continent/landmass size thoughts - Page 3

Eyeklops · 2012-03-23, 07:59 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Well, here is what I was thinking would be done for a Battlefield MMO: For example, no individual base will allow more than 50(or insert appropriate number here) players to spawn at it (once there are 50 living people spawned from a base no more can spawn until one dies. Or, instead, it's not just how many are spawned from that base, but how many are "logged into" the base). If your team wants more people than that to attack the nearest base, another 50 players can spawn at another base and travel the extra distance. If they want more than 100, then 50 more will have to spawn from an even further away base and travel to the attack site. And in this way, while there's no physical limit on how many people can drive or fly to a target, at some point people decide to attack somewhere else because of the increasing distance factor.

I dunno about you, but if I was fighting at a cool base fight, then died, and somebody snatched up my place forcing me to spawn far out. I'd be more than a little pissed. lol. Although...knowing that if you die you get kicked far out would promote preservation of online self.

Stardouser · 2012-03-23, 08:03 PM

Originally Posted by Eyeklops

I dunno about you, but if I was fighting at a cool base fight, then died, and somebody snatched up my place forcing me to spawn far out. I'd be more than a little pissed. lol. Although...knowing that if you die you get kicked far out would promote preservation of online self.

I thought of that too! Your place is not secured by simply spawning into that base, but when you even select that base as your spawn point, you become "logged into it". You don't get logged out of it unless you either log out of it by selecting a new base or if you don't respawn within a couple of minutes after each death. Also if you stand idle from more than 3-4 minutes you are logged out of your respawn queue.

Stardouser · 2012-03-25, 02:58 PM

OK, guys, I wanted to give an example of my idea for player per base spawn limits; only put it in graphics. Obviously I am NO artist. This is a simplified mockup of a map that has 2 factions, and this is how it is at the start of the war, each side has 42 bases. Yes, this is one mega continent. You can assume that one faction's uncap base is somewhere deep to the left and the other deep to the right.

Now, my idea was this: OK, let's assume a server is for 1500 players, 750 per faction. NOTE: These numbers and the numbers that follow are examples only, they are of course to be tweaked. Continuing: Each base can spawn a maximum of 50 players. Do you see the small gray box around the single red base? That's the target. See how 2nd line of Blue bases is 10km back from the front line? The grey box around the 6 bases denotes the 6 bases I presume are close enough to participate in the battle, I am assuming that people from bases more than 10km away will want to attack closer targets.

And the 6 red bases in the grey box are the bases where the defending team in this particular attack will pull their defenders from. Let's just say that Blue spawns 50 X 6=300 players at these 6 bases and attacks the target. That leaves 450 players to either attack, or defend elsewhere along the line.

Let's say Blue captures a deep spear into Red territory, a line of 3 bases. They will only be able to then pull 150 respawns from nearby without going too far back. Also, think about this: At the start, you have 750 players for 42 bases, that's an average of 18 players per base. As you penetrate into enemy territory, your own territory becomes vulnerable to enemy raids that sneak past your guys into your back bases. Some should be capturable without a line of supply and some will not.

Anyway, you can take this explanation as both me advocating for one megacontinent per server AND an explanation of my "50 players max per base spawning" idea. I believe that limiting spawns per base in this fashion will encourage, but not mandate, that teams spread out. It will also curtail the ability of one empire to drive another back to their uncap. Once you drive the enemy back to the point where they only have 10 or less bases left, they are freed from the 50 per base spawn limit - this gives them the opportunity to repel en masse further rape.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

RNFB · 2012-03-25, 09:50 PM

That is so complicated it hurts my brain.

Ait'al · 2012-03-26, 01:36 AM

It should be 1:1 ratio to the fiction. Then fill in the blanks.

cellinaire · 2012-03-26, 03:48 AM

I repeatedly got an impression that 'the actual travel time' will be a lot longer than that of PS1...not talking about the metrics here..

capiqu · 2012-04-23, 08:30 PM

I would love to see a Spherical world consisting of 10 new continents but also incorporating the original 11. These connected continents could be divided into 2 different hemisphere surrounded by large oceans containing islands within. LOl nice dream but it would be nice.

KTNApollo · 2012-04-23, 08:47 PM

Each continent will have its own server, and each of those servers connect to the main server that you see in the server list. If there was one huge landmass it would be instanced into multiple different server shards because they don't have the infrastructure to support all those people in one place.

cellinaire · 2012-04-24, 03:38 AM

Originally Posted by ThGlump

But variety is good, and only 3 continents at start will limit population on server, so it will feel a lot emptier when another 3 continents are added (3cont worth of population will be spread on 6th). You cant expect that huge influx of ppl to instantly populate new continents. not without merges.

