Well, I guess that´s a post (or at least the kind of a post) many of us were waiting here for a long time. At least it shows what you are working on, what you plan, and helps us to think about what kind of feedback may be actually of any help.
But besides the kinda generic stuff (that I actually still apreciate!) I really want to ask you: Will some small changes, some additional routes and/or some tactical options as well as changed up objective types, give the game the space it needs to be played to it´s fullest potential? I honestly see most of the topics you mentioned, very cosmetic and while sounding really good probably only taking care of the issue on the surface.
I can´t get rid of the feeling, that the map design in itself is trying too much to fit the theme of “london”, being kinda realistic (urban feeling, with small streets, many buildings etc.) as well as artistic and scripted towards specific tactics etc. For me it feels like there is no room for the game to breathe, for people to develop there own strategies, and by that creating a “meta” that is outside of what originally was intended, keeps changing with time and by that is unpredictable and giving the people who enjoy playing the game some long time motivation.
Even tho there are some other ways to implement this kind of feeling of “flexibility” into the game (like adding a draftish mode, character customization/development, etc.) the easiest, most fun and for an FPS ultimately most important way of doing so, is by a proper map design that allows various game mechanics to be applied for different reasons and having different beneficial or negative effects on the actual game. That´s also why I think that every different approach then improving the maps, won´t do any good for the game, and be at best some minor cosmetics most people will get bored of after some hours and in the end just a waste of time.
SLIGHTLY OFF-TOPIC
PS: Since I am talking about various tactics and ways to apply game mechanics (since I feel like that´s exactly what the current maps doesn´t allow us to do) I would like to point two things out that are slightly off topic, but would help a little to solve the core issues of the maps we experience (while still not being enough to make it better without further map adjustments of course).
-
Strafe/Trickjumping - I know why you never wanted to implement it, but is it really so much harder to understand then wall jumping? And don´t you think that it would make it so much easier for you to implement additional and maybe “sneaky” routes to increase the diversity of possible tactics?
-
Class specific objectives - Again, I know and understand that you want everyone who purchased a Merc to be able to use it straight away and as much as he wants, but don´t you think that you are hurting a newbies experience, as well as those of the experienced players that play organized scrims?
I personally remember when I played the first objective based games, and how overloaded I felt with information and action that was going on. And I was so happy to pick the objective class, and just tried to do the objective. I still died often without realizing what exactly killed me, and I understood that I was the sacrificial lamb while my team mates where hammering away on the enemies, but damn I was a rookie, and I could play a role you would expect from a rookie to fulfill. And it felt very rewarding, to still be useful, while playing on a server with people who out skilled me by a lot.
On the other side, when I became more experienced and even organized my own team, I realized how important my team composition was. There were many ways to do an objective. Killing the enemy and just doing the objective wasn´t the only way to do it. Because of this, teams could specialize on different tactics, while other teams could plan and execute appropriate counter tactics. It added an insane amount of depth to the game, and you experienced it not only while preparing various tactics, but also during the game, when you had to decide within split seconds how to react to a given situation. I honestly understand that many people will not be able to understand this, and there are so many possible situations that I can´t even think off how to start explaining them in more detail. But I am pretty sure, that this is one of the reasons for why (at least the organized scrims! and of course not as big of a reason as the map design itself is) feel very repetitive and unrewarding to play or watch. I also understand that mercs may allow simillar team composition and a larger diversity of tactics - but still, why would you cut out the even bigger diversity, that then probably would grow exponentially?
Those are just two notes I think really are making us experience the current issue of the maps even more. Please understand, that I know that these are basically things that existed in old SD games, but that´s exactly why I think that they are easy to implement, because you (SD) already know them so well and they are proven to be not interfering with the objective focused game type. Also they deliver a nice benchmark, and allow us to compare them to different changes in the core game mechanics. If there isn´t something that actually adds ADDITIONAL value to the game, there is no reason to leave them behind I think. And even tho alone they won´t really make the game better, paired with proper mad adjustments (that should come before you change anything of the gameplay), they would give the game some new styles of play and things to explore. And this are the probably biggest missing factors, that actually make most people who tryed out the game, run away after some hours of play…
All of this of course is useless and doesn´t need to be considered, when the maps are actually generating all the value this game needs to be enjoyable. It is up to you, if you think that you can do it just by improving the maps.
please