What Map Is This Picture From?

Drac0rion · 2015-11-26 16:56:05 UTC

I’d love to try the extended versions of maps that were cut, but only in objective mode(this mode really feels like playing the old ET to me, only less players and smaller maps), but since they got cut I’m sure having one in stopwatch mode would just be an overkill.

Just like I feel Dome should be more of a 12vs12 map maybe and never a competitive map(because too big for only 5vs5).
I wouldn’t mind having more big maps only in objective mode. In my opinion it worked pretty well for ET, even the huge maps were a lot of fun(but also had way more players than 8vs8 in most servers).

Ctrix · 2015-11-26 17:36:03 UTC

People hardly ever vote for Dome. It’s a shame. I blame the first objective being so badly designed. But even so overall it’s really not as large as it seems, because most games will focus on always the same couple places, with the rest just being a lot of running.
For example I’ve never seen the gates in the last phase used.
If you take all the spots where actual fighting happens on that map, it’s the same as the other maps. How are the defenders supposed to hold such a large area otherwise.

tominatorx · 2015-11-26 18:33:26 UTC

[quote=“Ctrix;115115”]People hardly ever vote for Dome. It’s a shame. I blame the first objective being so badly designed. But even so overall it’s really not as large as it seems, because most games will focus on always the same couple places, with the rest just being a lot of running.
For example I’ve never seen the gates in the last phase used.
If you take all the spots where actual fighting happens on that map, it’s the same as the other maps. How are the defenders supposed to hold such a large area otherwise.[/quote]

My biggest problem with that map is that it’s extremely difficult if you play on defense side. The problem is that the map is so big that it’s really hard to spot every enemy or to even set up a good defense.

Usually when the attackers succeed in an objective is because 1 or 2 guys slipped past the defenders via one of the many routes. Standing right next to the objective to defend is also not an option since there are so many mercs with explosive damage (even Stokers molotov is almost certainly an instant kill because getting out of it in time is almost impossible at least imo). As the defenders you have to push the enemy away from the objective the problem is as soon as you do that there are so many routes the attackers can use to flank you.

I’ve played this map multiple times now and I think I won twice as the defender (and lost about 9-10 times)and from the 7 or 8 times I played on offense, I only lost once (which was yesterday against a team that had a lvl 41 proxy player who was literally destroying our team).

This could be just a coincidence, I’m not immediately going to say it’s imbalanced. It could very well be that the players have to learn how to hold a certain area if they’re on defense. It’s a new map which means it will take some time until you are fully aware of what your options are to defend (or attack).

I think that the map is not so popular because it might feel too big for some people. More routes = more complexity and that could be a bit overwhelming for some people.

If I’m honest it’s my least favourite map. That being said I still think it’s a good map but it needs a few improvements imo.

ImSploosh · 2015-11-26 18:54:34 UTC

Wish it looked and sounded like that as well. Also love the maps. I personally just wish all of the maps weren’t so linear. I constantly find myself just battling it out with people at either close-range hopping around, or mid-long range strafing back and forth with not really any other way but to just move forward. There’s tons of invisible walls and areas that look like you should be able to pass through. I’ve seen some gameplay of maps like “Market” for instance, in its test/prototype phase, and it definitely looked a little better.

I feel like the game’s just too linear. Not sure how to describe it. I’ve always preferred flanking or “discovering new spots.” As it is, the gameplay gets repetitive, and the gunfights end up all being the same.

That’s just a personal opinion of mine though. Maps are one of the main things that keep me sticking around games. Battlefield Bad Company 2 had maps that were pretty good, although they were much more linear, and somewhat boring compared to Bad Company 1’s maps in my opinion. Another game I played was “Kuma War,” (Classic, not the newer ones) which had simple, yet in many cases, complex maps with tons of routes, choke points, and options for approaching the situation. The majority of people I’ve met have never heard of that game though sadly. It had something like 100 maps, co-op missions, single-player, etc. You can still download it and try out the maps if you want to see what I’m talking about, there’s just no one online anymore. Game died in like 2011/2012 from what I’ve seen on the internet (couldn’t play after 2009/2010 due to lack of computer).

^tangent. :#

Diosito · 2015-11-26 19:37:26 UTC

@MissMurder @Amerika @Faraleth

I thought all content prior to steam was under NDA, am I wrong?

