Map rebuilds, can we expect huge revisions later on?

Figment · 2012-06-16, 09:25 PM

For PS1, one of the reasons gives that we didn't get map updates was players having to download all maps again. To some players this would mean epic 52k/s download sizes. Today, that reason is no more you would think.

So can we expect maps to be revised to such an extend we need to download the entire map? Would or could we download it in pieces? Or just those pieces that got updated?

For instance, I wonder if they could rebuild Indar's shoreline into an Atlantic wall, add hexes near beaches and cliffs and make that territory useful for invasions and naval units too, increasing the playingfield and our sandbox options.

Also how far out of bounds is too far? Ie how much space is needed around a cont if we can get there? Or should you end up on another map? Like hayoo's ps idealabs invasion idea? Then we can also make footholds capturable (!) by means of holding all terrain around it and institute a rule of empires having at least ONE foothold on the server. That would change... Everything!

Just try to imagine its implications for a bit.

Sirisian · 2012-06-16, 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

So can we expect maps to be revised to such an extend we need to download the entire map? Would or could we download it in pieces? Or just those pieces that got updated?

I asked arclegger about that before in IRC and it sounds like their new system is much easier to update. He didn't give any specific details, but he said their map creation system is easier. (He apparently spends a lot of time placing objects).

Originally Posted by Figment

Also how far out of bounds is too far? Ie how much space is needed around a cont if we can get there? Or should you end up on another map? Like hayoo's ps idealabs invasion idea? Then we can also make footholds capturable (!) by means of holding all terrain around it and institute a rule of empires having at least ONE foothold on the server. That would change... Everything!

Higby specifically mentioned why they have the out of bounds system. They don't want players to be caring about planes flying out into the ocean and coming back in. Ideally everything will be happening over land. There's a strong gameplay idea of infantry, ground, and air combat so pretty much all of the world should allow the 3 to interact.

(It's one of the reasons why we'll probably never see naval or space combat because it tries to substitute ground for water units or get rid of ground units altogether. That and water is a hazard in the game, not a gameplay element).

Stardouser · 2012-06-16, 09:59 PM

Originally Posted by Sirisian

Higby specifically mentioned why they have the out of bounds system. They don't want players to be caring about planes flying out into the ocean and coming back in. Ideally everything will be happening over land. There's a strong gameplay idea of infantry, ground, and air combat so pretty much all of the world should allow the 3 to interact.

And that's a major problem. You need the freedom to fly out away and back in. Forced meatgrinding is something we have in other games, the very premise of an MMO's scale and size should allow us to get away from that.

Sirisian · 2012-06-16, 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

And that's a major problem. You need the freedom to fly out away and back in. Forced meatgrinding is something we have in other games, the very premise of an MMO's scale and size should allow us to get away from that.

The flight ceiling is arbitrarily set at 1 kilometer high. Galaxies are expected to make drops from a high altitude. I don't even think AA can hit the flight ceiling.

Xyntech · 2012-06-16, 10:11 PM

Planetside was shit for updates in a lot of ways. Forgelight sounds to be much more robust and capable in a lot of these areas, so I wouldn't be surprised to see them tweaking continents and bases in the same ways that other developers patch multiplayer maps in other shooters.

It doesn't sound like there will be any limits to how many base facility types and building/tower types they can have, and tweaking vegitation, rocks, and continent topography should be much simpler, so I think we'll see a lot of this going on. Hopefully they show restraint and don't change each base every other patch, but I could see one or two hexes (out of hundreds across the 3 continents) having some tweaking done to improve their layouts as the data rolls in.

CutterJohn · 2012-06-16, 11:21 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

And that's a major problem. You need the freedom to fly out away and back in. Forced meatgrinding is something we have in other games, the very premise of an MMO's scale and size should allow us to get away from that.

Its not forced meatgrinding. You can still take routes that have no opposition. You just can't take a route that virtually guarantess no opposition.

That said, I really don't see the need for the out of bounds.. It was very uncommon for people to take those routes in PS1. There was simply no need for it.

TheInferno · 2012-06-16, 11:23 PM

Yeah, I honestly doubt they'll be doing a ton of changes even if they can. One of the things they said is they didn't want to add in new weapons every week, they wanted the metagame to be able to stabilize. I doubt we'll see massive map updates more than once or twice a year, and possibly not even that.

