DUST Search - I want INFANTRY only maps.

Deskalkulos Ildigan wrote:

The problem is that currently some corporations came to unexpected wealth which has led to a surprising high amount of machinery. There should be no round with 4 tanks at once for one side. At least not in the no corporation battles, otherwise it will just turn off every non-vehicle player.

@Jason: I'd really like you to see it a bit more differentiated. Having vehicles is fun and stuff but if you want people to have more tolerance towards players with vehicle playstyle you should show a bit more tolerance to those who prefer vehicle free gameplay instead of basically saying "Screw you, if you don't happen to be one of the few AV focused people out there who actually have a chance to take down non militia tanks". Vehicle free gameplay offers exciting new possibilities (mainly talking about close quarter building based gameplay, which this game currently lacks. I want some big complex building structures where i can fight over corridors in addition to wide field sniper / vehicle catering maps. Also if i am right he proposed basicaly an additional gamemode with existing maps with no vehicles which kind of made your whole argumentation basis invalid. So i'd say that it was actually your comment that was "just bad" since it showed that you didn't read the post careful enough.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tech Ohm Eaven L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 401	Posted - 2012.11.01 09:10:00 - [1] - Quote I want besides the Skirmish/Ambush REGULAR maps an OPTIONAL skirmish/Ambush maps option where there are no vehicles. Those wanting vehicles/infantry can go play the regular maps. I want an OPTION to chose skirmish/ambush maps with NO VEHICLES just infantry. Topic.
Tony Calif Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 2002	Posted - 2012.11.01 09:15:00 - [2] - Quote Underground bunker style things. Operation Metro from BF3 is one of the best examples of this type of map IMHO.
xAckie Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising 125	Posted - 2012.11.01 10:55:00 - [3] - Quote Tech Ohm Eaven wrote: I want besides the Skirmish/Ambush REGULAR maps an OPTIONAL skirmish/Ambush maps option where there are no vehicles. Those wanting vehicles/infantry can go play the regular maps. I want an OPTION to chose skirmish/ambush maps with NO VEHICLES just infantry. Topic. + 1million
Ydubbs81 RND Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising 886	Posted - 2012.11.01 10:59:00 - [4] - Quote I second this....or can be given a few maps that is infantry only exclusively. Matter of fact....all ambush maps should be infantry only or with LAVs. But definitely no dropships
Chalybeia Aquila Doomheim 10	Posted - 2012.11.01 11:13:00 - [5] - Quote No they wont do this but there will be maps with huge downsides for tankers etc.
xAckie Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising 125	Posted - 2012.11.01 11:14:00 - [6] - Quote Chalybeia Aquila wrote: No they wont do this but there will be maps with huge downsides for tankers etc. why do you think that?
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 1216	Posted - 2012.11.01 11:55:00 - [7] - Quote Tech Ohm Eaven wrote: I want besides the Skirmish/Ambush REGULAR maps an OPTIONAL skirmish/Ambush maps option where there are no vehicles. Those wanting vehicles/infantry can go play the regular maps. I want an OPTION to chose skirmish/ambush maps with NO VEHICLES just infantry. Topic. Skirmish with no vehicles? That's just weird. Ambush, maybe.
Jason Pearson Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 742	Posted - 2012.11.01 13:34:00 - [8] - Quote Vehicles are another players playstyle and therefore totally fine for any match. We shouldn't limit vehicles to certain maps by map based restrictions automatically disallowing them. By all means, have maps that make it unsuitable for Vehicle combat, such as a suburb area with lots of alleys with no place to actually place a tank, or with only a few places that are suitable for them. Places with lot's of shelters to protect from dropships and other air vehicles. Right now, what you're proposing is just bad imo.
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1012	Posted - 2012.11.01 13:42:00 - [9] - Quote Sooooo...... You wont mind if i drop a tank in then?
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1170	Posted - 2012.11.01 13:44:00 - [10] - Quote While I don't care if they do this, it would be 1000000 times better if they just made the maps have actual interiors, roofs, walls, and tunnels so infantry have mobility and utility without being mere target practice for turrets.

