General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: oboe on May 07, 2017, 06:57:50 PM
Title: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: oboe on May 07, 2017, 06:57:50 PM
Found some online polling software that allows ranked voting, so I thought it might be interesting to see how players rank the terrains. Click the link below.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: oboe on May 08, 2017, 07:01:21 AM
25 votes so far. That's all the info I can get about it - I can't see any results until I stop the voting, but I'd like to see a 100 responses before I do that. The aircraft wish poll I did a while back got 63 responses total, so maybe we won't reach 100.
I'm on a guest account there so I have to close voting by the end of the week.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: Kanth on May 08, 2017, 07:13:10 AM
I had to guess a little. There are some maps I've never played but I do have other clear favorites. :aok
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: waystin2 on May 08, 2017, 07:15:19 AM
Done. Although I call some of these maps by their nick names do not even know the real ones. Actually had to look at the pictures. The grapefruit, buzzsaw, uterus, lopsides, pizza, lots-o-water.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: Kanth on May 08, 2017, 07:16:35 AM
25 votes so far. That's all the info I can get about it - I can't see any results until I stop the voting, but I'd like to see a 100 responses before I do that. The aircraft wish poll I did a while back got 63 responses total, so maybe we won't reach 100.
I'm on a guest account there so I have to close voting by the end of the week.
I must have missed that one. LinK?
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: oboe on May 08, 2017, 10:10:28 PM
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: nooby52 on May 09, 2017, 09:03:18 AM
Done! :salute
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: popeye on May 09, 2017, 09:20:52 AM
voted
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: oboe on May 09, 2017, 09:30:14 AM
54 votes tallied. More than halfway -- keep it coming! I'm really curious how its coming out, but the results aren't available until I close voting. I'd like to at least get 100 votes tallied before I do that.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: DmonSlyr on May 09, 2017, 10:21:36 AM
Done. Montis first, Buzzsaw last hehe.
Montis typically has the best and most fights going on on the map at the same time. Buzzsaw typically has the least.
I too, hope we can get a team together to make a bunch more maps. I think maps are the most important part to the game and making maps that support air combat with short range bases, will go a long way in attracting new or old players.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: oboe on May 10, 2017, 03:13:10 PM
66 votes recorded so far. Have YOU voted yet? :salute
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: bustr on May 10, 2017, 05:18:08 PM
Hey, every time I vote I only get a choice between a klingon Bird of Prey or a Beaufighter.......I know I shouldn't have clicked on the click bait that said "Learn the real secrets of really hot Kimche".... :cry <---- I reallly like Kimche.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: Shuffler on May 10, 2017, 05:55:41 PM
I clicked the link and it sent me to google with the search words deep, dark, and moist. Is this about spelunking or terrains?
I found it..... VOTED
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: oboe on May 11, 2017, 06:44:31 AM
Today is the last day to register your opinion by ranking the terrains from most to least favorite.
71 votes so far. If you haven't voted yet click here:
The poll is set up to find 4 winners out of the 8 candidates. By default, it uses the Scottish STV method, which I just started reading about. STV is "Single Transferable Vote" and it goes something like this - if your top choice already has enough votes to win, you vote is transfered to your second choice.
I've never heard of that voting algorithm but its apparently designed to preclude the wasting of your vote on a sure winner. Not sure that system would fare well in the U.S., I think the idea of landslide victories has too much appeal here.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: bongaroo on May 11, 2017, 05:03:52 PM
Voted!
Someone please make some more maps with a FighterTown! :D
Title: RESULTS of the MA Terrain Poll
Post by: oboe on May 11, 2017, 08:06:58 PM
Very interesting! Thanks to all who voted.
BowlMA came in first with NDIsles not far behind. Then came CraterMA, followed by Montis. Poorest showing was a tie between Buzzsaw, SFMA2016, and SmPizza.
BowlMA came in first with NDIsles not far behind. Then came CraterMA, followed by Montis. Poorest showing was a tie between Buzzsaw, SFMA2016, and SmPizza.
A bit surprised Mindanao was so low in the standings.
