EIR Maps

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[IJustDontCare]

EIR has quite a few maps to pick from, but unfortunately most people think a lot of the maps or most suck. Neuville being played more than 1600 times and the rest are I believe under 1000. With only 9 out of a WOPPING 90 maps that are played over 500 times total so far.  I guess minus like 15 or so since they look like beta versions according to the site.

ANYWAYS.

I started this thread to see what others seem to think why this may be. Is it because the maps are Truely horrible, the way the balance of the game is in relation to the maps, or is it people just like maps that give them an advantage with the way their company is built.

I'm curious about how well the war-map will make things interesting with the amount of maps people typically play. I remember reading a post in one of the mapping threads with someone stating its hard to make a map people will play, which is also sparking this thread. Why is it hard to make a map people will play? What are key features in a map that steer people away from in it in regards to play style or balance of factions. What could make things better for a map and keep it unique instead of the "lots of open fields and hedges"

I could think of a few things, but I'm more interested in others opinions.

Commence brain storming.

[EIRRMod]

Cant brain storm.  Busy looking at all the pretty colours.
/derail

But seriously, I need to allow a system that can cycle some less favourable maps, or even offer an optional map-pack somewhere - maybe for download via launcher, or some other way.

[WildZontar]

It's be nice if OMG lended  their maps to us considering their community is dead.

[EIRRMod]

It's be nice if OMG lendes  their maps to us considering their community is dead.

Beating a dead horse is not an option.  (I mean getting access to the maps, not playing OMG btw).

[IJustDontCare]

Well this thread is going in the right direction. =,=

[Killer344]

Let's say we add 50 maps more.... nobody would give a flying shit, they'd still be playing the same stuff. The amount of maps isn't the problem.

[RikiRude]

we do need more options, i think a optional map pack would be great. killer is right for the most part, there are quite a few of us though that hate seeing the same maps over and over and would like to play some new ones.

[IJustDontCare]

we do need more options, i think a optional map pack would be great. killer is right for the most part, there are quite a few of us though that hate seeing the same maps over and over and would like to play some new ones.

One of the biggest problems is finding the right way to make a map balanced and unique at the same time. Most of what people want is a few houses and then mostly hedges and fields on a large map allowing flanking. With that it leaves you with little to be creative with. I feel like some of this could be due to unit balance and functionality, but there's not much we can do in that regard.

One example is British Piats therefore eliminating heavy urban maps when players are playing as british since they can shoot through buildings.

[AmPM]

Yea, you make anything that is not in that formula and people get mad.

[tank130]

The you have maps that are like this || close to being a great map, but have some feature that just makes it suck so bad.
 
I put Bastion in that category. Really cool map with room to flank, some open areas, some city fighting, good sectoring. But then it has all this swamp and fucked up pathing that it just completely sucks to play any vehicles on it.

If someone was able to take that map and clean up that bullshit, it could be a great map.

[Valexandes]

I like bastion now I have a fun project

[RikiRude]

do it up! take out swamp = win!!!

[EIRRMod]

I like bastion now I have a fun project

Bastion is one of my fav maps.

And I love to hide snipers in the swamp..... Tactical.

But the pathing does suck.

[Masacree]

EIR has been overtaken, as has much of the world, by a creeping tide of "one-dimensional thought". The average EIR player is no longer an innovator, they are a follower. Though the individual means have changed, the overally (or shall I say meta-) meta game has stayed constant: it has emphasized absolute aggression over all other playstyles. Though this gameplay (or any particular type of gameplay) is not in-itself harmful, the relative stagnation has imposed on the mind of the eirr player certain conditioned restraints. More and more they see maps with variety as "un-fun". In fact, the eirr community has redefined the concept of a "good map" to exclude any sort of map which does not encourage absolute, aggressive gameplay. As the man himself, Marcuse, writes,

Linguistic abridgments indicate an abridgment of thought which they in turn fortify and promote, Insistence on the philosophical elements in grammar, on the link between the grammatical, logical, and ontological "subject," points up the contents which are suppressed in the functional language are barred from expression and communication. Abridgment of the concept in fixed images; arrested development in self-validating, hypnotic formulas; immunity against contradiction; identification of the thing (and of the person) with its function-these tendencies reveal the one-dimensional mind in the language it speaks.

(Read this quote in relation to Skaffa's thread: http://forums.europeinruins.com/index.php?topic=21663.0 The resemblance is uncannily horrifying. The absolute definition of "success," the imposition of "hypnotic formulas", "identification of the map with it's function" ect. ect.)


Maps that do not fit this gameplay are repressed and in some cases outright removed from the mod. This serves only to feed the cycle of single-playstyle games. The consequences are clear: increased variety in maps will do nothing: people only play certain maps as is, and really, all of those maps share certain fundamental characteristics (as is embodied in Skaffa's thread). The functionalization of map making has led to a general decline of both creativity and variety in the mapping and gameplay processes.

