Map designs. Please o please could a dev explain the reasoning

(Stormchild) #61
  • capturable advanced spawn points (and un-capturable by enemies for a nasty surprise when you respawn all the way back in the main base)
  • more “linear” maps, easy to grasp with action advancing most of the time along the same direction.
  • some maps are not that big, but just happen to be more open air and less “clutter”, giving an impression of more freedom for tactics.
  • some small buggies/jumpacks in main base on some maps to help reach front faster.
  • indeed faster running speed and usually less obstacles or corridor turns etc in the way (except last part of “Ark” map in ETQW maybe)
(wolfnemesis75) #62

[QUOTE=Stormchild;368983]- capturable advanced spawn points (and un-capturable by enemies for a nasty surprise when you respawn all the way back in the main base)

  • more “linear” maps, easy to grasp with action advancing most of the time along the same direction.
  • some maps are not that big, but just happen to be more open air and less “clutter”, giving an impression of more freedom for tactics.
  • some small buggies/jumpacks in main base on some maps to help reach front faster.
  • indeed faster running speed and usually less obstacles or corridor turns etc in the way (except last part of “Ark” map in ETQW maybe)[/QUOTE]
    Cool.

Keep in mind with the design of maps in Brink that they also have to be setup and accommodate for Heavy (Slower) Body type as well. :slight_smile:

(Exedore) #63

I wouldn’t necessarily go that far, it’s just that it’s so much easier to see things more clearly in hindsight. I’m still pleased with the way things turned out, but the points where we could have improved are now quite obvious.

(BioSnark) #64

while quake wars had to accommodate vehicles+foot. Brink design doesn’t accommodate heavies well. Defense spawn is much closer to objective than offense so defacto heavy respawn time is heavily increased for offense.

(wolfnemesis75) #65

Only 100% way to make it so defense is the same distance from objective as offense every time is for each objective to be in a self-contained fixed area and the defense is moved to another symmetrical distance away each time a new objective is completed. Boring. I’ll pass. :slight_smile:

(Stormchild) #66

Or make proper use of (or tweak ?) the speed boost. Maybe it was designed solely to help heavies reach front faster ? (replacing the idea of vehicle in larger maps) Maybe it should boost speed more if you’re heavy, and less if you’re light ?

(wolfnemesis75) #67

You need to invest an ability point into Futuresight. (its the latest and greatest ability)

For example: This ability allows you to know exactly how a game design and map will play out in every conceivable situation, that way you can fix it before anyone plays.

For an example of Futuresight Ability, watch Spaceballs further.

Ha ha ha. :slight_smile:

(tokamak) #68

And by mitigating this weak point the heavy needed to hand in some of it’s strong points, IE heavy weapons, keeping the diversity between the bodytypes at a minimum .

(DarkangelUK) #69

I made this suggestion before, heavies should have their own routes that can lend to others following them. For example on CC there could be huge rusty doors that only the heavies are strong enough to open etc.

Wolf you seem fixated on this symmetrical thing, no one ever mentioned symmetrical, and it’s never had to be used in the maps mentioned from previous games yet the layout works for both teams. Let it go dude!

I think one of the contributing issues seem to stem from the lack of capturable forward spawns, (I know you can’t, but this is for the rest) think if Sewer in ETQW didn’t have any forward spawns to capture, or Oasis in ET where the allies constantly have to stay at the back initial spawn, that’s exactly how we’re playing now in Brink. You’re playing Tomey’s My First Objective Based Shooter and comparing it to similar, not very well thought out games… and still insist on selling it as something else.

We get it, you think it’s amazing, and compared to a lot of shooters on console I guess it is, but i’d seriously give up trying to convince the PC crowd of this, it’s just not going to happen.

(FireWorks) #70

So why dont we rework the spawnwave concept just a little?

How about giving heavies on offense a shorter spawn time then others. Just a little.

Let the heavies spawn earlier so that the mediums get even with them at - lets say - 60 or 70% of the (shortest) way to the objective. There they could still buff up eachother and would get easier group pushes overcomming a defense more easily.

(wolfnemesis75) #71

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;369016]I made this suggestion before, heavies should have their own routes that can lend to others following them. For example on CC there could be huge rusty doors that only the heavies are strong enough to open etc.

Wolf you seem fixated on this symmetrical thing, no one ever mentioned symmetrical, and it’s never had to be used in the maps mentioned from previous games yet the layout works for both teams. Let it go dude!

