Jump to content

Regarding Hostile Waters


Raap

What is wrong with Hostile Waters?  

21 members have voted

  1. 1. What do you think causes players to leave the server when this map comes up in the rotation?

    • Naval gameplay balance (naval specifically)
    • Naval + air gameplay balance (the interaction between naval and air units)
    • The central iceberg capture logic (is it too confusing?)
    • The lack of a land based attack route.
    • The primary objective is too hard or too easy (is this server population dependent?)
    • I don't know / I want to see the results without having an opinion.

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

Seeing as feedback and voting reached a pretty clear conclusion, I've forwarded my present thoughts to Pushwall and we will have to come to an agreement within the next few days on how to proceed.

In the meantime, here is a draft for Hostile Waters "Redux";

kl9gDE8.png

Some extra insight into these changes: The new landmass will feature a new objective in order to integrate it into the gameplay properly, other than that, I will salvage assets from my cancelled  "3rd map contribution (Frostburn Cove)". The new iceberg additions will not be made of ice, as editing the ice mesh is a bit of a tricky process due to the double mesh layer. Instead I'm opting for more industrial entry points and additional buildings, and generally making the icebergs a bit more industrial (more concept salvaging from my cancelled map, essentially).

So yeah, industrialized icebergs are coming to APB. Abandon all logic ye who enter here. But the good news is, gameplay should improve.

Edited by Raap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That looks interesting. Obviously can't say 100% it'll work, but I have high hopes. Maybe add in a destroyed gap generator and blame it screwing physics for all the logical inconsistencies :v (I still don't quite understand 100% what a gap generator is even supposed to *be* )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AZ-Stalker said:

I'd be lovely if you added in a bit more lighting effects around the place to make land combat areas more well lit. The map is oh-so-dark everywhere that it might be a welcome contrast. My 2 cents.

Feedback noted.

I wish W3D offered a non-vertex based lighting though, currently that is the main reason why we use light so selectively; you literally have to draw the light onto the terrain via the polygon edges. The cave lighting on Siege took me a fair while.

Edited by Raap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Raap said:

Feedback noted.

I wish W3D offered a non-vertex based lighting though, currently that is the main reason why we use light so selectively; you literally have to draw the light onto the terrain via the polygon edges. The cave lighting on Siege took me a fair while.

If you're going the industrial route with icebergs, might I suggest a few well-placed lamp post props for lighting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can have some fun with colors if it's industrial Raap. Like say orange lit areas if something is fire-related or like furnaces.

Additionally, maybe have a port area with walkways a bit over water and some higher structures that snipers and rocket troops can climb to help combat whatever is flying near the land route or on the water? Perhaps some windows looking over the sea area with the inside lit to make infantry silhouettes visible to passing ships and aircraft for balance. Some more ideas to consider. I'm just super excited for more urban environments. Oh, make sure to include things like the pipes that ride above Pipeline, something like that. Could we connect a pipe like that to the closest iceberg or something? Some interesting platforming could be a thing for ninja players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChopBam said:

That new land route looks like it will take a very long time to cross.

This is my concern as well, but I'll inquiry Pushwall regarding the feasibility of region specific movement speed enhancements. Either way, no matter how you look at it, it's still just making the best of a bad situation. This map was simply never designed for a land route. Even one that goes straight through the icebergs would still take notable travel time, and also break naval in the process.

45 minutes ago, AZ-Stalker said:

You can have some fun with colors if it's industrial Raap. Like say orange lit areas if something is fire-related or like furnaces.

Additionally, maybe have a port area with walkways a bit over water and some higher structures that snipers and rocket troops can climb to help combat whatever is flying near the land route or on the water? Perhaps some windows looking over the sea area with the inside lit to make infantry silhouettes visible to passing ships and aircraft for balance. Some more ideas to consider. I'm just super excited for more urban environments. Oh, make sure to include things like the pipes that ride above Pipeline, something like that. Could we connect a pipe like that to the closest iceberg or something? Some interesting platforming could be a thing for ninja players.

In regards to aesthetic designs, I was thinking of industrial spaces similar to what you describe, but not for the entire new landmass since that would take a lot of time to do properly.

As for connecting the icebergs to the land route, I'm intentionally opting to not do so in order to ensure the icebergs remain primarily accessible by Naval Transport, otherwise nobody will use those transports for anything anymore.

The land route will not be intended to function as the primary attack route. It will exist as a backup route, and to add some flanking capabilities. It also serves as a helping hand to guide newer players and give them something easy to understand. I'm considering the option of adding limited ground vehicle play as well (no War Factory though).

Edited by Raap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, understood. I'm really hoping for some vertical play with an interesting industrial complex. We have a lot of already made assets spread across mutliple maps which you could combine for things like that. A silo from Pipeline here, a structure there, an oil derrick somewhere, a few pipes, a structure on a small hill, a port down the beach, LST landing zones... You have a lot of options. Perhaps a transport truck or two lying around for players to rush for early game and save back to their bases for later use? AA truck for mobile defense? Can't wait to see what you think up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Small update: The level update draft a few posts up is now obsolete. Welcome to iterative design.

Without giving any further details away, there will be no need for a new landmass, but elements used will be a first for APB (perhaps all of W3D, as I can't remember anyone being this crazy). 

I'll provide a sneak peek video in a few days of a small prototyping section.

Thanks for participating in this topic everyone, it may now be closed!

Edited by Raap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...