Might be tweaking a few things every once in a while, though. Things always come up.

Mechlord · 2012-06-16, 11:42 PM

From the leaked files, Planetside 2 seems to use map chunks as a storage system. This, combined with widely used construction pieces, will likely facilitate easier/smaller map updates than other games using a more compiling based map system. Skyrim is a good example of a system such as this. (Note that I have no idea how Planetside 1's map system worked)

Additionally, as a member of the NC, I am somewhat jealous of the TR's sector. Those rocky canyons and hills look rather more interesting than the grassy highlands or barren desert of the other sectors. I shall be glad to relieve them of their fun terrain.

p0intman · 2012-06-17, 01:04 AM

there are people that still use 56K/S modems...

GreatMazinkaise · 2012-06-17, 01:17 AM

I'd prefer more continents over continent rebuilds, to be honest... three, even at 8x8ish is a pauper's Auraxis.

RedKnights · 2012-06-17, 02:35 AM

I would assume that the new game would support delta-patching which would allow it to update the only usable pieces

Figment · 2012-06-17, 03:10 AM

Originally Posted by Sirisian

Higby specifically mentioned why they have the out of bounds system. They don't want players to be caring about planes flying out into the ocean and coming back in. Ideally everything will be happening over land. There's a strong gameplay idea of infantry, ground, and air combat so pretty much all of the world should allow the 3 to interact.

(It's one of the reasons why we'll probably never see naval or space combat because it tries to substitute ground for water units or get rid of ground units altogether. That and water is a hazard in the game, not a gameplay element).

Yes this is the status quo. Status quo IMO sucks donkeyballs though. Hence the hypothetical situation provided.

I think Higby should realise that bypassing enemies is called a tactical flanking maneuvre. Higby should stop thinking in zerg and massive resistance only. And if he is really concerned with someone removing themselves from a fight and then turning back, what's with all the impassable barracks and warpgates then? It's a bad argument.

Bridgefight stalemate example. My outfit would bring 3 Thunderers/Deliverer along the horizon to a position behind the enemy, then circle and engage from behind. Why would we not attack along the bridge in full sight? Because we are not stupid, this is called tactics! A frontal assault is not going to work: that would be suicide, dumb, boring, predictable, bland, deathwish, waste of time, contributing to a stalemate, etc etc etc. How is that fun or smart to make players feel limited and patronised? If they want to fly in and out and waste time, great! Let them! If you are really concerned, just make specific areas of the border where you can switch continents.

Higby should stop thinking in zerg terms only and player movement control and realise this is a sandbox strategy game. If players want to circle, that apparently adds to gameplay options. Why would one always have to pass through heavy resistance and warn the opposition on their next m

ringring · 2012-06-17, 05:45 AM

Originally Posted by Sirisian

The flight ceiling is arbitrarily set at 1 kilometer high. Galaxies are expected to make drops from a high altitude. I don't even think AA can hit the flight ceiling.

It's not the same thing though is it?

TBH, I heard Higby's response and I still don't understand it. The fighting is going to be much more intense than planetside 1 already.

DviddLeff · 2012-06-17, 06:05 AM

We should be able to fly over the oceans for a time - perhaps have a longer out of bounds timer that would allow it, just not sitting out there and hiding.

From what I remember the problem with the old maps was that if you cut a hole in the terrain (say for a basement for a tower or facility) if you moved that facility and tower then the hole would still be there and to fix it the entire continent had to be downloaded.

Obviously this has not really been a problem for the past 5-6 years for most people, but PS has hardly been developed in that time.

Figment · 2012-06-17, 06:29 AM

Why shouldn't people sit out there and hide? You never went afk cloaked in a base kitchen area? How is it different from running back to friendly territory and 'hiding' aside from if found being more vulnerable and being less useful at that moment in time? Why shouldn't someone get the chance to get behind you undetected? Why do you think it is fine on a building level (room with multiple entrances) but not to circumvent you on a bigger level? Same for cloakers, why are they okay, if you can't stand not seeing someone as they flank you with a more time consuming path. They put themselves in an advantageous position through investing time and thinking on ways to best you, is it really that big a deal someone of 2000 people might sit in a corner of the map afk?

I find the argument arbitrary and narrowminded, too control freak over the player and opposition. I'd even say lazy, because you demand they fight through you or give your empire advance warning.