I think both suffered from not being as good as the three clearly good maps. In my opinion Pizza is better of the pair, but both were in my bottom 4 - along with SFMA and Buzzcrap.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: CAV on May 11, 2017, 11:13:59 PM
Quote
Someone please make some more maps with a FighterTown!
There was a reason Airwarrior did away with FT's........ They don't work in the MA.
Title: Re: RESULTS of the MA Terrain Poll
Post by: 1stpar3 on May 12, 2017, 03:13:17 AM
Yup, I concur! Way to go BUSTR, on the best map award :rock
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: Shuffler on May 12, 2017, 12:01:24 PM
Yes.... Bustr's terrain was easily the best of the lot.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: popeye on May 12, 2017, 12:02:00 PM
I'll be waiting on the porch for the delivery van...... :x
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: oboe on May 12, 2017, 12:24:07 PM
Could be a while :lol
Bustr, you must have some speculation about why BowlMA is so popular? I thought there could be some sort of "newest map" halo effect, but Buzzsaw is fairly new as well, and it placed dead last. And NDIsles has been around a long, long time, and it placed second.
Could it be the battleship groups? BowlMA is the only MA map with those. Or, is it the distance between fields, or the number and arrangement of spawn points for GV attacks? Is the overall size of the map a factor? The placement of strat targets?
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: bustr on May 12, 2017, 02:46:23 PM
I listened to players for the two years I did the alpha\beta while they talked on range to each other. Interesting stories comparing their AH2 experiences to what they were seeing in the alpha and what they wished for as a reality when it went live. Learned a lot about GV's and GVer expectations and frustrations as we tested that aspect of the game. Air combat was simple, "get me into a fight as quick as possible". Simple solution, place as many bases as possible 19 miles apart with no alt advantage.
I trusted everyone to up and create activity because everyone wants activity to be part of. Size of the terrain appears to not matter as long as everyone can get at each other. Too many terrains were created to slow down NOE hoards of 30-60 players which today makes getting into a fight a long and boring process. And isolates the community from itself by balkanizing the activity. BowlMA 7 years ago would not last the night with the NOE hoards that terrorized the terrains. Today, an NOE large scale mission would create activity and excitement for everyone making for a grand evening of game play.
BowlMA is designed to make it easy to run over to the next field and stomp it if no one wants to defend it. And easy to defend it creating activity to attract more participants. And there is almost always some near by close airfield to up a fighter sweep from to gum up the steam roller. The battle ships are Hitech's fault, he made me do it, UhHu yepp, he made me do it. :O
I made an AH player friendly terrain to go break things with the toys Hitech scatters around the arena.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: BBQsam on May 12, 2017, 04:03:42 PM
I nominate bustr for HTC "employee" of the year!
:salute Sir!
(hint hint: make us some more please)
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: bustr on May 12, 2017, 04:22:24 PM
I'm not an HTC employee.
Oceania
I have to build all of the volcanic mountain ranges by hand on all of these Pacific Solomons and New Guinea style islands.
(https://s20.postimg.org/zdjn0ga31/oceania80.jpg)
Base and spawn map from the blue print file.
(https://s20.postimg.org/iztmtwd8t/oceania32.jpg)
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: DmonSlyr on May 12, 2017, 05:51:38 PM
I have to build all of the volcanic mountain ranges by hand on all of these Pacific Solomons and New Guinea style islands.
(https://s20.postimg.org/zdjn0ga31/oceania80.jpg)
Base and spawn map from the blue print file.
(https://s20.postimg.org/iztmtwd8t/oceania32.jpg)
I actually like the map, but think the islands on the outsides need to be taken out, it will make the map a little bit smaller and would condense the action better.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: Zoney on May 12, 2017, 06:08:48 PM
nevermind
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: Kanth on May 12, 2017, 06:30:39 PM
Typically if I log on and NDIsles is on, I know exactly where to go for a fight. Right to the middle. No guessing no hunting no fight that is constantly moving. That's why it was one of my top maps.
I guess instead of speculating on WHY folks voted the way they did, maybe pick the top 4 maps from your vote and ask people to write in why they like it if they voted it up. :cheers: End the speculation. The same folks are still here standing around.