What is the solution? Only a change in culture will break the vicious cycle. When you host games, enourage (BUT DO NOT FORCE) others to play maps with more variety. When these types of maps get more play, playstyles will change and games will encourage maps with more variety. But really, only a long term shift in the culture of the mod can solve the problem.

[skaffa]

You should be happy that after 5 years of EIR there is finally 1 good map out of the 100 and that there is a guide about how to make more.

[Dnicee]

I miss tons of maps tbh. I mean, even though the wont get played as much, why do we need to remove them? I really dont mind if its not a totally even map.

please do not take out the swamp from bastion btw.

[IJustDontCare]

You should be happy that after 5 years of EIR there is finally 1 good map out of the 100 and that there is a guide about how to make more.

lul there are other maps that are good besides yours and have been since 5 years. Don't forget about the "2v2" maps. Also granted yes you made a guide on how to make a good map (thanks), but again like you stated its based off of nueville. Were looking for ways to create maps a little more creative than a small town surrounded by fields and hedges.

Although like Masacree said its hard to come up with stuff other than what your guide describes how to make a successful map due to play styles and what people actually find fun out of the game.

I just feel like if maps are all based off of nueville from now and onward things will get stale, but who knows its just a feel and I could be completely wrong. I'd try to get into mapping, but i just don't have the time to really make one :/

[Masacree]

You should be happy that after 5 years of EIR there is finally 1 good map out of the 100 and that there is a guide about how to make more.

Do you hear this shit?

...the eirr community has redefined the concept of a "good map" to exclude any sort of map which does not encourage absolute, aggressive gameplay.

Ideology at its purest.

[tank130]

Do you hear this shit?

Ideology at its purest.

And what would the difference between Skaffa promoting his ideology and you promoting your ideology be?

For the sake of argument, let's just assume that I am completely neutral in the argument and don't give a shit either way. I do have an opinion, but just humor me and pretend I don't for a moment.

Assuming it would be better from a marketing stand point to produce a product that appeals to the largest mass of consumers:
We don't sell EiRR, but our goal, of course, is to have the largest  population in our player base as possible.

A while back I posted a record of the Map usage: http://forums.europeinruins.com/index.php?topic=20594.msg361638#msg361638

Whether you agree or not with my statements at the time is really irrelevant to my point now. The data clearly shows the maps the MAJORITY of the consumers (players) want to play. Whether they want to play them because they are a bunch of mindless souls who can't think out side of the box, or if they play them because the maps are better, is a matter of opinion. Regardless of your opinion, that data is correct.

What it does show is what the majority wants. It would be silly to provide support for a product that only a very small percentage of the consumers use.

I guess you could argue that by forcing a different product on the consumer it may make them change their mind, but that would be a risky gamble. You could even suggest rewards or incentives to use the lower desired product, but the usage will stop when the incentives stop. In the end, you are throwing a lot of resources, time, and production trying to convince people to use product they don't want to use.

[IJustDontCare]

And what would the difference between Skaffa promoting his ideology and you promoting your ideology be?

For the sake of argument, let's just assume that I am completely neutral in the argument and don't give a shit either way. I do have an opinion, but just humor me and pretend I don't for a moment.

Assuming it would be better from a marketing stand point to produce a product that appeals to the largest mass of consumers:
We don't sell EiRR, but our goal, of course, is to have the largest  population in our player base as possible.

A while back I posted a record of the Map usage: http://forums.europeinruins.com/index.php?topic=20594.msg361638#msg361638

Whether you agree or not with my statements at the time is really irrelevant to my point now. The data clearly shows the maps the MAJORITY of the consumers (players) want to play. Whether they want to play them because they are a bunch of mindless souls who can't think out side of the box, or if they play them because the maps are better, is a matter of opinion. Regardless of your opinion, that data is correct.

What it does show is what the majority wants. It would be silly to provide support for a product that only a very small percentage of the consumers use.

I guess you could argue that by forcing a different product on the consumer it may make them change their mind, but that would be a risky gamble. You could even suggest rewards or incentives to use the lower desired product, but the usage will stop when the incentives stop. In the end, you are throwing a lot of resources, time, and production trying to convince people to use product they don't want to use.

Disregarding the small bits of flame.

This is Correct in its way in regards to what people want to play based off of facts, but that's besides the point since we already know what most want to play. The main point of this is thinking of ways to provoke people to try something new, creative, or just plain different from what they are use too and come in with an OPEN MIND.

The question is how without pissing on everyone by means of forcing or being dicks. How do we improve pathing around obstacles better. More work less lazy? Or is it just not possible and have to resort to less objects.

For me I like maps filled with obstacles and cover in various areas it adds to its "Dynamic value", but if done incorrectly can lead to many frustrations and "You mad bro" comments followed by "Rage Quits" and then Rage Threads.

I like Falaise a lot, but many dislike it perhaps not so much for its clustery aspect, but due to some having shitty computers and not being able to play it smoothly. This arises another question are we able to optimize maps ourselves or no?