Time to crop down the size of the bigger maps?

[Shuffler]

I liked it when one was small one was large .

+1

[IrishOne]

LWO only big maps, LWB only small ones.

+1

[Bruv119]

+1 on the big and small.   Usually there is a different map in the other sometimes a smaller one.

How about renaming the arenas to late war big map and late war small map 

this way people won't get all confused when the majority are in blue yet they still click on orange...

[greens]

Honestly, they are way too big for the amount of people who populate them at off peak hours! So boring!

Also, what's up with having Tagma in both Blue and Orange? Worse map ever!

HTC, please, it's time for a change.

I second that, no good map.

[Shuffler]

I second that, no good map.

Anyone can make a terrain......

[Yeager]

cap arena populations at 120 per server and use smaller maps.

[Bear76]

cap arena populations at 120 per server and use smaller maps.

Good Grief

[grizz441]

There should be at the very least a different map in each arena.

I understand each map is on a rotation and since each map resets independently of one another, there's always a chance the same map can pop up in each arena.  Can't a cross referencing section of code be added to make sure this doesn't happen?

[Babalonian]

I really like the LWO: large maps, LWB: small maps idea.  Leave the player cap system, as is it's turning out that LWB on most nights/days has less players than LWO.

+1

[Kazaa]

I feel like we need a way to encourage players into Blue (smaller map) on off peak hours as this would result in more action.

Maybe a double perk bonus or something along those lines?

[Kazaa]

so then you would suggest what exactly to happen during peak hours?    even on the large maps during peak hours there are those who complain about too many people.........so we should shrink the maps and increase the hordes?

As far as Tagma goes............ perhaps not the worst ever...... but I agree its a horrible map......... and for some reason that map is the worst on frame rates for everyone

every time we have it I spend most of my day listening to people complain about FR

It's a lot less fun playing a game with no one, people who complain about the horde just don't know how good they have it. I remember back in the good old days when we just had a single late war arena which was easily populated with 600+ players, now that's was fun!

To most players now days, 1v2 is "the horde"

[hlbly]

Does nobody remember that they did?

We had small maps only for about a year or so  after the main arena split.

And there were many, many complaints about it. (From me too )

Give people a choice, give the two LW arenas a distinct feature that sets them apart without changing any arena settings: LWO large maps, LWB small ones. 

Once again wisdom from my favorite gastropod .

[hlbly]

I don't think it matter's too much how large the maps are - people still play seem to play about the same.

Generally, regardless of map size, when I sign in there are always 2 to 3 places where everyone elects to engage enemy forces, and that's where everyone is. It doesn't matter how large or small the map is outside of the 2 to 3 areas, and except for the occasional solitary porker/bomber, the rest of the map is pretty much ignored. With one exception: bigger maps make it easier for those who enjoy them to do sneak NOE's and to conduct a "ground war" while generally avoiding much of a fight.

I'm just happy when I sign in and find the the fighting to be relatively balanced - too much of the time I sign into an arena to find that there only the 2 active areas per side - and one is 80% of one of side's forces against 20% of the other side defending as best they can against overwhelming odds, while across the map you see the remaining 80% of that side's forces whomping on 20% of the third side, with the only thing that changes being which chess pieces are involved at the third corner of the arena.  

That's why I like having two arenas available.  If you aren't up to being on the short side of a sustained 4 on 1 - but don't enjoy being one of the 4 on the other side of the map where the bulk of your countrymen are, then much of the time the other arena is the only real choice.

<S>

I wonder if a 4 sided setup would not be better . I was watching Sahara the other day <the good one with Bogart and an M3 Lee tank as the stars> and the Muslim Sgt. had a quote supposedly from the Koran . Telling him the proper number of wives to have . It went something like this . If a man has only one wife she will have no one to pester but him ,so he knows no peace in his life . With two it will always be one against the other ,again allowing him no peace . With three always 2 will attack just the one forcing him to intervene ,again allowing him no peace . With 4 it will always be that 2 will have each other against the other 2 ,with this balance a man will finally know peace .

[phatzo]

I wonder if a 4 sided setup would not be better . I was watching Sahara the other day <the good one with Bogart and an M3 Lee tank as the stars> and the Muslim Sgt. had a quote supposedly from the Koran . Telling him the proper number of wives to have . It went something like this . If a man has only one wife she will have no one to pester but him ,so he knows no peace in his life . With two it will always be one against the other ,again allowing him no peace . With three always 2 will attack just the one forcing him to intervene ,again allowing him no peace . With 4 it will always be that 2 will have each other against the other 2 ,with this balance a man will finally know peace .

No one would want to be Queens.

[MORAY37]

LWO only big maps, LWB only small ones.

I've been lobbying for that setup for a long time now.  

+1

And, Tagma is just brutal on framerates.