What about 3 handcrafted continent, and rest 5-10 computer generated. They wont be that awesome, but theyll be playable enough, and give more room to populate on that server. And later instead of adding new continent, just rework one of the computer generated like you would add one.

SOE isn't following the 'a continent is entirely dominated by single biosphere' credo of PS1 in PS2. I'm pretty certain by now that Indar, for example, has at least 3 major landtypes. (SW part of Indar is grassy, quasi forest-looking, central and north part of Indar is mostly valleys and mountains, middle east part of Indar seems to have desert-ish areas.)

Mastachief · 2012-04-24, 04:37 AM

Originally Posted by Alduron

I could have sworn T-Ray or Higby said somewhere in a video that the continents would be 8 Square Kilometers, which would be 4km x 4km, not 8km x 8km... I'm positive someone here will correct me with link if I am wrong.

::EDIT::
Can't find them talking about it in the video, but It looks like they might have said 8 Kilometers Square, which would indeed be 8x8.

They've been quoted at 64km² maps which is 8km x 8km (4x4 would be 16km² btw)

Looking at the map vs in game footage from GDC 8km x 8km seems about right. Higby and co are actively moving away from vast open (un contested) spaces so a large map would cause issues as you'd need more pop to make the battles spread there in lies a problem when those 3-4000 people decide to all go to one area.

The engine is supposed to be made for scaling so in the future they could see continents like the size of cyssor return but i see no reason to go bigger than that.

Personally i'd prefer lots and lots of different hand crafted 8km x 8km maps.

Hmr85 · 2012-04-24, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by Mastachief

Personally i'd prefer lots and lots of different hand crafted 8km x 8km maps.

QFT

I would rather see this IMO.

Although, bigger maps would be awesome, it is not going to cause players to spread out. If PS1 is any indication, players have a tendency to stick together in giant zergs that roam from one objective to the next. Huge battles are a blast and that is what the typical FPS player is looking for instant action. Not some giant huge map where you run into the other faction once in a blue moon.

In regards to a post a little higher up in thread.
Also, if you want to see a game fail really fast limit base fights to 50 people only. See how well that goes over with your community when you have 3 to 400 other players trying to partake in the fight only to be sent way back to the nearest base to foot it up there again because bases where limited to a 50 person only respawn. People die extremely quickly in these huge base fights. Its hard to prolong your life when you have 10 other people shooting at you at all times. Bases would never be captured due to everybody being afraid they are going to lose their spot up in the fight due to the limited restrictions on base fights.

Sorry went a little off topic there

Eyeklops · 2012-04-24, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by Mastachief

Personally i'd prefer lots and lots of different hand crafted 8km x 8km maps.

I am with the Chief on this one. I would rather see more maps, and expanded server shard capacity. I feel that 6000 players per shard (3 maps @ 2000 players) is not enough for a gold release. 3 maps may be ok for beta, but I really hope that they expand up to 10+ maps fairly quickly once money starts rolling in.

SniperSteve · 2012-04-24, 12:41 PM

I think what they are doing right now is pushing the boundaries quite a bit... What you are suggesting is probably best done in PlanetSide3.

Rbstr · 2012-04-24, 01:56 PM

My thoughts on map size, not having more than skimmed the thread:

Maps like Cyssor or Searhus and others in PS1 are cool. Kinda-plausible vast expanses between things. The problem always was that there wasn't anything to really do except travel through those areas.
You might run into people on the way, but over all all that extra area didn't serve much of a purpose. No one smart would want an AMS in the boonies so they had a 5 minute walk to the base they wanted to attack.
PS2 can/has fixed that by adding reasons to take these places. There's resources in them there hills!
Not only that, but the hex system says that if you want the base, it's easier if you cap the "empty" space next to it.

So I think you could do a map like Cyssor in a much more interesting fashion than PS1. The Mountain is no longer a big thing in the middle that doesn't matter for much. There's a mine in it or something. And stuff in the surrounding Steppe-land. None of it BIG and important like a base but capturing the areas still count for something. You have to have the front pass through that area, instead of basically skipping through it as the fight has gone to the next base.

From an ideal standpoint I'd want it EVE style: One server with every body on it and a TON of maps/Continents scaling from a little island thing with a fairly low PopCap to something really, really big. PS2's version of Asia.
Practicality says "that ain't gonna happen" because of technical and man-power limitations. But all in all that's what I'd want: As many people in a single server as possible with a big enough game world to support them.

Stardouser · 2012-04-24, 09:06 PM

Originally Posted by Hmr85

QFT

Although, bigger maps would be awesome, it is not going to cause players to spread out.

I am not familiar with exactly what they do but WW2 OL is one huge continent and people spread out. They might have some kind of maximum spawn per base limit. Personally I have always envisioned an MMOFPS as having a maximum per base spawn limit but that you can always travel from further away to get more people in a battle.