| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
bacon blaster
BIG BAD W0LVES
Eternal Syndicate
86
   |
Posted - 2013.07.21 21:17:00 -
[1] - Quote
some of the older and larger maps like biomass, are simply too big for the number of players we have. Either shrink the map by about a 3rd, or increase the number of players.
Otherwise, large portions of the map are simply ignored, and the individual fights themselves can start and stop a lot, with long spaces inbetween. |
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
252
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 00:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
bacon blaster wrote:some of the older and larger maps like biomass, are simply too big for the number of players we have. Either shrink the map by about a 3rd, or increase the number of players.
Otherwise, large portions of the map are simply ignored, and the individual fights themselves can start and stop a lot, with long spaces inbetween.
We regularly get a note to either shrink or enlarge the maps. The maps will not be made smaller at this time. Eventually we "may" have more players in the matches. We have higher priorities at this time though.
The biggest reason we have larger maps is to allow for choices. However, some of the previous game modes need a bit more "directive" gameflow lay outs. A big reason why you may not be seeing people is due to this very issue. |
|
Aeon Amadi
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
League of Infamy
2184
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 00:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:bacon blaster wrote:some of the older and larger maps like biomass, are simply too big for the number of players we have. Either shrink the map by about a 3rd, or increase the number of players.
Otherwise, large portions of the map are simply ignored, and the individual fights themselves can start and stop a lot, with long spaces inbetween. We regularly get a note to either shrink or enlarge the maps. The maps will not be made smaller at this time. Eventually we "may" have more players in the matches. We have higher priorities at this time though. The biggest reason we have larger maps is to allow for choices. However, some of the previous game modes need a bit more "directive" gameflow lay outs. A big reason why you may not be seeing people is due to this very issue.
the canyons in Skirmish 1.0 had some amazing flow. Battles felt intense and there was a lasting sensation of having to watch around every corner as an attack could come from anywhere with ambush points littering the place.
And dont even get me started on how the battle went when things escalated and the MCC had to dock with the outpost - attackers having to traberse such a large expanse with three bases laying seige? pure sex.
Nothing like feeling and seeing your entrenchment as opposed to having an outpost smack dab in the center of the map -_- |
Aero Yassavi
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
690
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 03:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:bacon blaster wrote:some of the older and larger maps like biomass, are simply too big for the number of players we have. Either shrink the map by about a 3rd, or increase the number of players.
Otherwise, large portions of the map are simply ignored, and the individual fights themselves can start and stop a lot, with long spaces inbetween. We regularly get a note to either shrink or enlarge the maps. The maps will not be made smaller at this time. Eventually we "may" have more players in the matches. We have higher priorities at this time though. The biggest reason we have larger maps is to allow for choices. However, some of the previous game modes need a bit more "directive" gameflow lay outs. A big reason why you may not be seeing people is due to this very issue.
If you have higher priorities, then you may want to change this bit of false advertising on the game's website.
http://dust514.com/game/
Quote:Fight, dominate, and hone your skills as an elite mercenary with an unparalleled array of armor, weapons, and vehicles in massive online battles of up to 48 players. |
G Torq
ALTA B2O
185
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 07:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
Aero Yassavi wrote:CCP LogicLoop wrote:bacon blaster wrote:some of the older and larger maps like biomass, are simply too big for the number of players we have. Either shrink the map by about a 3rd, or increase the number of players.
Otherwise, large portions of the map are simply ignored, and the individual fights themselves can start and stop a lot, with long spaces inbetween. We regularly get a note to either shrink or enlarge the maps. The maps will not be made smaller at this time. Eventually we "may" have more players in the matches. We have higher priorities at this time though. The biggest reason we have larger maps is to allow for choices. However, some of the previous game modes need a bit more "directive" gameflow lay outs. A big reason why you may not be seeing people is due to this very issue. If you have higher priorities, then you may want to change this bit of false advertising on the game's website. http://dust514.com/game/Quote:Fight, dominate, and hone your skills as an elite mercenary with an unparalleled array of armor, weapons, and vehicles in massive online battles of up to 48 players.
