• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

What type of maps would you like to see

Jump to latest Follow Reply

What type of maps would you like to see

  • Infantry only

    Votes: 160 41.9%

  • Vehicle only

    Votes: 66 17.3%

  • Combined Arms

    Votes: 299 78.3%
  • Total voters
    382
Sort by date Sort by votes
#61
Infantry only and combined arms. I do occasionally like to see vehicle only, but infantry seems to be RO's strong point.

And while smaller infantry maps are nice, such as Danzig, we need more open ended maps with mainly bolt action rifles (Kaukaus, spelling).


Most maps, in infantry, should be the size of Odessa.

I would hate for the maps to become small in HoS.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#63
I'd like to see vehicle only maps, but only if the vehicles in ROHOS are much improved over RO's incarnation.

To me, RO was always an infantry game that had vehicles in it; the infantry combat was the focus. Vehicles were never as well implemented as the infantry systems were. This isn't to say the tanks were bad; they were quite good. It is just that they were out-shined by the amazing infantry combat. Now that's ok for a combined arms map, because infantry is still the main focus; vehicles take a backseat in the battle, supporting infantry.

On vehicle only maps, however, the vehicles are the main focus and are therefore under much more scrutiny. It is like going from flying around in a game of ArmA to flying in LOMAC; the aircraft in ArmA are only part of the game, so you let some problems slide, but in LOMAC, you have a higher expectation of in the aircraft, since they are the focus of the game. If vehicles are given their own time center stage, they should really live up to the same level of high quality that the infantry combat has.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'd like infantry, combined arms, and vehicles only gameplay to all be freaking awesome, rather than having awesome infantry, great combined arms, and "only" pretty damned good vehicle-only. If vehicles are going to be given time in the spotlight, they shouldn't take a backseat to the infantry combat in quality.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#64
I like infantry only and combined arms about equally. But I have to say that for combined arms, I prefer the ones that are more infantry based and less about tanks. Like where tanks are the supporting role and are fairly vulnerable to sappers or a 'faust.

I saw where bswearer said that BlackDayJuly is about as big as a tanks-only map should be. I totally agree there. Orel drove me nuts. Hated it. I do enjoy a purely tank game on occasion, but as a percentage I'd have to say I play as a tanker maybe 10% of the time.

Thanks for asking! Very hopeful and excited about this game!
 
Upvote 0
#66
Jaesperson said:
if combined arms finally means that you have tanks and infantry on a map without the infantry having to run for half an hour before getting shot, then yes, i'm all for that. if not, screw the tanks and give us something new, like MG-nests or something. kthxbai

voted CA
Click to expand...

Exactly!!! CA but mostly infrantry!! And not so big maps! =p Like konigplatz was nice.
 
Upvote 0
#68
For the most part, infantry only. But a couple of combined arms maps here and there are nice. Something like 70% infantry only, 30% combined arms. I think the way RO currently does it is fine, it's a good balance.

What's more important to me is the size of the maps. I'm hoping they will be bigger. Not like Danzig or even StalingradKessel. I want to see more maps where rifles dominate, like Fallen Heroes or even better, huge maps like Kriegstadt.

I think excluding tanks would be a bad idea, IIRC there are quite a lot of people who like them. I'm not too fond of tanks, though. The advantage of combined arms is that it gives people more stuff to play with (as well as more tactics), and that's always a good thing, isn't it?
 
Upvote 0
#69
[TW]Ramm-Jaeger said:
I didn't confirm anything. For all you know, we're using this poll to decide if there will be tanks in ROHOS :)
Click to expand...

RO without tanks ?????

Not a good idea. Never good to take away what was previously in the game. Unless you want a HUGE petition!

I voted combined arms with the understanding that vehicles can be optional on dedicated servers.
 
Upvote 0
#70
[TW]Ramm-Jaeger said:
Despite what the naysayers in the forums would have you believe, there are still a lot of active players for RO. As a matter of fact, the player counts for RO haven't really gone down at all in the past year and a half. The only difference is, about 30% of the RO players now play the Darkest Hour mod for RO instead of Vanilla RO.
Click to expand...

If you play your cards right, you may just have an influx of pc gamers coming to this game from another one that is seriously flopping.

If you build it, they will come.

The success of this game will depend on the type of game modes that will be available.

Multiple game modes will attract more players.

:)
 
Upvote 0
#71
10-78 BusterKing said:
If you play your cards right, you may just have an influx of pc gamers coming to this game from another one that is seriously flopping.

If you build it, they will come.

The success of this game will depend on the type of game modes that will be available.

Multiple game modes will attract more players.

:)
Click to expand...

Killing floor and RO only have 1 game mode each and there are always people playing them...

UT3... with so many game modes and so much hype and advertising... well, you know what happened
 
Upvote 0
#72
Well i voted infatry only but i like combined arms, if there is just few tanks.
So as far as Tanks support infantry i like combined arms. But when it
goes to maps like arad where some single faust commandos support tanks,
i say no.

Also on combined arms i would like to see more vulnerable vechiles, which
needs infantry to moving on. As so far there have been only battle tanks,
which infatry cant harm without chatchels or fausts. So something like
panzerj
 
Upvote 0
#73
Fedorov said:
Killing floor and RO only have 1 game mode each and there are always people playing them...

UT3... with so many game modes and so much hype and advertising... well, you know what happened
Click to expand...

RO only got 1 gamemode but generally if you run an infantry server and you switch to a tank map the server gets empty. As the experience isnt really consistent, thats why i think that pure tanking should be its own gamemode. Atm there are alot of active pure tanking servers and they survive just fine. There should not be too many gamemodes but you could nearly say that pure tanking is already its own gamemode.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#74
Zetsumei said:
RO only got 1 gamemode but generally if you run an infantry server and you switch to a tank map the server gets empty. As the experience isnt really consistent, thats why i think that pure tanking should be its own gamemode. Atm there are alot of active pure tanking servers and they survive just fine. There should not be too many gamemodes but you could nearly say that pure tanking is already its own gamemode.
Click to expand...

with that, I agree, I was just stating that having a lot of game modes, is not the key to success
 
Upvote 0
#76
10-78 BusterKing said:
It's all about giving people options. Less options = less people interested. Common sense.
Click to expand...

The equation follows the other logic. Less options, less to think just jump in and have fun.

I prefer Infantry only because CA feels always unbalanced. If you are a normal soldier a tank always kills you, if you have a Faust the tank is faster dead than you can see and the tank crew didn't even see what hit them. Tank versus tank is ok but the long driving distances and people who steal your frags kills it for me.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu