Author Topic: Objectiv discussion to evolve pizza map (Read 553 times)

Duedel · « **on:** July 07, 2002, 12:56:37 PM »

After reading so much emotional posts about OUR new map i wanted to start a discussion how to evolve this map.

Here are a few contras:

1. Map is to big
2. Field alts way to high
3. Spreading of countries supports milkrunning and supresses furballing
4. Desert terrain is to yellow (i need green!)

Pros:

1. Map has action for everyone
2. Great vehicle fights
3. Slick canyons
4. Cool high alt fights

My points:

Contras:
1. yep its a little bit to big for our community. 180 Fields would be enough (or a size of 400x400)
2. yep but i think the AK's mentioned that they'll change it
3. JAB has post a good idea about it. Why not have every slize of the pizza owned by one country. So we have clear frontlines. i think this could be done very easy?
4. I fine with it

Pros:
i dont think that the pros will be changed by changing the 3 contras

Any none emotional posts here?

AKIron · « **Reply #1 on:** July 07, 2002, 01:06:17 PM »

Good thread Duedel. Just to clarify one thing though, while AKWabbit has written a program to rescale the terrain elevation and given it to Hitech, the terrain is solely in the hands of HTC.

While AKNuttz is working on a terrain for the MA, the rest of us are out of the terrain making business, much to the relief of many here I'm sure.

J_A_B · « **Reply #2 on:** July 07, 2002, 01:29:50 PM »

I like the overall terrain enough to WANT to see it work. Right now it's just too spread out IMO. If it could be re-designed so the starting countries each own a single whole "slice" instead of 1/3 of each of the "slices", I think the terrain would be a lot more workable. I think doing it like this would also make the "zone" strat system more logical--a country would have to actively resupply its bases as it advanced on the enemy, but wouldn't have to while on the defensive. In addition, 2/3 of a country's starting bases would no longer be "alienated" from its main "zone". As an added bonus, the terrain itself would also mean the attacking country would be advancing uphill (literally), giving another benefit to the defender.

The major problem right now is there's too many "active" bases for the current player base ("active" meaning bases within striking distance of enemy bases), which results in spreading the action too thin. This map would work really well in its current form with 750 players IMO. Not a bad design; it's just a design ahead of its time.

It'd also be nice to see each "slice" get a unique look--maybe 1 slice as desert, one as jungle, and one as grassland--but I'm not sure that AH's terrain system can do that all in one map, at least not with playable framerates. It's been so long sine I did anything with the terrain editor I'm no longer sure exactly what it can do and what it can't.

J_A_B

Duedel · « **Reply #3 on:** July 07, 2002, 01:31:56 PM »

Great ideas JAB

Steven · « **Reply #4 on:** July 07, 2002, 01:36:34 PM »

I've only had two days with the new map, but so far I don't have a single complaint.
The map isn't too big, the bases are still the same distance it seems and the map was reset in just a few days. I thought it really bad where maps were reset 2-3 times per day as before.

I especially love the variety of field altitudes and have noticed a decrease in the amount of LA7 useage (which could never be a bad thing to me.)

I don't see "milkrunning" as being a threat due to the sheer number of bases and as long as the opportunity is fair and even across-the-board, no biggie.

The desert terrain looks good to me. It reminded me of the dogfight ranges in Nevada.

I think this map is just fine as it is. With the addition of maps to the set, I'm sure they'll all have their elements that differ and provide a good variety overall. Some will favor this map, some will favor that one...etc.

I'd like to see one that has a portion of the map that requires "island hopping" and thus naval operations.

john9001 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 07, 2002, 02:11:48 PM »

it might work better if each country started with one pie slice, but as things progressed the lines sorted themselves out, last night knights ended up with most of the west , rooks the east .

that sure is a lot of desert, looks like north africa, what about the southwest slice desert, south east green, and north slice snow.

i don't understand people saying they can't find a fight, last night there were big furballs, jabo attacks, bombruns , armour battles in the desert, fog of war, from my small POV in the fight it seemed to have co-ordinated attacks and defense, what else do you want from a sim?

yes the pizza map is unrealistic and ugly , but when you zoom into your little piece of the world you never notice it.

44MAG

Frost · « **Reply #6 on:** July 07, 2002, 02:13:58 PM »

Let me start by saying I'm a fan of this map. Thanks AK's. This map was designed to be one in a rotation of a number of maps. It will be appreciated more when other maps are released.

I like the idea of each continent having a different landscape. That would be really cool. But I would not want to see each country own one of the continents for itself. It's great the way it is because it gives a lot of fronts to fight on.

I have one idea that I have not seen mentioned yet. What about keeping the concentration of fields the same at each front but thining them out as you go deeper into each territory. This would decrease the number of bases and confusion somewhat and keep the fights concentrated at the fronts. People will follow the path of least resistance and switch to other bases along the front instead of flying farther for a fight. One of the downsides would be that it would make it longer to reset. I'm sure there are other downsides and that people will point them out for me in a nice gentle way

CptTrips · « **Reply #7 on:** July 07, 2002, 02:22:50 PM »

>I like the idea of each continent having a different landscape.