It's too bad there isn't a "Nuketown" kinda map for Aces High in rotation. The more people try with different maps and vote them up or down, probably the more we can move towards maps we like.
NDIsles has been around a long, long time, and it placed second.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: oboe on May 12, 2017, 07:27:00 PM
That's a good idea, Kanth.
Really we have 3 clear winners and then a group of not-so-much. OK you guys, why did you rank BowlMA, NDIsles, CraterMA so highly? What do these maps provide that the others don't?
I ranked ranked NDIsles and CraterMA highly because I like maps that have a real world look to them. I liked BowlMA for the Battleship groups.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: bustr on May 12, 2017, 08:53:00 PM
Kanth,
Ultimately you repeat microcosms dictated by the rules of base placement in the MA. Laying out a full arena design sucks, then everyone plays armchair general after you break your back second guessing you. Creating it by committee won't work because ultimately only one person builds it, you cannot farm our bits and pieces. And the committee is like asking 4 blind men to feel up an elephant and tell you what they think it is while you sculpt a statue of it by their directives.
You rely on the game itself to be why people are really here, and that given the toys they paid for, will play air force and panzer commander in the sandbox. Buzzsaw is in it's own strange universe that doesn't resonate with the majority who are looking to play WW2 air war, so it's out of balance to make the general broadest group happy. All the change in ndisles did was make it so the current small numbers could find each other with the least amount of effort.
19 miles 3\4 sector is the separation rule for minimum distances with airfeilds. Those three are about 12 miles. Half the time 2 or all 3 of those fields are in the hands of a single country due to that small distance. I applied 19 miles to bowlma as much as I could, without over loading the players with an eye full of bases everywhere. Ndisles is very good on not overloading your visual perception of the map. Waffle only traded field types in tank town to shorten the flight distance to a furball. Some nights people want to take bases, some nights people feel lazy and don't want to fly or drive anywhere. I applied that to bowlma on a larger scale with repeated microcosms.
I'm not sure Hitech will allow 12 miles as a standard other than telling someone to do it as a one off, the primary airfields on that central island are over a sector apart and balance the game play. Until some bored geniuses during off peak time take advantage of the down sides to bases too close together and take away everyone's fun by capturing all of them.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: Vulcan on May 12, 2017, 11:07:04 PM
Logged in, saw buzzsaw, logged out.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: hgtonyvi on May 12, 2017, 11:24:26 PM
Same here, that map needs to go. It's making a lot of players log when its a friday night.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: BuckShot on May 13, 2017, 08:20:10 AM
I swear, hating on buzz saw and night time must be the cool thing to do.
Last night on buzzsaw I found fun as easily as on any map.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: JunkyII on May 13, 2017, 09:17:15 AM
Ndisles has been my favorite map since I started playing the game because the center fight is always active and the base taking fight is good at creating larger fights.
Ozkansas was similar we just dont have the numbers to use it...well I think we do but I think the general population doesnt think so.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: oboe on May 13, 2017, 09:41:31 AM
I was just comparing the results of the raw vote to the Scottish STV, and it looks to me like Mindnao was robbed - it had more raw votes than Montis, but Montis came out ahead after all the rounds of suplus vote distribution.
I'll have to look more closely at why that happened later. Doesn't change anything about the 3 favored maps. Just curious about that result
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: DmonSlyr on May 13, 2017, 11:02:08 AM
I was just comparing the results of the raw vote to the Scottish STV, and it looks to me like Mindnao was robbed - it had more raw votes than Montis, but Montis came out ahead after all the rounds of suplus vote distribution.
I'll have to look more closely at why that happened later. Doesn't change anything about the 3 favored maps. Just curious about that result
I chose Montis first because it doesn't have a furball or tank island. There's always fights for all 3 teams normally. It's small. There's great CV action and the front's arent too far away. I find the biggest fights on this map because they are easy to spot around the map and the action is condensed.
Here's some thoughts.
Bowl MA was pretty decent. I actually had it 6th on my list. I think it being new, and having battle ships made a lot of people like it. It does have decent fights, but I still think it's overall just too big. You are correct about the new maps, but at the same time, buzzsaw is just so bad that no one likes it. The fights are still slow in the off hours and there's no real condensed action area for players to find fights once the #s die down. A lot of times I just saw a few planes here or there spread out around the map.
