Author Topic: ok.. i know we can't change current maps but.. (Read 1846 times)

lazs2 · « **Reply #60 on:** February 15, 2003, 09:28:52 AM »

exactly.. It would be of little value. I don't even want a furball only arena... I simply want a map in the MA that is not quite so prejudiced against the early war planes... I don't know how much simpler I can put it. I still can't figure out what your reasoning was in making the fields so far apart.. A few pockets of larger fields closer together wouldn't have hurt a thing...
lazs

NoBaddy · « **Reply #61 on:** February 15, 2003, 11:41:59 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
exactly.. It would be of little value. I don't even want a furball only arena... I simply want a map in the MA that is not quite so prejudiced against the early war planes... I don't know how much simpler I can put it. I still can't figure out what your reasoning was in making the fields so far apart.. A few pockets of larger fields closer together wouldn't have hurt a thing...
lazs

The map is not 'prejudiced against the early war planes'. It is an attempt to balance for the ENTIRE plane set and not just one group.

I still can't figure out why you don't know what my reasoning was in the design of this map. I have posted it in this thread and numerous others.

sax · « **Reply #62 on:** February 15, 2003, 12:08:10 PM »

Nobaddy , i've flown both late model and early war model in this map. The map does tend to favor the late model.

That said , it is a great map but like all the rest it ain't perfect and probably never will be.
If you read this thread you can see some folks are just pointing out what could be improved for a more balanced game play.

Have to salute HTC for bringing it out though , great to have another one in the rotation.

NoBaddy · « **Reply #63 on:** February 15, 2003, 12:21:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by sax
Nobaddy , i've flown both late model and early war model in this map. The map does tend to favor the late model.

That said , it is a great map but like all the rest it ain't perfect and probably never will be.
If you read this thread you can see some folks are just pointing out what could be improved for a more balanced game play.

Have to salute HTC for bringing it out though , great to have another one in the rotation.

Sax...

I have read and I do understand. The point is that I don't believe a MA map can satisfy everyone. Unfortunately, they are a 'one size fits all' deal. All anyone can do is try to do the best for the most people possible. Everyone should try to make a map....then more would understand

.

If I do another map, I will try to address Lazs' desire for some closer fields. However, since the game is really a conquest game in aircombat sim clothing, I have doubts that it will accomplish the desired effect.

lazs2 · « **Reply #64 on:** February 16, 2003, 09:19:18 AM »

nobad... I think that what is going on here is that you simply assumed (and still are) that areas with close fields would be either bad for the game or be of no use since they would be over run. I think that since neither you not anyonme else has tried it before that... you don't know. I watched other maps and the closer fields don't seem to be much different strat wise than the far ones. sometimes they get taken quick and sometimes not... I think that in these huge maps the building battlers actually have less desire to screw up the furball... they get enough attention or... they have so much else to do.
lazs