I think one of the contributing issues seem to stem from the lack of capturable forward spawns, (I know you can’t, but this is for the rest) think if Sewer in ETQW didn’t have any forward spawns to capture, or Oasis in ET where the allies constantly have to stay at the back initial spawn, that’s exactly how we’re playing now in Brink. [/QUOTE]
But doesn’t capturable forward spawns create a kind of (artificial) symmetry? (Equal distance from spawn to objective between Offense and Defense.) :confused:

Edit: also, your final sentence is irrelevant. That’s why I deleted it. :slight_smile:

(.Chris.) #72

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;369016]I made this suggestion before, heavies should have their own routes that can lend to others following them. For example on CC there could be huge rusty doors that only the heavies are strong enough to open etc.

Wolf you seem fixated on this symmetrical thing, no one ever mentioned symmetrical, and it’s never had to be used in the maps mentioned from previous games yet the layout works for both teams. Let it go dude!

I think one of the contributing issues seem to stem from the lack of capturable forward spawns, (I know you can’t, but this is for the rest) think if Sewer in ETQW didn’t have any forward spawns to capture, or Oasis in ET where the allies constantly have to stay at the back initial spawn, that’s exactly how we’re playing now in Brink. You’re playing Tomey’s My First Objective Based Shooter and comparing it to similar, not very well thought out games… and still insist on selling it as something else. [/QUOTE]

Not sure how that could be neatly implemented, be interesting to try out in a mod perhaps, oh wait. :slight_smile:

Yeah I’m not sure why he seems to think the only other alternative is a symmetrical map layout…

Totally forgot about forward spawns till now, they are a rather important aspects to any map they are used in. :slight_smile:

It’s as almost as if it was intended to have forward spawns at some point along the way in order to decrease the time it took to reach an objective but were ditched at some point and we were left with these distance discrepancies.

(wolfnemesis75) #73

[QUOTE=.Chris.;369036]Not sure how that could be neatly implemented, be interesting to try out in a mod perhaps, oh wait. :slight_smile:

Yeah I’m not sure why he seems to think the only other alternative is a symmetrical map layout…

Totally forgot about forward spawns till now, they are a rather important aspects to any map they are used in. :slight_smile:

It’s as almost as if it was intended to have forward spawns at some point along the way in order to decrease the time it took to reach an objective but were ditched at some point and we were left with these distance discrepancies.[/QUOTE]Reactor. :wink:

Edit: just to be clear. I put that because I am agreeing with you. That particular map seems like stuff had been subtracted from it at the last minute (the second part), whether it was forward spawn points, objectives, etc. I could be wrong. :slight_smile:

(Cep) #74

That is a seriously excellent idea and perhaps to encourage teamwork, they can only press and hold F to keep it open so anyone else on the team must protect them whilst they keep the route open.

(Exedore) #75

I always have my coffee when I watch radar, you know that.

(badman) #76

Everybody knows that.

(wolfnemesis75) #77

[QUOTE=Cep;369046]That is a seriously excellent idea and perhaps to encourage teamwork, they can only press and hold F to keep it open so anyone else on the team must protect them whilst they keep the route open.[/QUOTE]Any idea that makes a heavy more worthwhile beyond increasing their HP (2 more bullets to kill them is the same as currently) is a good idea. I suggested a more powerful melee like a steal pipe. Kicking down a door as a Heavy only thing is not a bad idea. :slight_smile:

(wolfnemesis75) #78

Sorry had to do it.

:smiley:

We all need this with decisions. :slight_smile:

(BioSnark) #79

it wasn’t boring when they tried it before.

Oh, horrors! A map that doesn’t take an hour in ridiculously long time additions on each objective because it has well balanced basic geometry. Must be boring and symmetrical!

(Kurushi) #80

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;369016]I made this suggestion before, heavies should have their own routes that can lend to others following them. For example on CC there could be huge rusty doors that only the heavies are strong enough to open etc.

Wolf you seem fixated on this symmetrical thing, no one ever mentioned symmetrical, and it’s never had to be used in the maps mentioned from previous games yet the layout works for both teams. Let it go dude!

I think one of the contributing issues seem to stem from the lack of capturable forward spawns, (I know you can’t, but this is for the rest) think if Sewer in ETQW didn’t have any forward spawns to capture, or Oasis in ET where the allies constantly have to stay at the back initial spawn, that’s exactly how we’re playing now in Brink. You’re playing Tomey’s My First Objective Based Shooter and comparing it to similar, not very well thought out games… and still insist on selling it as something else.

We get it, you think it’s amazing, and compared to a lot of shooters on console I guess it is, but i’d seriously give up trying to convince the PC crowd of this, it’s just not going to happen.[/QUOTE]

Lack of forward spawns is not the be all and end all. They really are not needed in current Brink maps, although I would welcome them in future maps.

Making Brink sound simplified compared to ETQW due to lack of forward spawns is daft. Forward spawns do not make the game any more advanced when it’s compensated for and compensation does not really make it any more simplified