I would suspect that since Loopy is on terrain and structures, him and the team he is in having different priorities doesn't exclude someone else from working on increasing the number of players. |
KingBlade82
The Phoenix Federation
115
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 09:41:00 -
[6] - Quote
Aero Yassavi wrote:CCP LogicLoop wrote:bacon blaster wrote:some of the older and larger maps like biomass, are simply too big for the number of players we have. Either shrink the map by about a 3rd, or increase the number of players.
Otherwise, large portions of the map are simply ignored, and the individual fights themselves can start and stop a lot, with long spaces inbetween. We regularly get a note to either shrink or enlarge the maps. The maps will not be made smaller at this time. Eventually we "may" have more players in the matches. We have higher priorities at this time though. The biggest reason we have larger maps is to allow for choices. However, some of the previous game modes need a bit more "directive" gameflow lay outs. A big reason why you may not be seeing people is due to this very issue. If you have higher priorities, then you may want to change this bit of false advertising on the game's website. http://dust514.com/game/Quote:Fight, dominate, and hone your skills as an elite mercenary with an unparalleled array of armor, weapons, and vehicles in massive online battles of up to 48 players.
its funny u say that since I created an alt a week ago and seen drones in the intro -_- still mad at that |
Reaper Skordeman
The Reaper Crew PMC
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 10:55:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote: Eventually we "may" have more players in the matches. We have higher priorities at this time though.
I know it's not as simple as some people think,
but an increase of 36 Total players to allow Three Full Squad Per Team would be great.
However, I understand and am relieved that staff see this as a lesser priority. |
Halador Osiris
Dead Six Initiative
Lokun Listamenn
479
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 12:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
bacon blaster wrote:some of the older and larger maps like biomass, are simply too big for the number of players we have. Either shrink the map by about a 3rd, or increase the number of players.
Otherwise, large portions of the map are simply ignored, and the individual fights themselves can start and stop a lot, with long spaces inbetween.
From all the dropship pilots out there: Go die in a hole. |
Stands Alone
Ultramarine Corp
41
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 18:19:00 -
[9] - Quote
i think they need to be larger... also the objectives getting spread out more, to encourage more squad tactics and make use of whole map, rather than a take and hold the compound style of play... also dropships and LAV will be used more for what they are supposed to be used for |
BLKDG
ROYAL SQUAD
Shadow of the Apocalypse
18
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 18:25:00 -
[10] - Quote
up to xyz players
means that you can have under that number and still be true to what was previously said about player number size on/in a map
just saying |
|
|
|
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
253
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 01:44:00 -
[11] - Quote
We want to up the player counts. This just wont happen right now. We need to get some optimizations in to make room for that. When we had done testing internally it was not optimal. So we dropped the count down for stability. Big priorities for code is optimization / fixing what we have. Game design being the same. Level Design and Environment art to continue to create new content. |
|
Aeon Amadi
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
League of Infamy
2196
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 02:15:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP LogicLoop wrote:We want to up the player counts. This just wont happen right now. We need to get some optimizations in to make room for that. When we had done testing internally it was not optimal. So we dropped the count down for stability. Big priorities for code is optimization / fixing what we have. Game design being the same. Level Design and Environment art to continue to create new content.
As a guess, provided everything is as optimal as it possibly can be, what are your estimates for the very maximum amount of players in a match without having to sacrifice for future new content such as future weaponry, outposts and planet types affecting memory? |
steadyhand amarr
Royal Uhlans
Amarr Empire
968
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 08:59:00 -
[13] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:CCP LogicLoop wrote:We want to up the player counts. This just wont happen right now. We need to get some optimizations in to make room for that. When we had done testing internally it was not optimal. So we dropped the count down for stability. Big priorities for code is optimization / fixing what we have. Game design being the same. Level Design and Environment art to continue to create new content. As a guess, provided everything is as optimal as it possibly can be, what are your estimates for the very maximum amount of players in a match without having to sacrifice for future new content such as future weaponry, outposts and planet types affecting memory?
By the time the ps4 is here :-P |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |