Mapping...

Building from the feedback given in this thread - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=947 - I would like to ask a few more questions.

In short, what sort of maps are lacking/necessary, not visually but in terms of gameplay? Remember the the naval element of the game is both limited and diminishing in the next release. I’ve been hearing some debate over open against our presently “closed” maps, with areas in which to flank. Any preference? What about mountains as opposed to hills or plains? Interest in any particular human concentration - i.e. desolate, rural, villages, towns, cities?

All useful input desired.

-Desert (maybe coastal lines?)
-some hills and trees

(maybe El Alamein like)

-open field
-start positions to protect the own bases better/easier

(maybe only pushing on one front? so that you don’t need to setup units for more then 2 fronts)

A lot of resources and places… =)

More nonlinear open-field maps would be awesome. I really like desert dunes, for example, because it doesn’t try to force players into any particular routes. This implies that most areas of the map are passable by most types of units, of course, so the particular setting for that might be hard to come by while still having interesting terrain for infantry to hide behind.

It would definitely require largish maps, even by our standards.

a city map is what i’ve been dying for. also a more useable island map, not really for ships, but for amphibous assualts

cities wouldn’t work so well, with the infantry trying to shoot through the buildings and all.

I like maps with some terrain variation that affects gameplay; a big map with heights, river crossings, crossroads and other areas introduces points on the map that, while not necessarily having command flags on them, should be taken and held in order to win. That adds a little extra dimension aside from a simple “rush at each other and kill the other guy’s base” game. It also allows you to play with micromanaging unit positions; I tend to put armor in terrain that allows them to go “hull-down” (i.e. tuck the chassis down behind a ridge or in a hole so only the turret is exposed to fire).

I think a good map also has a mix of both open spaces for those sweeping armor offensives and built-up areas for close-in fighting; that presents the chance that you can get your opponent watching for a charge over the flat, open ground and surprise him by sneaking infantry and maybe a couple tanks around, a la the Ardennes Offensive.

I think kiev v4 had some kind of a feature-related bug that was never fixed and caused trouble for various people depending on engine version et cetera.

Desync, but was primarily engine related and v4 should work with the present version fine.

It was some kind of issue with maps that were taller than they were wide, and while they spammed desync messages, the games did not in fact result in different outcomes iirc.