SpEeDr Posted July 18, 2012 Posted July 18, 2012 maps is boring NOW map Rotation: now Field, Volcano, Under, Canyon, Complex, City_Flying, Islands, Mesa, Walls_Flying we need map Rotation :: Under.Field, Volcano. Canyon, Complex, City_Flying, Islands, Mesa, Walls_Flying.Snow Glacier_Flying.Siege thanks tik tok
Guest Animoski Posted July 18, 2012 Posted July 18, 2012 Putting in "new" (not exactly new if it was made 7-9 years ago) maps can drastically affect player count. Although, I think we can try it out for at least a week and see what the average player count is. It might be an issue because I noticed a couple of our regulars use 3.4.4, and we've even spotted a couple of 2.9.2s, 1.9 (lol), and a couple of 0.0 guys out there. They might not have the maps :/ 1
BillieJoe67 Posted July 18, 2012 Posted July 18, 2012 I personally prefer the original rotation as the different types of maps (with base defense, flying, etc) are evenly spread out whereas you're (speedr) proposing to put under and field together; in a marathon game both maps can and have taken a long time for a team to win, so people will become bored and start to leave the game half way through. Also, ditch Glacier_flying, terrace ftw: Walls_Flying, Under, Canyon, Field, Volcano, Terrace, Complex, City_Flying, Islands, Mesa,, Snow, Siege 1
Loki Posted July 18, 2012 Posted July 18, 2012 Here's the best rotation possible to use Snow,Field,Walls Flying, Volcano, City Flying, Canyon, Mesa, Islands <-- best rotation I didnt put under up there because it always turns into a infantry camp war with the refinery gone for like 3 hours Sometimes it feels like under is the only map on the server because on every other map one team steamrolls another So you've got some maps goin on for like 15-20 minutes at most consistently, under is boring enough said I think that rotation will keep the server in a good rythym more likely to get full house
newtown19 Posted July 18, 2012 Posted July 18, 2012 Maybe add a !rate (1 to 5) map system, throw a few other maps in, then remove the low ratings maps after a week or so. As for those who may not have certain maps, just provide them for download here at the forums. It gets monotonous with the same maps over and over. Under has been played so much that I've seen players leave as soon as it loads up. 1
D4rX Posted July 18, 2012 Posted July 18, 2012 I'm somewhat against the completely unknown new maps. It will harm the server more than doing any good. Just imo. Although there are a few I do like: - Sand, - Snow, - Siege - Glacier Flying (), - Terrace. 1
BillieJoe67 Posted July 18, 2012 Posted July 18, 2012 Maybe add a !rate (1 to 5) map system Aye, this would be a good idea; or a plugin that lets players vote for the next map, kinda like st0rm had. I should have some code for both around somewhere if you're interested. *facepalm* Just remembered !vote nextmap in brenbot
jks101 Posted July 18, 2012 Posted July 18, 2012 I agree with D4rKx, We still have to finish the standard maps, place some gts, turrets, ce, etc. This will take some time cause idk what 'moski is up to :/
RnD Posted July 18, 2012 Posted July 18, 2012 I disagree with every removing Hourglass, Under, Field, Glacier_Flying and Mesa, maps with Defenses more often then not last awhile and this notion that all battles should end within tops, thirty minutes is total bullshit, I respect opinions, but I also would prefer to enjoy long, grueling battles that actually require effort, focus, endurance and above all the dedication to see it to the end be it an hour or six hours. Maps like Hourglass and Under are among the two best for long battles, if every battle is short then I would honestly say we're not doing ourselves any favors, at the same time every battle cannot be a long battle either which is why I side with BillieJoe, I believe he as the one who suggested an interval type rotation where long and short battles with occur evenly. But I for one would love to see maps with defenses stay, they are time proven to host longer battles and in many cases, larger player totals as well, if you need a clear cut example, how many people do we seem to have when the map is on field for example in comparison to canyon or walls, the number normally drops like a rock. As for the subject of new maps, Animoski brings a valid point, for as many of us use 4.0 and take advantage of the automatic map down-loader many people still do not use 4.0 or even 3.4.4, why some do this, I don't know but I also don't mind saying that even if it is a handful we're talking about here without 4.0, I still do not at all believe or support the notion we should turn a blind eye to those players at any level. Renegade exists in an age where we need to value every last player, if we refuse or fail to do that then in the end we could be turning away a player who could have been one more regular in our server, I welcome all of you to tell me I am picking at straws here with the whole, "Lets attract every last player to RenCorner." ideal but I would much rather stand in the group that is willing to hold the door open for those of us who do not run 4.0, and send the message we want YOU here. And even if it comes to a point where we do have maps some do not have, lets put an effort forward to establish a means of players getting those maps. ~ R n D ~ 2
Jd123123 Posted July 18, 2012 Posted July 18, 2012 every time under comes on I leave. Cant stand it. Glacier ftw
Zemki Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 Under is decent, if biased moreso than other maps. I do agree with one or two new maps, though taking into consideration those that don't/can't download a map for what ever reason, they should be defenseless, 'short' maps. While a new map with full on obelisk and agt sounds nice, those types of maps tend to last quite long, and would put those without the map out of the server for potentially hours. As well, keeping a rotation that puts shorter maps between the long sluggers is a good priority to have when coming up with a rotation. It's just a very nice boost to keep playing when faced with a small map after say, field where often you get newbies like me running around in the tunnels most of the time and not really doing much to assist in taking down the other base.
