Symmetry or Realism? -1 reply

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Mr. Matt VIP Member

#BanRadioActiveLobster

357,014 XP

17th June 2002

7 Uploads

33,696 Posts

780 Threads

#1 14 years ago

While exploring the maps section of A2files, I have noticed there are two distinct types of map. There are the symmetrical maps, which I will from now on refer to as 'Multiplayer-friendly', and there are the 'realistic' maps (i.e. those which try to look like natural space). I'm just interested to know... which do you actually prefer? The realistic maps or the multiplayer friendly maps? I personally prefer the realistic ones. I find it much more fun to strategically plan a battle on a map that's anything like a real region of space. There are only so many strategies you can have with a base-based (:lol: ) multiplayer-friendly map, I always find. With a realistic map, almost all sides of a base are exposed, meaning multiple defensive plans... and multiple offensive ones. That's what I think anyway; how about the rest of you?




Ensign Riles VIP Member

No! I'm Spamacus!

426,516 XP

17th June 2003

0 Uploads

39,479 Posts

1 Threads

#2 14 years ago

I prefer completly realistic maps. Remember the one for A1 which was a 3v2 multiplayer map? Forget what it's called, but it is my favorite. It really is more like a true solar system. Great for role playing.




Operative34997

error 414- user not found

50 XP

3rd June 2004

0 Uploads

794 Posts

0 Threads

#3 14 years ago

3 vs 2 was an awesome map! One of these days I'm going to try to remake it for A2. I agree with both of you about realistic maps. I have to laugh every time I see a new "Map Mod" listed on the home page and it's always some tic tac toe crap. If they need a map for 8 players, they should make some 50k x 50k maps and just space everyone around in different places. One other thing I don't like is that every map puts all players backed up against the edge of the map. Put everyone in the middle, like Matt said. Make 'em fight for that one Class D planet that's right next to the Fed AI player. I have enhanced build lists that would thrive in that type of environment. By design, my AI is set up to encroach on other people's "property". That's something else. I can't stand to see, one player in his little cubicle building his stuff, the next one in his cubicle building HIS stuff, etc, etc. That's boring. I say to h--- with the MP friendly maps and make some realistic ones! And since when does a single sector of space have 30 wormholes? Or 20 nebulae? A lot of asteroids I can see, but the other stuff is just plain comical.




pro.crow

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

27th July 2004

0 Uploads

7 Posts

0 Threads

#4 14 years ago

they just have to be fun and playable and to date i havent found 1 assault map worth playing even the 8 i made:/




Operative34997

error 414- user not found

50 XP

3rd June 2004

0 Uploads

794 Posts

0 Threads

#5 14 years ago

However they are made, they should look realistic. 8 players arranged in a tic tac toe around 27 nebulae and 78 wormholes with an asteroid maze in the center just doesn't look like real space. Heck it doesn't even look like Star Trek space. I've seen almost every episode and never seen a sector of space that busy. The map's layout should be half the challenge. Especially if you use random placement.




draconis_sharp

error

50 XP

11th July 2004

0 Uploads

806 Posts

0 Threads

#6 14 years ago

Not making a map fair is what its all about. It makes things more fun and interesting. It makes the players really think about what their next move will be and how to beat the crap out of that starbase circling the planet, taunting them, laughing at them, take shots at their scouts, AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!!! I'm just messin, that's a feature from my mod. The AI seems to like to take control of those for some reason... Just one more thing, how fast would a starbase be going if it circled a Class M planet in 30 seconds? I want to keep orbital time realistic, yet practical and tacticly advantageous. Thirty seconds will make it useful, but is it realistic? Most likely not.




Operative34997

error 414- user not found

50 XP

3rd June 2004

0 Uploads

794 Posts

0 Threads

#7 14 years ago

draconis, with the game at "normal speed", it takes approximately 60 seconds for an M class planet to rotate 1 solar day(24 hours) so your starbase(I'm assuming your game was set to normal speed as well) will orbit that planet twice each day. Assuming a 20,000 mile orbit above the surface, that would give you 140,000 mile orbital distance. Divide that by 12(the number of hours needed to orbit) you will come out to about 11,500 mph. Which puts the inhabitants of such a station at about 5g's. Not bad if you don't mind walking around with 1000 theoretical pounds. lol. Actually, why don't you just slow down the orbit times of the planets? You could pretend like you're Q. . lol.




Operative34997

error 414- user not found

50 XP

3rd June 2004

0 Uploads

794 Posts

0 Threads

#8 14 years ago

Uh oh, whoops! I meant speed up the planet's rotation! This Q continuum stuff is hard to get used to.




c0mpliant VIP Member

50 XP

9th March 2003

0 Uploads

1,947 Posts

0 Threads

#9 14 years ago

I much prefer a map with that requires thinking, plotting, stratagy and cunning. Multi-friendly maps are for people who can't get their head around strategic thinking. I'm not saying that in a bad way, I know that some people can't understand military thinking, so there has to be both in a game, but for me, I love a good REAL map;)




Operative34997

error 414- user not found

50 XP

3rd June 2004

0 Uploads

794 Posts

0 Threads

#10 14 years ago

Sometimes it's the fact that you're at a disadvantage that will push you to be that much more aggressive in a strategic situation. And if your playing against human players, the one that has the best advantage in the beginning, might get overconfident and slack off just enough for you to get the upper hand. I always remember Wil Riker in the USS Hathaway in TNG's "Peak Performance" Riker's ship was way outclassed, but Picard underestimated him. And that's what cost him.




  • 1
  • 2