Topic: Repost of map for inspiration to server builders

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

The Artic Fire Map, such a great idea, scaled back with lower DVs it has so much potential for fun and strategy

[IAF Lyrkiller]

Chuut showed me the AriicFire map and i say w/ it scaled down it would be doable.

Lower DVs and such would be alot better then hitting a 30DV planet, IMHO.

What say you?

(I support this 500%)

[Kougar_XC]

So in theory, instead of having say a map like SG04's with 30 DV planets and 10DV hexes, one would instead have a map twice the size with twice the stuff with 15 DV planets and 5 DV hexes, as one random example?

I actually think I'd be for that, as much as I've grown to dislike hex flipping that would provide a nice work around for some things I've seen, even if it would make finding PvP just a little harder. I'd say go for it, if scaled down from Artic Fire's map a little bit though 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I was thinking, some nice irregular borders with most hexes in the 5 DV range, perhaps some DV 2 and 3 Hexes as well might be a welcome change, I mean how do you errect defenses for open space anyhow  .  Some definate strongholds would be necessary as well like a Barad Dur from the origional.  Perhaps even allowing the various races to name their own strongholds.

I can see it now

Hydran strong hold :  The Gas chamber

Gorn stronghold:  The Isle of Monsters

ISC stronghold:  Alcatraz

Kzin stronghold:  The Star End Bar  

Federation Stronghold:  The Bermuda Triangle

Klingon Stronghold:  Stovakor

Romulan Stronghold:  Hadrian's Wall

Lyran Stronghold:  Hexx's Playpen

On a map like this, such points would be the scene of great PvP as much of the mapp would be in flux on the borders, these points would hold the line, or their collapse would spell dire consequences, a whole lot better than just another unnamed 30 DV hex in my opinion.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

So in theory, instead of having say a map like SG04's with 30 DV planets and 10DV hexes, one would instead have a map twice the size with twice the stuff with 15 DV planets and 5 DV hexes, as one random example?

I actually think I'd be for that, as much as I've grown to dislike hex flipping that would provide a nice work around for some things I've seen, even if it would make finding PvP just a little harder. I'd say go for it, if scaled down from Artic Fire's map a little bit though 

Indeed,

On of the problems with most 30 DV planets and our player base is that to take one requires mainly having enough players online and in the majority long enough to do so, rather than necessarily out fighting the enemy for them.  You would still likely have some of that with this, but it is more frequent that all sides would have such opportunities with lower DVs on some planets.  I still think the big targets should be tough as they anchor the lines, but smaller support targets would be opened up to threats with the lower DVs changing hands several times perhaps.  Perhaps you can hold "The Gas Chamber" but it might get cut off on a dily basis and the resupply points between it and the rest of the Empire taken, needing to be recaptured to ensure "The Chamber" doesn't eventually fall itself.  The PvP will still be there and perhaps spread out over a 10 hex front instead of piled in one hex, each side trying to outflank the other and cut off key units, for piecemeal destruction.

Just my thoughts 

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Of course since the Original Artic Fire was never finished, perhaps a redo with a modified map and the right setup, could draw back some old blood as well........

If anyone was interested in this type of project, I'll definately volunteer to help, I got some other interesting ideas regarding creative aspects of a campaign that have been in my opinion largely overlooked in the past.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Just a brainstorm here but,......

What about the idea of letting the races tailor their own defenses a little.

For example, a race has X number of "DV" points to spend in a given region of their territory and "Y" number can be spent in any given hexx.  Do they create a few really tough Hexes blocking off an approach, do they make a longer line of build up hexes in wall fashion, do they scatter the points over many hexes, do they create a few big hexes to funnel their opponents into killing zones... the option is theirs.

Now this would be done only after the map was generally set up with certain tough points already, it would just allow a bit of tinkering by each race to simulate the deployment of reasources in each sector based on their overall warplan.

The use of say 100 DV points in a large sector and no more than 20 in any given hex wouldnt fundamentally change the map but would allow for some interesting features.

[FPF-Wanderer]

Just a brainstorm here but,......

What about the idea of letting the races tailor their own defenses a little.

For example, a race has X number of "DV" points to spend in a given region of their territory and "Y" number can be spent in any given hexx.  Do they create a few really tough Hexes blocking off an approach, do they make a longer line of build up hexes in wall fashion, do they scatter the points over many hexes, do they create a few big hexes to funnel their opponents into killing zones... the option is theirs.

Now this would be done only after the map was generally set up with certain tough points already, it would just allow a bit of tinkering by each race to simulate the deployment of reasources in each sector based on their overall warplan.

The use of say 100 DV points in a large sector and no more than 20 in any given hex wouldnt fundamentally change the map but would allow for some interesting features.

As a strategy minded guy, I love this idea.  Gives it almost a more board game feel, lol.

[Capt Jeff]

***looks at map, wipes tear from eye***

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

the map?  or just the smoke........

[Mog]

Nah, flame wars, crashes, ship loss bug, slooooowwww movement, cheating players etc 

[FPF-DieHard]

Nah, flame wars, crashes, ship loss bug, slooooowwww movement, cheating players etc 

<Snicker>

But I'll try anything once as long as it doesn't invole a strap-on or a goat.