Guest Animoski Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 In case you guys haven't realized yet, we already have a rotation like this (base defense then a non-base defense map): [20:33] <~Animoski> !rotation [20:33] <&RCAOW> Host: The map rotation includes: [20:33] <&RCAOW> Host: [Field] Complex City_Flying Islands [20:33] <&RCAOW> Host: Under Walls_Flying Mesa Volcano I think you guys are making the rotation a bigger deal than it should be. Maps are just the playing field whereas the game itself is what makes people wanna join. The more we modify the server, the more I think people will wanna stay. Overall, I wouldn't mind adding more games to the rotation, but only if we can organize the rotation itself so that it keeps games going and people staying.
Loki Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 I disagree with every removing Hourglass, Under, Field, Glacier_Flying and Mesa, maps with Defenses more often then not last awhile and this notion that all battles should end within tops, thirty minutes is total bullshit, I respect opinions, but I also would prefer to enjoy long, grueling battles that actually require effort, focus, endurance and above all the dedication to see it to the end be it an hour or six hours. Maps like Hourglass and Under are among the two best for long battles, if every battle is short then I would honestly say we're not doing ourselves any favors, at the same time every battle cannot be a long battle either which is why I side with BillieJoe, I believe he as the one who suggested an interval type rotation where long and short battles with occur evenly. But I for one would love to see maps with defenses stay, they are time proven to host longer battles and in many cases, larger player totals as well, if you need a clear cut example, how many people do we seem to have when the map is on field for example in comparison to canyon or walls, the number normally drops like a rock. As for the subject of new maps, Animoski brings a valid point, for as many of us use 4.0 and take advantage of the automatic map down-loader many people still do not use 4.0 or even 3.4.4, why some do this, I don't know but I also don't mind saying that even if it is a handful we're talking about here without 4.0, I still do not at all believe or support the notion we should turn a blind eye to those players at any level. Renegade exists in an age where we need to value every last player, if we refuse or fail to do that then in the end we could be turning away a player who could have been one more regular in our server, I welcome all of you to tell me I am picking at straws here with the whole, "Lets attract every last player to RenCorner." ideal but I would much rather stand in the group that is willing to hold the door open for those of us who do not run 4.0, and send the message we want YOU here. And even if it comes to a point where we do have maps some do not have, lets put an effort forward to establish a means of players getting those maps. ~ R n D ~ Oh for fuck sakes, you think you know about getting a communitys player count up? Tell me more Rnd!
RnD Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 I am not talking about the Community's player-count if you would pay attention, I am obviously talking about the servers, and I will say it again, maps with defenses more often then not SEEM to have more players interested in staying around over maps that do not have defenses or end quickly, I am not against having maps that have the potential to be over quickly but I am against removing too many maps that boast long battles. I hope that offers you some clarity Loki since you seem to be giving me an attitude without warrant, as for the community, I think it is quite obvious how that works and I am far from being the only guy who makes it work, we all make it work, that's common sense. Last but not least understand one more thing, I have said what I did in this topic because those are my views and thoughts, I never said that all of them are right or wrong, they are how I view things, and I also welcome people to challenge me on those views, but I would appreciate it if you Loki did not come up with some response as you did that suggests I consider everything I say to be correct because it is not, my views are based on things I have seen and from experiences, does that make everything I try and say right? Of course not, but I would appreciate if your response would not imply such, I am far from being that arrogant. I edited this to add a final note Loki, do not take the above with offense, I am not6 trying to offend you, nor do I care to, I just do not fancy when it is implied that I know everything, I don't, certainly not on a matter such as this where I am simply inputting my views or experience, never the less, if I do hope for anything out of this other then a harsh reply back I am sure, I do at least hope that whatever happens with the map rotation, we see more people in the server, In the end, that is what I CARE about with this subject. ~ R n D ~ 2
Loki Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 RnD I wasnt serious.. or you might have HS me in a game last night and I vented on the forums lol, but yeah chill RnD.. I know what you're saying and all
Jd123123 Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 what loki is trying to say is......... he was high when he made those remarks.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now