Ndisles was my second choice. Overall its very small. There's great fights on many islands. Fun CV action, I'm not a big fan of furball islands, but it's alright here. There's a lot of good aspects to the map that make some good fighter action in many parts.
CraterMA was my 3rd choice. Overall it's actually a pretty good map. I do think it's still too big. I'm not a fan of the TT though. It generates pretty decent fights around the map. One reason is because the bases aren't too far distanced. I think people chose it because it still produces big fights in many areas of the map.
I chose Mindano 4th. that's the one that looks like a big island country right? Very small map. Always easy to find fights. Can fight agaisnt 2 other teams at the same time on the map. It's easy and clear to find the fights. Everything is very condensed. The only thing about it is the mountains make plane altitudes very high and can lead to high alt fights, which are typically much more challenging and time consuming for players.
The SMpizza map was #5 for me. Still a small map with no TT which I like. Theres some good fights still. I do think the bases are a little too far apart for the Map size. You can have a really small map, but with far away bases it will still be slow. This map doesn't really have a flow to it, and I think that's why it scored so low. The sides aren't really symmetrical and I think it just throws people off. Maybe it gets won too quickly, but I just don't think players have played on it that much and people aren't as familiar with the fight flow on this map so they scored it lower. I still think it is decent map though. Just an observation.
Finally, the SFMA2016 map was 7th. The heart shaped map. It's one of the older small maps, I actually think it has great fights from A1-A19 and at the top of the map along the coast. But those 2 specific areas are always where the fights are. The south east part of the map is very week because bases are too far apart. I think if this area was reworked, it could open a lot more fights down south. It's the same ole same ole every fight on this map, and I'm sure it's just old for players.
Extra note: Maybe another design that might work for a map is a donut, with a huge circle of water on the inside similar to SFMA2016, and teams would have to fly around the outside ring to capture bases. Sort of like a NASCAR ring. There would be 2 -3 bases as the width of the area. Put some CVs in the middle. I think it would be a fun map that would condense the action very well and spark big fights.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: bongaroo on May 13, 2017, 11:03:07 AM
Based on how many people fly in the FT area when the 1 map we have left with one is up; I would argue it works just fine.
FTs and TT are pretty fun and great for new quick fights, but they just take away from the entire point of what the MA is suppose to be. That's why I insist that Map makers make the middle where either all 3 teams can collide and have a fight in the middle, or just have no middle all together. The best way IMO to make a middle for all the teams to clash would be to have 1 base in the middle at a little higher alt, and then have the 2 other teams so be able to fight for the high ground middle. That might be pretty fun also. I really like the flow or Montis, which doesn't need a "middle" but has both fronts across from each other at a reasonable distance. It can create good fights throughout the maps without their needing to be a "middle".
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: bustr on May 13, 2017, 04:18:14 PM
I was just comparing the results of the raw vote to the Scottish STV, and it looks to me like Mindnao was robbed - it had more raw votes than Montis, but Montis came out ahead after all the rounds of suplus vote distribution.
I'll have to look more closely at why that happened later. Doesn't change anything about the 3 favored maps. Just curious about that result
Analise the three or four top maps for a simple thing, the microcosm setup that gets repeated so almost anywhere players have the conditions met for less time to the fight and good terrain for GVs. Then for closer feilds near by to up from. You can see it by looking at any 2x2 sector area, ndisles has about 3 airfields with at least one other type of field in each 2x2 microcosm. Using the 19mile rule you can get another airfield into that sometimes which speeds up the time to fight.
Buzzsaw during prime time has action for "groups" of players willing to move around their country. For the solo player who wants a specific kind of action, it can be great and then horrible in wide swings because of that need to move around and kick cans. When air action is good, it's great until it peters out and you have to kick a few more cans in the hope of promoting another great air combat location. Buzzsaw is a finicky map for good air combat but, there is usually a prime time window if you can catch it. On squad night if buzzsaw is up, POTW uses it's numbers to kick cans until we get a fight, and we get fights with no problems. It is not a solo player friendly map to casually find a fight with duration.
