Thin long maps, that a great suggestion @desktop - It also ties in with another Idea. With a base map like ollipsis in the middle (a seperate instance hence sector) a wrap-around map is a circular map which also happens to be long and thin. Now this could be like a long crescent or it could be completely wrap around where a dedicated force could after some travel encircle another side by coming from their rear. Surrounding base maps with long thin circular maps could be another way to keep players together on a reasonably thin front line whilst giving the impression of a larger map. By eventually winning this exterior wraparound map the players could open the fight for the interior base map and the option to conquer it.
why not use the same airlock mechanism the lair matches use to load different area's, have valleys and bridges and such connecting the maps, that you enter from one side, the door closes, you fight and kill whoever is on the enemy team going the opposite way(if any) and come out in another map on the other side. it would open up alot of barricade and checkpoint holding play.
Could try this other approach..... I realize this is a singleplayer, but transplant this concept to multiplayer. Battles are instanced and based on territory location.
I suggest a quest-base big map without time limit. Two end of the map are the fortresses , in between them are a number of outposts. Main quests for players to push outpost each others on sequence before raiding fortress. Some side-quests for advance, e.g. create/block tunnel shortcut or order orbit bombmnet on outposts or even gathering resource to call hero to help....(yes, It was influence by AV of WoW ) exp bonus on completing quests . since it is unlimited time, players could join or leave anytime. It would be fun even 30vs30.
Just sometimes. GOA and Electonic Arts are tremendous rubbish noobs in technical solutions but Whm Online was running pretty good during last time before shut down servers. In comparison with this game it was even much much better in case of handling net protocols and lagging. This shit is not able to keep lag in acceptable values even with just 30vs30 matches. It is horrible mockery for the money bE charged us.
@Orkan: To create large territories was never a problem per se. The size of a map depends on much more than just "how many players fit in". But I guess you know that already. That being said, every engine, be it UE4, Cryengine, Unity or any other is made with a specific purpose in mind. But all have something in common: What do you want, more players or fancy graphic? But the engine alone isn't the whole deal, you need a great middle and backend hard- and software to pull that off. Camelot Unchained, under Marc Jacobs (DAoC and W.A.R.) knew this and build with his team its own engine to fit their needs. But how does this helps EC? Not a single piece! As it stands right now, I don't think BHVR has the money, time or maybe even the skill to pull something big off. A shame right? Most of us just bought the game because of the "new tech" to break the record for massively player count with the Pikko-Server. And I feel fooled twice, since I didn't drop out, merely of @Oveur showed the "The road to open world". Even it was not the original plan, I believed that. Now, we have just a lobby shooter and no money / time to change the direction. So what to do? You made the right assumption. You have to be clever you have to be smart. Not with the tech or fancy bling blings, with just the only thing that really matters: Game design! We can not fight the circumstances, we have to work within the parameters of it. Do I still believe that BHVR can make it? Yes, otherwise I will be gone. I hope they are smart enough to work in that direction and if they need our help, ask for it and we will make it together! If they need input, ideas, testing or even money, it's OK, but please for Emporer's sake, be honest to us and talk to us like we deserve and not this cheap marketing speech and hollow promises.
Err it doesn't? Wasn't that the original idea from the previous team who are all but gone and the idea changed to this smaller maximum of 30vs30 but more often then not laggy 15vs15 games. Since the larger maps are Fortress maps and given the size of the team now it is very very unlikely we see the original vision of the game. I wouldn't hold your breath for vehicle loadouts, Bigger maps, persistent world or even new vehicles. What we need from the development team is a roadmap, It doesn't have to have dates displayed until they are sure of the date of the features being implemented but it needs to show a list of features in order they are being planned on put in. Right now it feels like its going to be just what we have now but with more RTC spending options.
I asked for a road map and got a very convoluted answer from Nathan that didn't really answer the question. Instead of giving a road map of what they want to implement ,we were given our own top ten back in list format. https://steamcommunity.com/games/375230/announcements/detail/246973215407468444
