot of open land with nothing on it. This should be dotted with turrets, supply depots, roads, and CRUs. Maybe you can be nice and put a couple sniper towers in there.
For example, Border Gulch. A sniper tower anywhere from H3 - K6, would enable snipers to send fire to the objective A bridge.
EMPTY SPACE everywhere from H2 - M8... with the objectives elsewhere, there's no reason why a sniper tower or two, and some elevated structures can't be placed to allow snipers to harrass flankers attempting to move on objectives D and E, and provide limited support fire on objective A. (Limitied because there is SO much cover on that bridge.)
Give elevated structures detailed and complex interiors. Give them like 5 floors with window view for snipers... ground access is acceptable. Stop leaving snipers out.
Look at Impact Ridge! E2 - H4. Structures and elevated structures can be placed here. Or bunker structures. There's so much empty space, and not even snipers can take advantage of it or cover it, because you've been so determined to block them out! B5 - C8 can be used.
Look at Fracture Road. It's a very arduous task to cover ground in it, if you're the attacker. The attacker side has to travel substantially more distance to capture objectives D and A at the start. This map is good on its use of space, but the structures lack expansive interiors. Whenever you enter a structure, you expect it to find an elevator to go down, or up, even further, but it's not there. We're seeing large and awesome structures that are basically..... completely solid and not hollow (with interiors).
The research facility has no actual research labs in them. lol
Again, yes. You guys have done a beautiful job. I think I speak for everyone when I say that these new maps are much more fun than the old ones. (Or maybe we just really needed new maps that badly.)
Complexity level on a scale from 1-10 for the maps.... I would put it at a 5. For all of them. (And a 2 for the old maps.)
But please, drop the anti-sniper philosophy. These new maps have so much potential for overwatch sniper positions, that would allow a sniper to do his job, and I identified them. All that empty space is where snipers really shined. Getting good overwatch positioning on chokepoints was vital.
You are limiting how dynamic your battlefields can be when you design them to exclude a portion of your players. |
3XHERMES
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.15 06:29:00 -
[80] - Quote
My name is Hermes. |
|
|
Scheneighnay McBob
Bojo's School of the Trades
3200
|
Posted - 2013.09.15 17:40:00 -
[81] - Quote
1. Too complex- too easy to get lost. A simple map on the wall would help.
2. Perfect
3. Again, perfect
4. Not complex enough
5. Perfect
6. What's with the staircases to nowhere? |
Wombat in combat
TeamPlayers
EoN.
81
|
Posted - 2013.09.16 20:41:00 -
[82] - Quote
1. Just right in complexity.
2. About right.
3. About right.
4. About right.
5. I haven't even seen this map yet.
6.
a) Border Gulch: traversing the hill in F10 and G10 is treacherous, needs fixing.
b) Fracture Road: G7 needs ladders to get on top the building. Needs more ladders to get on top of pipes. Ladders leading to the top of silos would also be nice. |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
922
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 00:23:00 -
[83] - Quote
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:1. Too complex- too easy to get lost. A simple map on the wall would help.
You mean like this?
Also, read the signs on walls. They do coordinate with buildings / exits. Not too hard to figure your way out in there after a few runs.
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:
6. What's with the staircases to nowhere?
Was supposed to be some doors up there. It slipped past the artists. They were working a lot to get that outpost out the door. |
|
Vin Vicious
Capital Acquisitions LLC
Public Disorder.
460
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 02:10:00 -
[84] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:Scheneighnay McBob wrote:1. Too complex- too easy to get lost. A simple map on the wall would help. You mean like this? Also, read the signs on walls. They do coordinate with buildings / exits. Not too hard to figure your way out in there after a few runs. Scheneighnay McBob wrote:
6. What's with the staircases to nowhere?
Was supposed to be some doors up there. It slipped past the artists. They were working a lot to get that outpost out the door.
Did those doors lead anywhere :o |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
923
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 02:38:00 -
[85] - Quote
Vin Vicious wrote:CCP LogicLoop wrote:Scheneighnay McBob wrote:1. Too complex- too easy to get lost. A simple map on the wall would help. You mean like this? Also, read the signs on walls. They do coordinate with buildings / exits. Not too hard to figure your way out in there after a few runs. Scheneighnay McBob wrote:
6. What's with the staircases to nowhere?
Was supposed to be some doors up there. It slipped past the artists. They were working a lot to get that outpost out the door. Did those doors lead anywhere :o
To Bed Bath and Beyond.
Seriously though. No. They were just going to be there for the exact reason people have pointed the lack of them out. Stairs that lead to nothing. Purely a visual. |
|
Bojo The Mighty
Zanzibar Concept
1835
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 05:22:00 -
[86] - Quote
Research Outpost
Logic Loop I applaud adding a multi-level map. I love the ability to get above, below, etc. However, when you are underground, I have found myself running in circles. Sometimes, when the enemy has blocked an exit from above, I get lost because I avoid said exit but then confuse another for it (This is around Alpha)
Yes I have noticed the signs on the wall at intersections but I would say taking it a step further and putting it everywhere in the subterranean.