The base distance rules for MA terrains dictates a pretty well defined outcome to MA terrains no matter the shape of the land masses. Maximum combat radius is usually about 2x2 sectors because most players are not here to spend the evening flying to a fight. The genius is what you do with that 2x2 because each corner of the 2x2 is a corner to another 2x2. Ndisles uses water to keep fights discrete to dispersed 2x2s which is great for NOE missions and uninterrupted 2 country fights. And why having three small airfields in the center in a 12mile on a side triangle works. Salting 12 mile distance airfields as a rule around an MA terrain will result in them becoming road blocks to doing much of anything but playing War Thunder for fear of getting stabbed in the back. They will become prime capture targets just for that reason. Imagine buzzsaw with a 9k airfield 12 miles from your 4k airfield, then imagine the same for any other feilds inside of the 2x2 accessible to that 9k field and at least half of the other 2x2 on it's backside it is in a corner sector to.
Now if Hitech wants to change the MA to a sandbox that is a 6x6 sector terrain, sure, 12 mile distances. That would be one heck of a circular firing squad and bring out the really worst in gamyness to not loose fights. If you think you have seen the worst in funky chicken, HOnRun and whatever else gets whine fests going in the forums. That will be tame with the cast of "not loose at any cost" greifers we have today. And the complaints about lack of a strategic game now, a map that small would be xBox hero city and Leroy Jenkins would be the highest level of ability.
Cramming large numbers of rats or people close together to "force them" to interact, even in a game, does not bring out the best in them. Splitting the MA into two arenas was an example of that once the arena space for a single MA arena became over populated. Unless your goal in this game is to be abusive and self serving at the cost of others. The closer you can get everyone crammed and angrier at each other, the more you can abuse them in the arena and here in the forums. For some that's a superior reward than their kills landed in the text buffer.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: Lusche on May 13, 2017, 08:05:35 PM
The best way IMO to make a middle for all the teams to clash would be to have 1 base in the middle at a little higher alt, and then have the 2 other teams so be able to fight for the high ground middle. That might be pretty fun also.
The FESTER map had this feature, and it was mostly ignored.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: DmonSlyr on May 14, 2017, 09:39:31 AM
The FESTER map had this feature, and it was mostly ignored.
Im pretty sure the fester map only had 3 small tank bases in the middle. His map wasn't really what I was thinking about. Also, too bad that map is gone. It really did spark some good fights. Most fights on his map were not in the middle, which I liked a lot.
Analise the three or four top maps for a simple thing, the microcosm setup that gets repeated so almost anywhere players have the conditions met for less time to the fight and good terrain for GVs. Then for closer feilds near by to up from. You can see it by looking at any 2x2 sector area, ndisles has about 3 airfields with at least one other type of field in each 2x2 microcosm. Using the 19mile rule you can get another airfield into that sometimes which speeds up the time to fight.
Buzzsaw during prime time has action for "groups" of players willing to move around their country. For the solo player who wants a specific kind of action, it can be great and then horrible in wide swings because of that need to move around and kick cans. When air action is good, it's great until it peters out and you have to kick a few more cans in the hope of promoting another great air combat location. Buzzsaw is a finicky map for good air combat but, there is usually a prime time window if you can catch it. On squad night if buzzsaw is up, POTW uses it's numbers to kick cans until we get a fight, and we get fights with no problems. It is not a solo player friendly map to casually find a fight with duration.
The base distance rules for MA terrains dictates a pretty well defined outcome to MA terrains no matter the shape of the land masses. Maximum combat radius is usually about 2x2 sectors because most players are not here to spend the evening flying to a fight. The genius is what you do with that 2x2 because each corner of the 2x2 is a corner to another 2x2. Ndisles uses water to keep fights discrete to dispersed 2x2s which is great for NOE missions and uninterrupted 2 country fights. And why having three small airfields in the center in a 12mile on a side triangle works. Salting 12 mile distance airfields as a rule around an MA terrain will result in them becoming road blocks to doing much of anything but playing War Thunder for fear of getting stabbed in the back. They will become prime capture targets just for that reason. Imagine buzzsaw with a 9k airfield 12 miles from your 4k airfield, then imagine the same for any other feilds inside of the 2x2 accessible to that 9k field and at least half of the other 2x2 on it's backside it is in a corner sector to.