Abbadon
Abaddon

Black2 · 2015-11-26 22:21:51 UTC

[quote=“sympatheticMotorcycle;114861”][quote=“BlackFro;114822”][quote=“Glowpowner;114649”][quote=“derpypenguinz19;114647”]Welp, found some gameplay footage of Bridge longform.

looks and sounds way better what we have now XD[/quote]

I knew I’m not the only one who thought this.
Dirty bomb pre-Alpha was the shit. It was more dark, gloomy, and gritty. The announcer sounded way more realistic with static too. This is the way a game portraying a nuclear fallout should be.

But now they made DB something laughable and facetious.
[/quote]

I like the game as it’s now. Pre alpha looks all grey too me.[/quote]

The way the game looks is completely fine it’s just pre-alpha more suited the nuclear fallout theme better. Something serious and dark like gears of war.
The announcer was like curt and too the point. When they repaired the ev he said:
“They activated their ev. Engineers build the barricade. Don’t let them get their ev to the GH building. Use firepower, explosives, drone strikes, just stop them from reaching the objective!”

Did you know how long it took me to figure out that airstrikes stopped the ev? I would of caught on if the annoucer said the above.

But now we got some off-accent guy screaming: “DEFOOSE THE FUCKING C4!”
C’mon now really?

Mr-Penguin · 2015-11-26 22:23:07 UTC

[quote=“BlackFro;115221”][quote=“sympatheticMotorcycle;114861”][quote=“BlackFro;114822”][quote=“Glowpowner;114649”][quote=“derpypenguinz19;114647”]Welp, found some gameplay footage of Bridge longform.

looks and sounds way better what we have now XD[/quote]

I knew I’m not the only one who thought this.
Dirty bomb pre-Alpha was the shit. It was more dark, gloomy, and gritty. The announcer sounded way more realistic with static too. This is the way a game portraying a nuclear fallout should be.

But now they made DB something laughable and facetious.
[/quote]

I like the game as it’s now. Pre alpha looks all grey too me.[/quote]

The way the game looks is completely fine it’s just pre-alpha more suited the nuclear fallout theme better. Something serious and dark like gears of war.
The announcer was like curt and too the point. When they repaired the ev he said:
“They activated their ev. Engineers build the barricade. Don’t let them get their ev to the GH building. Use firepower, explosives, drone strikes, just stop them from reaching the objective!”

Did you know how long it took me to figure out that airstrikes stopped the ev? I would of caught on if the annoucer said the above.

But now we got some off-accent guy screaming: “DEFOOSE THE FUCKING C4!”
C’mon now really?[/quote]

Old announcer is better, but I like the current look. Differentiates the game from the art style of other shooters.

Black2 · 2015-11-26 22:29:34 UTC

[quote=“derpypenguinz19;115223”][quote=“BlackFro;115221”][quote=“sympatheticMotorcycle;114861”][quote=“BlackFro;114822”][quote=“Glowpowner;114649”][quote=“derpypenguinz19;114647”]Welp, found some gameplay footage of Bridge longform.

looks and sounds way better what we have now XD[/quote]

I knew I’m not the only one who thought this.
Dirty bomb pre-Alpha was the shit. It was more dark, gloomy, and gritty. The announcer sounded way more realistic with static too. This is the way a game portraying a nuclear fallout should be.

But now they made DB something laughable and facetious.
[/quote]

I like the game as it’s now. Pre alpha looks all grey too me.[/quote]

The way the game looks is completely fine it’s just pre-alpha more suited the nuclear fallout theme better. Something serious and dark like gears of war.
The announcer was like curt and too the point. When they repaired the ev he said:
“They activated their ev. Engineers build the barricade. Don’t let them get their ev to the GH building. Use firepower, explosives, drone strikes, just stop them from reaching the objective!”

Did you know how long it took me to figure out that airstrikes stopped the ev? I would of caught on if the annoucer said the above.

But now we got some off-accent guy screaming: “DEFOOSE THE FUCKING C4!”
C’mon now really?[/quote]

Old announcer is better, but I like the current look. Differentiates the game from the art style of other shooters.[/quote]

Why does it have to be different?
I don’t see many shooters with that kind of dark look pre-alpha had.

The only one I know is gears of war.

Mr-Penguin · 2015-11-26 22:31:50 UTC

[quote=“BlackFro;115229”][quote=“derpypenguinz19;115223”][quote=“BlackFro;115221”][quote=“sympatheticMotorcycle;114861”][quote=“BlackFro;114822”][quote=“Glowpowner;114649”][quote=“derpypenguinz19;114647”]Welp, found some gameplay footage of Bridge longform.