So do I, but you have 5 textures to work with. That doesn't give you a lot to work with. Its hard (but not impossible) to do more than one climate zone in a single map.

Regards,
Wab

Frost · « **Reply #8 on:** July 07, 2002, 02:33:32 PM »

AK's are too darn ornery to have much of a life anyway...so get to work

I know absolutely nothing about making the maps so I'm just dreaming with no sense of reality on the climate thing.

What do you think about thining out the bases as you get deeper into each country's zone? Do you think it would eliminate some of the confusion and clutter as well as concentrate the fights a little more?

poopster · « **Reply #9 on:** July 07, 2002, 02:41:56 PM »

Just something to add to the discussion..

I think this is a shared view with many, as the boards can attest.

The problem from my view is the map itself. ( size is factor also but I guess we're stuck with it

)

It has no resemblance to an "on earth" map. In effect you are sacrificing any relation to the "real" world in favor of "equal" gameplay. Gameplay in this sense defined as "winning" the map.

I don't know the numbers but those that "play" the base capturing thing may not be majority here. ( correct me if I'm wrong )

From my point of view ( how I play ) I want to log on to a map that "looks" like a part of the world with all it's advantages and disadvantages. With trees, green folage, canyons, sea shores and lakes. Some of the maps here are beautiful. It doesn't have to "be" real. Just LOOK real.

Take up a WWII aircraft and engage the enemy in a "realistic" envirement. Like planes vs. like planes. It doesn't work allied vs. axis as WB has proven. Winning the map doesn't interest me. Never has.

"If" I was interested in winning the map, it would be a "real" map with inherrent pros and cons and I would deal with it. If a country wins the map, they get the chitty position on the next one.

Politically correct can only go so far. When it gets to the point where a pizza now represents the world I play in, I have a problem.

Please understand. It's a problem, not a whine. For some reason legitimate problems are precieved as whines by the status quo.

So if you can make it work with adjustments, fine.

But your going to lose people.

WB is very good at it.

That's not what THIS game is about.

And now is not the time to start.

nopoop

CptTrips · « **Reply #10 on:** July 07, 2002, 02:57:42 PM »

>Politically correct can only go so far.

Don't be silly poop. political correctness has nothing to do with the shape of this map.

Is this map, other than size, fundementally different that Lake Uterus, NDIsles, and the beta map (which is being reffitted now)?

I understand that you don't care about strategy and game play. But I'm sure you can understand that others may be. In a rotation of maps, there will be some that are less historical and more balanced for gameplay, some that are more historical with less balance in gameplay. They will rotate and everyone will sometimes enjoy the current map and sometimes have to deal with it until the next map rotates. It would be childish for either group to demand that the other group totally play their way. There is room for both in a map rotation. IMHO.

Regards,
Wab

Dinger · « **Reply #11 on:** July 07, 2002, 03:06:37 PM »

Size isn't a problem; the current starting fields is. By going with the "one slice -- one country" starting field system, you effectively make the map smaller.

Elevations are already being worked on.

HTC really has to work on the engine to get more htan 5 textures

poopster · « **Reply #12 on:** July 07, 2002, 03:16:45 PM »

Wab if indeed there is going to be a rotation, I can hang with that

Good job BTW, musta been fun. Until released

But I really don't see the need for it to be "equal". Equal in itself is boring. It IS politically correct. I think too much is sacrificed to achieve "equal" in the game sense.

All those new P40 and F4F pilots out there and old zeke and C205 pilots could give a damm about being "equal"

Being the underdog is fun, and has it's advantages.

And it's never boring.

Why doesn't that transpose to map creation ??

THAT'S what I don't understand.

nopoop

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #13 on:** July 07, 2002, 03:19:24 PM »

Because everyone squeaked that the old maps weren't equal Poop, now there is one that is equal for all sides.... it ain't PC, it's a direct result of squeaking.
-SW

CptTrips · « **Reply #14 on:** July 07, 2002, 03:26:18 PM »

>Size isn't a problem

Maybe, maybe not. Last night when we had 450 player in it, it seemed ok. It prolly seems pretty big to the 4am Euro crowd.
I still can't decide for myself either way.

>By going with the "one slice -- one country" starting field >system, you effectively make the map smaller.

Yes, that would definitely reduce the surface area of each country. If it worked, the nice thing about it is that HTC can reconfigure the zone distrobution for a map to support different player loads without having to make an entire new map.

>HTC really has to work on the engine to get more htan 5
>textures

Well, of course they can have as many as they want. But it raises the mem req on the vid cards. It has a lot to do with the way the transition tiles work. The mem req expands exponentially as a function of the number of base tiles.

Regards,
Wab