Now if Hitech wants to change the MA to a sandbox that is a 6x6 sector terrain, sure, 12 mile distances. That would be one heck of a circular firing squad and bring out the really worst in gamyness to not loose fights. If you think you have seen the worst in funky chicken, HOnRun and whatever else gets whine fests going in the forums. That will be tame with the cast of "not loose at any cost" greifers we have today. And the complaints about lack of a strategic game now, a map that small would be xBox hero city and Leroy Jenkins would be the highest level of ability.
Cramming large numbers of rats or people close together to "force them" to interact, even in a game, does not bring out the best in them. Splitting the MA into two arenas was an example of that once the arena space for a single MA arena became over populated. Unless your goal in this game is to be abusive and self serving at the cost of others. The closer you can get everyone crammed and angrier at each other, the more you can abuse them in the arena and here in the forums. For some that's a superior reward than their kills landed in the text buffer.
The 19 mile rule is what you need to start using. I think 15-17 miles would even be better. But 19 should be the standard. Anything 25 miles is just too far away. Which is why the outside of the Buzzsaw arena doesn't work, and which is why the southeast side of SFMA2016 front is too far apart and the action is more stale down there. It's very hard to continue attacking a base over and over again when each flight takes 15 minutes to get to a base.
Buzzsaw needs to go. It's a detriment to the game.
Maps should have bases that very in distance but really 17-19 miles would work a hell of a lot better than 25. The fights would be much better. There wouldn't be so many alt monkeys, there wouldn't be as many hoards because taking off from a back field would be easier. One reason that Hoards are so prevelant is that they attack a base and hoard it, but the back base is 25 miles away and no one wants to take the time to up from the back field to go stop it. Most of the time, when the fields are far apart, if there is a fight, it's high alt monkey hoarders and this is pushing people away. Shorter base distance would have quicker fights at less altitude and would be much more fun and even for both sides.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: Lusche on May 14, 2017, 10:17:29 AM
Im pretty sure the fester map only had 3 small tank bases in the middle.
And a central airfield , which could be used to launch quick & easy sorties to the 3 central strats at that time. The design intention was to have the three countries to fight over that that potentially very valuable base.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: DmonSlyr on May 14, 2017, 11:19:23 AM
And a central airfield , which could be used to launch quick & easy sorties to the 3 central strats at that time. The design intention was to have the three countries to fight over that that potentially very valuable base.
Oh yeah, I member. Well, maybe it would have worked better if the outside bases around the TT area were closer. The middle was kind of in the middle of no where. I think if the outside bases were closer, and it was geared toward to fighter bases, and not tank bases around it, it might have been much better. That being said, I'm sad that festers map is no longer here, as it actually did spark great fights around the map.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: JimmyC on May 14, 2017, 04:09:41 PM
V...make a map .it's probably the best way to state your case.. Maybe see if you can find someone to do it with you... Then we can play it and see if your theory hold water.. I"d LOVE to see it in action. :salute Jimmy
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: KrzyIvan on May 14, 2017, 08:00:45 PM
Quote
V...make a map .it's probably the best way to state your case.. Maybe see if you can find someone to do it with you... Then we can play it and see if your theory hold water.. I"d LOVE to see it in action.
+1
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: DmonSlyr on May 15, 2017, 01:30:45 PM
V...make a map .it's probably the best way to state your case.. Maybe see if you can find someone to do it with you... Then we can play it and see if your theory hold water.. I"d LOVE to see it in action. :salute Jimmy
Jimmy, the problem is time. That being said, I just moved to Oregon and am out of work until I find one. I might look at the terrain manager today and see what I can do.
Personally, I think about 15 people need to be working on different maps, super small, small, big, medium, large and so on. The more types of maps the better. I'd like to see about 20 maps be created for all types of game play. I think it would help a lot for custom arenas.
Title: Re: Time for another poll - this time it's about MA terrains
Post by: Shuffler on May 15, 2017, 05:09:47 PM
There are a lot of terrains for the custom arenas. They are not as strict as the MA.