xAckie Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising 125	Posted - 2012.11.01 13:47:00 - [11] - Quote EnglishSnake wrote: Sooooo...... You wont mind if i drop a tank in then? +1 for making me laugh
xAckie Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising 125	Posted - 2012.11.01 13:49:00 - [12] - Quote Noc Tempre wrote: While I don't care if they do this, it would be 1000000 times better if they just made the maps have actual interiors, roofs, walls, and tunnels so infantry have mobility and utility without being mere target practice for turrets. true. But, I would like an ambush mode (smaller than the 5 letter maps) that has no vehicles. Its a preference that's all. For skirmish, those ideas make a lot of sense. But can you imagine CCP doing this? I still get stuck in the hills. But yes, overall the maps are broke. So broke.....
Deskalkulos Ildigan CrimeWave Syndicate 115	Posted - 2012.11.01 13:59:00 - [13] - Quote The problem is that currently some corporations came to unexpected wealth which has led to a surprising high amount of machinery. There should be no round with 4 tanks at once for one side. At least not in the no corporation battles, otherwise it will just turn off every non-vehicle player. @Jason: I'd really like you to see it a bit more differentiated. Having vehicles is fun and stuff but if you want people to have more tolerance towards players with vehicle playstyle you should show a bit more tolerance to those who prefer vehicle free gameplay instead of basically saying "Screw you, if you don't happen to be one of the few AV focused people out there who actually have a chance to take down non militia tanks". Vehicle free gameplay offers exciting new possibilities (mainly talking about close quarter building based gameplay, which this game currently lacks. I want some big complex building structures where i can fight over corridors in addition to wide field sniper / vehicle catering maps. Also if i am right he proposed basicaly an additional gamemode with existing maps with no vehicles which kind of made your whole argumentation basis invalid. So i'd say that it was actually your comment that was "just bad" since it showed that you didn't read the post careful enough.
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1170	Posted - 2012.11.01 14:29:00 - [14] - Quote Deskalkulos Ildigan wrote: The problem is that currently some corporations came to unexpected wealth which has led to a surprising high amount of machinery. There should be no round with 4 tanks at once for one side. At least not in the no corporation battles, otherwise it will just turn off every non-vehicle player. @Jason: I'd really like you to see it a bit more differentiated. Having vehicles is fun and stuff but if you want people to have more tolerance towards players with vehicle playstyle you should show a bit more tolerance to those who prefer vehicle free gameplay instead of basically saying "Screw you, if you don't happen to be one of the few AV focused people out there who actually have a chance to take down non militia tanks". Vehicle free gameplay offers exciting new possibilities (mainly talking about close quarter building based gameplay, which this game currently lacks. I want some big complex building structures where i can fight over corridors in addition to wide field sniper / vehicle catering maps. Also if i am right he proposed basicaly an additional gamemode with existing maps with no vehicles which kind of made your whole argumentation basis invalid. So i'd say that it was actually your comment that was "just bad" since it showed that you didn't read the post careful enough. Lol EVE wealth cut both ways. I'd almost say it hurt vehicles more than it helped them, since there are more deadly counters in the wild than before. But in any case, the vehicles were rolling before the extra ISK. It's just that time of build. AR->Tanks->Swarms->Dropships->Forges->Everything Else We're clearly transitioning from the dropship to forge stage.
Ops Fox ZionTCD Legacy Rising 197	Posted - 2012.11.01 14:33:00 - [15] - Quote would love for maps to be more rugged so tanks and LAV would have to focus on not running off cliffs or getting stuck in canyons, and more interior space would be great for more infantry combat. make large external like lifts, drawbridges and gates so tanks have to get out of have infantry support to use these
Sentient Archon Red Star. 690	Posted - 2012.11.01 14:53:00 - [16] - Quote Tech Ohm Eaven wrote: I want besides the Skirmish/Ambush REGULAR maps an OPTIONAL skirmish/Ambush maps option where there are no vehicles. Those wanting vehicles/infantry can go play the regular maps. I want an OPTION to chose skirmish/ambush maps with NO VEHICLES just infantry. Topic. +1
lordjanuz Norwegian Dust514 Corporation 88	Posted - 2012.11.01 14:56:00 - [17] - Quote Tech Ohm Eaven wrote: I want besides the Skirmish/Ambush REGULAR maps an OPTIONAL skirmish/Ambush maps option where there are no vehicles. Those wanting vehicles/infantry can go play the regular maps. I want an OPTION to chose skirmish/ambush maps with NO VEHICLES just infantry. Topic. -1 no, I dont use tanks or DS myself, but thay are needed in the battle
Jason Pearson Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 742	Posted - 2012.11.01 15:22:00 - [18] - Quote Deskalkulos Ildigan wrote: The problem is that currently some corporations came to unexpected wealth which has led to a surprising high amount of machinery. There should be no round with 4 tanks at once for one side. At least not in the no corporation battles, otherwise it will just turn off every non-vehicle player. @Jason: I'd really like you to see it a bit more differentiated. Having vehicles is fun and stuff but if you want people to have more tolerance towards players with vehicle playstyle you should show a bit more tolerance to those who prefer vehicle free gameplay instead of basically saying "Screw you, if you don't happen to be one of the few AV focused people out there who actually have a chance to take down non militia tanks". Vehicle free gameplay offers exciting new possibilities (mainly talking about close quarter building based gameplay, which this game currently lacks. I want some big complex building structures where i can fight over corridors in addition to wide field sniper / vehicle catering maps. Also if i am right he proposed basicaly an additional gamemode with existing maps with no vehicles which kind of made your whole argumentation basis invalid. So i'd say that it was actually your comment that was "just bad" since it showed that you didn't read the post careful enough. Replace Map with Gamemode. There shouldn't be a single map/gamemode that limits me in calling in whatever I damn well please in terms of mechanics. No gamemode restrictions saying "Sorry mate, but you spent 3mil SP on Vehicles so **** YOU, go play with your militia gear with not even 100k SP in actual infantry based skills", instead I said there should totally be map limitations in the sense that theres lots of alleys or a lot of cover from above. Buildings with inside and such. Any more flaws in my post you want to point out? The idea itself is still just bad.
Moonracer2000 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 314	Posted - 2012.11.01 15:28:00 - [19] - Quote I think this is an idea worth considering. Lot of players (especially low level ones who aren't skilled or rich enough to counter vehicles) would like a chance to play as infantry and have a chance. Maybe very high security (1.0-0.8) planets could restrict vehicle use? Since those would be for beginners anyway. Obviously anything goes in low security space. I think a better solution that others have pointed out is simply better map design. -More obstacles around flags so a tank or LAV can't drive right up to them and they have to be taken on foot. -More vertical cover to protect infantry from dropships (currently there is hardly any).
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2012.11.01 16:43:00 - [20] - Quote No, you shouldn't be able to filter out the kinds of things you have trouble fighting against. What they've done with maps right now is to make some areas fairly open and vehicle-friendly, while other areas are more urban/built-up and safer for infantry. That's the ideal solution. So if you want to avoid vehicles, then fight in areas of the existing maps where tanks/whatever can't navigate as easily. But further dividing the playerbase between more and more game modes would be a bad idea.