If somebody makes the map, I'llout it on a "free range" server.

[Sochin]

So rather than blow sunshine up chutts ass lets do it allready   

[F9thRyker]

^^^What he said^^^

[Minus the ass or goats, though  ]

[Corbomite]

Nah, flame wars, crashes, ship loss bug, slooooowwww movement, cheating players etc 

Ahhhh, the really good old, old days. You youngsters don't know what you missed! 

[Dizzy]

I hate that map. Spent two weeks getting to PvP.

The concept of big maps is flawed. With big maps, huge front lines, and spread out VC's, this just discourages PvP. It also takes forever to reach the front lines where the battles rage. Articfire map was all about hex flippers. That was ther server where Flufbotism was born.

Articfire is great for players who want to see individual progress with hex flipping. Lower DV's allow for that. But a problem arises from player numbers. Even with lower DV's the side with more players will win the map, just as they did on SGO4 and all the other maps from all the other servers. So what's the point of having a larger area to cover with lesser DV's when you can have a smaller area with higher DV's concentrating the action rather than spreading it out? I dont like traveling from one map side to the other when it's any larger than the GW or SGO4 sized maps. Its a pita and no fun.

Most of the past servers, combat has taken place along the same 4-5 hex wide area. Why have a gigantic map and spread the VC's all about if u want PvP? Doesnt make any sense.

Also, the ISC on SGO4 ended up in a map position where they couldnt get any PvP. That mistake should never be repeated on another server. Larger maps will aggravate this problem.

I just cant see any reason to have larger maps with a smaller playerbase.

[Firehawk]

Nah, flame wars, crashes, ship loss bug, slooooowwww movement, cheating players etc 

Ahhhh, the really good old, old days. You youngsters don't know what you missed! 

Heheh now that was a server.  I loved playing on it.  10000 hex map, but alas I agree with dizzy we don't have the player base for it.  That was at the start of the D2 and there were 100 people on that server during prime time with another 100 or so on the login screen hitting refresh hoping someone would crash out or log off so they good try to get on.  We just don't have those kinds of numbers anymore.

[F9thRyker]

But a problem arises from player numbers. Even with lower DV's the side with more players will win the map, just as they did on SGO4 and all the other maps from all the other servers.

Go talk to some of the D3 guys. We use a player registration system to ensure roughly equal player numbers. Granted, its not perfect, but it works

http://sfc3.puterz.net is one instance of it being used, http://www.islandwars.net is another


Is there any way to put a password onto a D2 server?

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

I hate that map. Spent two weeks getting to PvP.

The concept of big maps is flawed. With big maps, huge front lines, and spread out VC's, this just discourages PvP. It also takes forever to reach the front lines where the battles rage. Articfire map was all about hex flippers. That was ther server where Flufbotism was born.

Articfire is great for players who want to see individual progress with hex flipping. Lower DV's allow for that. But a problem arises from player numbers. Even with lower DV's the side with more players will win the map, just as they did on SGO4 and all the other maps from all the other servers. So what's the point of having a larger area to cover with lesser DV's when you can have a smaller area with higher DV's concentrating the action rather than spreading it out? I dont like traveling from one map side to the other when it's any larger than the GW or SGO4 sized maps. Its a pita and no fun.

Most of the past servers, combat has taken place along the same 4-5 hex wide area. Why have a gigantic map and spread the VC's all about if u want PvP? Doesnt make any sense.

Also, the ISC on SGO4 ended up in a map position where they couldnt get any PvP. That mistake should never be repeated on another server. Larger maps will aggravate this problem.

I just cant see any reason to have larger maps with a smaller playerbase.

STFU Dizzy.....

Of course it has to be a smaller map thus my words scaled back you silly twit!

The same concept could be easily done at 1/2 size or less.  I dont know if I can bear to play on another BORING AS FRICKING HELL server where all the action is on 4-5 20-30 DV hexes in a row.  Its like being on a strategic assembly line doing the same operation over and over. 

As for the larger maps if you double the size of recent campaign maps and just 1/2 the DVs the net result is the same.  Also redeployment SHOULD take time, thus coordination and timing become strategic elements.  Besides in recent campaigns players have been having one account per race, isn't this a quick way across the map.  If you want your big DN to move to another front as well, God forbid you actually have to move it there and take time in a redeployment.  Having the right assests on the correct front is STRATEGY my friend, strategy takes effort and planning not just moving over 1 hex.

If you want PVP it wouldnt be hard to find on such a scaled down map, you just cut down on the empty space and create a few strongpoints while keeping the irregularity of empire borders.  You might just have to be in a different line ship account to engage in some, is that so terrible rather than having DNs and BCHs in all the battles?

[Kroma BaSyl]

The same concept could be easily done at 1/2 size or less.  I dont know if I can bear to play on another BORING AS FRICKING HELL server where all the action is on 4-5 20-30 DV hexes in a row.

I am guessing you were just in the wrong 4-5 hexes if you thought SGO4 was boring.

An interesting idea, but it looks like more of a hex flippers wet dream than what I would consider a less boring server. It is worth a shot though. Why don't you run it? I would definitely give it a go.