It's a pretty complex map but I won't say that it is a bad thing. But man have I gotten lost when indoors. Otherwise I'd say good designs. I really like the new slanted symmetry design of levels. |
Bojo The Mighty
Zanzibar Concept
1835
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 05:40:00 -
[87] - Quote
Fracture Road
Alpha: Attacking Alpha is semi-suicidal. It's sunken in (grenade trap), it's open like the dickens (spells doom), and there is no road from the North west so it is fairly protected from vehicles thus giving advantage to the Blue Team according to the map
Bravo: I would say that it isn't complex enough. Bravo is on the ground floor yet there's all this nice roof access to make use of. It would be nice if Bravo was above ground. Just saying.
Charlie: Fell through cracks in the stairs to my death. Can that be solved? I mean I get it, I was trying to shortcut the stairs, I deserved it, but damn it that CRU was getting hacked, no time for stairs!
|
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis
Covert Intervention
1701
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 16:53:00 -
[88] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:dw ad wrote: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. None of your maps is too complex or not complex enough. I like them in a "3D CAD Viewer" without FPS action. But I the framerates in Research Facility are awfull. With or without the wind. With or without enemies And framerate becomes worst with skilled scanners in your squad. Choosing weapons depending on framerates is really awful. Yes, I have brought this up recently. My question I had asked was (and maybe you can answer this for me yourself) if you noticed this frame rate hit after the last patch or was it from start of release on 1.4? We are trying to figure this one out, because it does meet our technical budgets.
I'll test more if some details can be provided on this front, I have so far noticed no performance hit within these maps so if I'm given reproduction steps perhaps I can provide a bit more data to zero in on it.
Cheers,
Cross |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
941
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 00:08:00 -
[89] - Quote
Bojo The Mighty wrote:Fracture Road
Alpha: Attacking Alpha is semi-suicidal. It's sunken in (grenade trap), it's open like the dickens (spells doom), and there is no road from the North west so it is fairly protected from vehicles thus giving advantage to the Blue Team according to the map
Bravo: I would say that it isn't complex enough. Bravo is on the ground floor yet there's all this nice roof access to make use of. It would be nice if Bravo was above ground. Just saying.
Charlie: Fell through cracks in the stairs to my death. Can that be solved? I mean I get it, I was trying to shortcut the stairs, I deserved it, but damn it that CRU was getting hacked, no time for stairs!
Hey Bojo. I appreciate the bugs. If you could move this over to the specific forums for fractured road feedback that would be great. This post is for knowing players opinions on the over all complexity of the new maps.
Thanks,
-CCP LogicLoop
|
|
The-Errorist
Mannar Focused Warfare
Gallente Federation
211
|
Posted - 2013.09.18 02:26:00 -
[90] - Quote
I want lakes as medium sockets. They could also have like plants or interesting rocks or crystals, and or filled with acid instead of water. |
|
|
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. |
|
|
XxGhazbaranxX
The New Age Outlaws
WINMATAR.
468
|
Posted - 2013.10.24 13:56:00 -
[121] - Quote
they where al perfect. ccp you dd an awesome job with the new mas and seckets |
xXCleopatra FlippantXx
Seraphim Auxiliaries
25
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 07:01:00 -
[122] - Quote
1. I understand if you get some feedback on the complexity if this lvl, but please dont listen to hard to it! Its great! So many vantage points it can always turn out a little different, it is truly awsome to experience this. This is allso the only LVL where complexity comes to mind
2. Donno what a smaller socket is
3.+4+5 Comlexity levels are fine. Keep adding cool landing pads for the dropships too, great to arrive in style |
Alphaman Blaq
Brutor Vanguard
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.28 10:01:00 -
[123] - Quote
Stop cluttering the maps and making so many mini hills , its not like theres ways to hide behind any of that damn trash on the map , how could you ppl make such **** maps CLEAR THE RUBLE DAMMIT !!! |
|
CCP Stiffneck
C C P
C C P Alliance
58
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 03:39:00 -
[124] - Quote
xXCleopatra FlippantXx wrote:1. I understand if you get some feedback on the complexity if this lvl, but please dont listen to hard to it! Its great! So many vantage points it can always turn out a little different, it is truly awsome to experience this. This is allso the only LVL where complexity comes to mind 2. Donno what a smaller socket is 3.+4+5 Comlexity levels are fine. Keep adding cool landing pads for the dropships too, great to arrive in style
" adding cool landing pads for the dropships"
Note it:) |
|
Aeon Amadi
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
3604
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 13:42:00 -
[125] - Quote
CCP Stiffneck wrote:xXCleopatra FlippantXx wrote:1. I understand if you get some feedback on the complexity if this lvl, but please dont listen to hard to it! Its great! So many vantage points it can always turn out a little different, it is truly awsome to experience this. This is allso the only LVL where complexity comes to mind 2. Donno what a smaller socket is 3.+4+5 Comlexity levels are fine. Keep adding cool landing pads for the dropships too, great to arrive in style " adding cool landing pads for the dropships" Note it:)
On the back of the MCC...!!!!!!!!! I would froth at the mouth if I ever saw this.
ANON Diplomat // 3rd Place Winner of the Eight Thousand Suns Fiction Contest
|
Rynoceros
Rise Of Old Dudes
1276
|
Posted - 2013.11.12 03:44:00 -
[126] - Quote
I don't feel that any are complex enough.
I associate map complexity with tight, labyrinthian corridors.
More interiors.
Cheeseburgers.
|
|
CCP Frame
C C P
C C P Alliance
1740
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 01:29:00 -
[127] - Quote
Thank you everyone for your feedback on this, the level design team appreciates your effort, and will take it into consideration going forward! :)
CCP Frame
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |