Author Topic: Do scores affect gameplay? Do captures interfere with fun? (Read 5052 times)

mars01 · « **Reply #165 on:** May 16, 2006, 02:50:14 PM »

Quote

As for the field layout, efforts were made to improve that situation. Most agreed that what was done did improve things (except you surprise).

OH it's NB we have to thank for that nightmare of a MAP.

Please don't make anymore maps.

NoBaddy · « **Reply #166 on:** May 16, 2006, 05:01:12 PM »

Toad · « **Reply #167 on:** May 16, 2006, 05:09:59 PM »

I think you'd have to threaten NB's life to get him to attempt another map and I suspect that wouldn't do it either.

mars01 · « **Reply #168 on:** May 16, 2006, 05:13:08 PM »

Good the last thing we need are more maps that encourage flying like a timmid safety dancer. There are way to many of em as it is and they are growing like crazy.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #169 on:** May 16, 2006, 05:21:29 PM »

Wonder if NUTTZ still has the terrain he and I started 5 years ago? All that wide open space would drive Certain People into apoplectic fits. It'd almost be worth the effort for that alone.

Hoarach · « **Reply #170 on:** May 16, 2006, 05:33:06 PM »

Umm whats wrong with Trinity?

The Eastern part of the map is the best area to be in the area of 5,6,10,214, 239, etc. Furball loaded there.

Toad · « **Reply #171 on:** May 16, 2006, 05:35:30 PM »

Nah. I'd just play AA until a good map came round. At least the way they've got that set up, there's some fightin' and shootin' going on all the time.

Basically, you engage for about 4-8 minutes and then the round ends and it starts all over in 30 seconds.

You have to face facts eventually. AH is still the best game I've ever played but only on some maps. Donut is awesome since it has FT. Fester is good.

So, you allocate your play time where it has the best return on investment in fun. That's why some AH maps drive me to AA, a game that isn't nearly as good as AH when both are delivering their best.

Brenjen · « **Reply #172 on:** May 16, 2006, 06:05:53 PM »

I like trinity, I like fester, I like AA, I like people who make maps, please make more maps.

mars01 · « **Reply #173 on:** May 16, 2006, 06:11:38 PM »

Ignore Dok he's an #######.

Quote

The Eastern part of the map is the best area to be in the area of 5,6,10,214, 239, etc. Furball loaded there.

Yeah there are a couple good bases on that map, but the horde usually takes these first then your left with a cherry run fest that bores me to death.

As Toad said, I have a ton of other places to spend my time when the maps suck.

Edbert1 · « **Reply #174 on:** May 16, 2006, 07:17:31 PM »

I think in general the bases are a bit too far apart for my tastses on Infinity, but what drives me mad is the terrain itself. 21,000 foot peaks (with no snow) attop cliffs that rise from the shores of an ocean. I know Mount Everest is taller than that but not even close if you measure it from it's base, and it is not along the coast either.

So we have bases that are a bit far apart making for some rather boring commutes while chasing a bar dar looking for a fight, then you find there's a set of Himalayan peaks in your way and you have to climb into the stratosphere just to get to a nearby base. Almost guaranteeing the fight will be gone when you get there.

So, in some cases, the maps are more of an "interference with fun" than scores or captures...which WAS the subject of this TFH in the first place.

mars01 · « **Reply #175 on:** May 16, 2006, 10:10:58 PM »

Quote

So, in some cases, the maps are more of an "interference with fun" than scores or captures...which WAS the subject of this TFH in the first place.

LOL too funnay.

lazs2 · « **Reply #176 on:** May 17, 2006, 08:12:16 AM »

yep... I thought I was doing a pretty good job of staying on topic and answering questions put to me.

nb.. I was not privy to your mail so don't know what the reaction you got in private was to moving the fields far apart but as I recall everyone who posted was happy with the close fields except the fluffers.... I know I am not the only one who likes some of the terrrain on infinity but hate the field spacing.

Perhaps you could tell us what moving the fields farther apart hoped to accomplish gameplay wise?

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

NoBaddy · « **Reply #177 on:** May 17, 2006, 09:17:18 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2

Perhaps you could tell us what moving the fields farther apart hoped to accomplish gameplay wise?

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

Hoped to accomplish? Nah, it did accomplish it. The goal was to create a terrain that would be hard to reset. Remember, this was created at a time will the maps we had were AKdesert and the small maps. The small maps were being reset once per day at least and the desert....well, I didn't care for it and wanted to try my hand at an improvement.

The high mountains have a purpose also, note that they are zone dividers. They channel attacks from one zone to another. The idea being to create choke points where defenders have a chance to stop or, at least, slow down a horde.

As I stated when we first started talking about this, I didn't lay the fields out. That was done by someone else to expedite getting the terrain finished. Frankly, I probably wouldn't have done it any different had I been the one to lay the fields. Quick fights was not on my priority list. When the flaws in the field layouts were brought to my attention, I changed 90% of the GV fields to airfields. This cut down a lot of the distance between fields in each zone. I was not looking to reduce the flight distance between the zones.

On the upside, it did inspire Fester to do his terrains. He did a lot of the same things I did, he simply implimented them in a different way. After all of the pissin' & moanin' here about field spacing, he did a great job of taking that into account.

Lazs, step up to the plate. Grab the editor and create a terrain. BUT, remember...you have to try and balance the map for EVERYONE. Hell, no matter what you do, someone will find fault with it. So, keep an extra NOMEX suit handy.

Toad · « **Reply #178 on:** May 17, 2006, 09:32:28 AM »

Yah, it was much better after you revised it.

Played it last night and the action was just too slow for my taste. I'll have to do something else until the map changes.

IMO, there's still way too many V-only fields.

I'm still perplexed why pure V-only fields should even exist. Are there any Airfields without a VH? Nope. So if one changed all the V-fields to A-fields nothing would really change for the treadheads; the same locations would all still have V's available.

OTOH, it would significantly cut down on A-field gaps and provide the opportunity for more fights in different directions.

I know you're not going to revise it again.

mars01 · « **Reply #179 on:** May 17, 2006, 12:12:24 PM »

Quote

Played it last night and the action was just too slow for my taste. I'll have to do something else until the map changes.

Yep I hit a lucky streak and actually got two days in a row to fly. I logged in Monday night, it was fly with the horde or long flights with very little fighting. So after a few long flights I just logged out.

Last night I logged in, 2 mins later went to AvA and had a blast. Most of the guys were there to fight and it was a lot of fun.