Sha Kharn Clone Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 1087	Posted - 2012.11.01 17:58:00 - [21] - Quote + 1 billion. Otherwise wuts the point of infantry. LAV can go everywhere there is no point in infantry really. Whats wrong with just one district on a planet having an underground HQ or a massive warehouse or somthing. Or some jungle or forests or well anything other than owide open areas everywhere.
Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1170	Posted - 2012.11.01 18:21:00 - [22] - Quote Sha Kharn Clone wrote: + 1 billion. Otherwise wuts the point of infantry. LAV can go everywhere there is no point in infantry really. Whats wrong with just one district on a planet having an underground HQ or a massive warehouse or somthing. Or some jungle or forests or well anything other than owide open areas everywhere. +1 Balance by giving both their strong environments. Otherwise it's just RPS, not skill based. Still, EVERY map should have sections like this. It is more interesting to have multiple options than to just separate into different gamemodes. Emergent gameplay.
Sha Kharn Clone Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 1087	Posted - 2012.11.01 19:01:00 - [23] - Quote Someone whos in with the devs on IRC should so be working CCP hard on this.. Hint hint hint!!! Will make this game 10 x more funz.
Ten-Sidhe Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 414	Posted - 2012.11.01 21:07:00 - [24] - Quote Underground tunnel/cave and building interior maps would be a nice addition. The starscraper seen I distance on some maps could be vertical indoor maps by themselves. A way to state preference to avoid/prefer maps at the extreme in quick battles would be good. This would let vehicle specialists avoid indoor maps and let people that hate vehicles avoid open maps. I dedicated dropship pilot would be disappointed to spawn into a tunnel map. +1 to more buildings with interiors on regula
KEROSIINI-TERO Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 248	Posted - 2012.11.01 23:48:00 - [25] - Quote Gentlemen, please bear in mind that when you want to attack on an strategic objective, you rarely get to decide where it's gonna be. The same is true with districts. You might first start up on the 'countryside' where AA defences against your creation of a staging ground are lighter. Then you'd push towards outposts which might have random buildings here and there. Finally, the objective itself is likely to be in an urban environment, or factory complex. There you'd have the entire repertoire of infrastructure and terrain, of which latter is hopefully really random.
Shiro Mokuzan GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 106	Posted - 2012.11.02 00:33:00 - [26] - Quote Just go play another game if you don't want vehicles to be a factor. I'd be fine with having more terrain that limits their effectiveness, but there shouldn't be a "no vehicles" mode any more than there should be a " no heavies" or "no shotguns" mode.
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 1216	Posted - 2012.11.02 03:11:00 - [27] - Quote If this is taken into consideration at all, it should only be an option for the hi-sec NPC contracts. It should have no bearing in Faction Warfare.
xprotoman23 Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 1452	Posted - 2012.11.02 03:13:00 - [28] - Quote i proposed infantry only maps back during E3 build.
KEROSIINI-TERO Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 248	Posted - 2012.11.02 03:16:00 - [29] - Quote oh, and CCP told there will be different kind of arena versions in hisec as well. Maybe not at launch, but later.
xprotoman23 Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 1452	Posted - 2012.11.02 03:18:00 - [30] - Quote https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=21290&p=1 PDIGGY DA GAWD



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page