Show whole topic Aug 19, 2009 2:23 am
AlphaRebel Offline
Mitglied
Registered since: Aug 09, 2009
Location: -


Subject: Re: Poll: My favorite played map SIZE is...
Hi,
After 2 full games at lans and a few small / test games over the net I'm afraid to say that if M.A.X.R. is to make any impact with modern strat gamers (one of the guys I roped into a LAN game has decided that it's too slow which is missing the point) I have to admit that unless you have 3 WEEKS to dedicate to a game and are a fan of truly epic games then we are going to need more SMALLER maps for multiplayer.
64 of 92 squares would be ideal allow for earlier contact and keep the presure / combat on (do maps have to be square or can we do for example 64x128?)

I was a big fan of the original max SP and always went for the large target / epic goal / massive games (fav map high impact) but 15 years and a lot of evolution on the MP front means that unless you want m.a.x.r to only ever be a neich home LAN game, it's not going to gain impact unless the games hold interest and the gameplay is made less clunky (and no I am not saying dump the things that made max so awsome in the first place) but seriouly we were on a 256x256 (UK) map. It was well over an hour before I even found my opponant and due to our base locations (I was on south coast of mainland he was in iceland) meant that it was 10+ turns flat out for my airforce to get there and about 40 for my subs, the map was simply WAY too big for 2 player and probably even 4.
So what am I saying? well maxr can support lots of commanders but for the time being I can see 90% of games being 2-4 players, so I think that maybe to begin with we should conentrate on smaller maps that could accomodate 2 players or LAN games that can be played in less then a day (most gamers at LAN events will put up to about 3 hours on a game in a single session before breaking for another game or doing something else).
If anyone is willing to give me some pointers in making maps I am willing to help here Wink