|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lillica Deathdealer
Mango and Friends
447
   |
Posted - 2013.11.21 20:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
Howdy. I was thinking about some of the issues people you lot have mentioned, mainly ladders, and what many of the people on dust really enjoy. From what I've heard one of the major problems with ladders is making them work with sockets and the mix and match element of things. I was wondering if by building the ladders into the terrain rather than the sockets, ladders could be used with less work ensuring they function? In any case, if this is not doable replace ladders with stairs whenever I mention them.
The second thing many people have talked about is enjoying vehicle play, sheltered areas for infantry, bridges or areas that funnel the action to a point, and having more levels than ground floor in buildings.
Combining all of these ideas I came up with an idea around a crater where two parallel bridges span the middle and in the middle, connecting the two bridges is a tower of sorts. The result from top down makes the two bridges and tower look like an H across the crater.
The tower has space for a small socket at the top, and ladders or stairs building up to it along the outside. Additionally it may have an attached landing pad or inside area on some floors.
On either end of the bridges are other sockets.
This makes for a nifty four point map, five point map, or even one point map with objectives atop the tower or on different sides of the bridge. Given the addition of new rifle types with decent range, the tower would become an essential outpost for controlling the battlefield if you were focused on mobility. Vehicles could be useful both as transports, methods of breaching the tower, or the standard force projector role.
I'm not knowledgeable on what is and isn't possible for map ideas. So please, give me feedback on what would not work in my post, and how devs would prefer posts in this section of the forums to be structured; what information they should include. This way I might give better, more focused ideas next time. Thank you for reading this!
- Fear the Mango - Fear its friends -
Closed beta vet, Forum warrior prof. III
|
Lillica Deathdealer
Mango and Friends
448
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 16:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
Thanks Celesta! I'll keep what you said about ladders in mind.
As for the vehicle aspect, the way I see it they would be most useful in a skirmish mode with objectives on both ends of the bridge. The main point would be that a team who did not manage to hunker down inside the tower would have difficulty spanning the crater to reach the other points without getting shot by enemies posted up in the tower. This is where vehicles, being armored or extremely mobile, come in to play. No only could they bombard the tower, they could also cross the bridge or even skirt around the crater with ease. This means all play styles have an area they could be valuable in the map. What do you think?
- Fear the Mango - Fear its friends -
Closed beta vet, Forum warrior prof. III
|
Lillica Deathdealer
Mango and Friends
448
|
Posted - 2013.11.22 20:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
I think our ideas could work respectively as the skirmish and domination variants of the map idea. Boom! Double action map creation!
I'd actually like for CCP to give us an idea of what they want to see in our posts and responses on this section of the forums though, that way I can structure what I say to be most useful to them.
- Fear the Mango - Fear its friends -
Closed beta vet, Forum warrior prof. III
|
Lillica Deathdealer
Mango and Friends
449
|
Posted - 2013.12.01 03:31:00 -
[4] - Quote
Oho! You sir just brought up another way of thinking about the link that never previously crossed my mind. Indeed, by labeling certain outpost/facilities as being the only ones fit for certain planets and operations, it DOES enable the creation of risk vs reward stuff focused on tactical gameplay as a necessity to gain the truly lucrative rewards!
- Fear the Mango - Fear its friends -
Closed beta vet, Forum warrior prof. III
|
|
|
| |
|