SW Mode - Map Size Reduction

(montheponies) #1

Picking up on the PAX video and the numerous discussion/polls etc. Was wondering what the view would be of having truncated maps for SW mode, while leaving the full size map for Objective.

Benefit for SW would be quicker games, avoiding map fatigue. In competition you would also have the ability to run two maps with a ABBA rotation on each (ala RTCW, rather than the AB you got on W:ET). Benefit for Objective is that you have a nice period to play a round before moving onto the next map.

Camden already has a good break as per the PAX video with the train derailment, but there’s nothing stopping maps from starting at the mid-point, ie. Whitechapel could start with the EV loaded at the Church…

(Mustang) #2

This thought struck my mind also.

But on reflection if something like this route is looked at then I’d like to be able to play both the Quick and Full versions in both Obj and SW modes.

Although ideally I’d be more in favour of only one length and just reducing the time taken.

On a related note 3 objectives that take 4-5min each is preferable to 2 objectives that take 7-8 minutes each.

(Ashog) #3

If they do shorten maps, I wonder how are they planning to do it. Because splitting maps now means double work (often same work) done on same parts of maps. I am far from mapping but imho it makes sense to finalize big full maps till release, then take a couple of first months to disable parts of the existing maps for comp (or classic mode). This would however mean that we wouldn’t be able to test shortened maps during beta.

(DarkangelUK) #4

I’d rather a good mix of large and small maps were ready from the get go, that way both crowds are catered to.

(Kl3ppy) #5

No, imo SW and objective should have the same maps.

(Ashog) #6

This too, but I mean about already existing maps. Not like they are going to trash bin as someone suggested before lol. They have pretty nice parts for comp, e.g. WC, Camden, Victoria.

(DarkangelUK) #7

Personally I’d bin all the big maps and go small only but that’s just selfish old me talking :stuck_out_tongue: I agree with Shifty though, SW and Obj should be the same however they decide to go.

(Ashog) #8

Why then splitting map lengths not by Obj/SW but by Classic/Shipping modes then?

(stealth6) #9

For SW I prefer short maps, but for OBJ I wouldn’t mind seeing longer maps or maps what are played in a certain order each containing a part of a bigger map (like a campaign)

(Kendle) #10

I’ve always felt SW and Obj should be 2 different game modes in the same sense TDM is a different game mode. Same maps used to an extent, same set of assets etc. from a mapping point of view, but some areas cut off for TDM, and some objectives skipped for SW compared to Obj.

That way the concepts of each can be expanded, rather than having this constant push-me-pull-me trying to please SW (comp) and Obj (pub). You could make even bigger maps then as well as smaller maps. I bet there are people who’d love a 20 objective 1 hour epic map, which of course would be useless for competition.

Encouraging people to move from pub to comp, which is one of SD’s stated aims, then simply becomes a case of “you play the same maps, in the same way, only you play bits of them rather than the whole thing”.

You could also re-introduce ET’s Campaign mode, stringing maps together and carrying over the XP, which much as I hate that sort of thing also has its fans.

(Ashog) #11

That’d be great imho.

(rookie1) #12

This ^^ ^^

(trickykungfu) #13

I like smaller maps ala RtCW but i don’t think its a good idea to split objective maps and stopwatch maps.

I have to say i don’t like the map design. SD are doing the same mistakes they did with Brink.

(attack) #14

if there no short maps from begin , there will no competition later.
look at brink maps always double fullhold.nobody had wait for further patches
and nobody want to watch a 1hr match on one map.

(Ashog) #15

Agreed, but do you think Waterloo is too long now? I think it is quite ok timewise. Various maps like that would be great imho.

(trickykungfu) #16

Every Bomb Objective has a serious Problem. The defender spawn is to close to the bomb. This makes it very hard to defend the bomb for the attackers.
Waterloo Second Stage is a pain in the ass if u ask me.

Waterloo First Objective works out nice because of the forward Spawn. You could easily add one on Camdon second Objective.

(Attackmack) #17

Let OBJ and SW use the same maps (or remove OBJ altogether, leaving SW as the premiere gamemode) and instead have a serverside option to “shorten” the maps.

(attack) #18

+1
this way pub players can look competition and do not wonder why map is different

(attack) #19

waterloo isnt too long but too many or wrong placed ways, i think the dimension of waterloo is near to oasis.
i still havent stoped the times for the different ways but im sure that some are way longer and are going to be unused.why i should take 300 meters more to obj when i can be there in half of the time.
and the second obj feels " lets say unbalanced"

(DarkangelUK) #20

Remove the hack objective on Waterloo and it’d be ok for comp. Would rather the last 2 C4 objectives were spaced out more but wall and containers are enough imo.