Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 07/29/2010
Offline
410 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 15, 2010

I vote a big no to this. How about the rest of the community.

 

Personally, I like the faction neutrality idea. It would have been successful if assets were made generic. What that means is assets such as AAA or Mortar batteries will not have a PMC-specific design. For example, all SVER's assets are spray-painted in orange, Valor's assets have a moss-covered-like paintjob, and Raven's assets are all black. I don't like the sight of Raven players guarding a rusted orange painted AAA. Or SVER players repairing a shiny brand-new looking Sensor Array. Or Valor players spawning on high-tech bunkers. I say leave the old DOM maps alone and if they want faction-neutral make a new map with generic assets. SABO and SUPP is okay with me being faction neutral since it doesn't have assets.

 

If DOM would be faction-neutral then it would break faction loyalty since you can defend/attack any map as any of the 3 PMCs.

 

I don't care if Zipper don't make new maps, I care about the playerbase. I can manage playing with the same maps but what I can't manage is if no one plays the old and new maps.

Please use plain text.
Message 11 of 85 (303 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Sackboy
Registered: 02/13/2009
Offline
415 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 15, 2010

I'd also like to point out the flaws in basing this decision on a vote in the forums:

 

1) These forums consist mostly of experienced MAG players who have played all PMCs, are bored, and simply want variety to sustain them.

 

2) For reasons mentioned in my previous post, faction-neutral domination maps discourage new players from sticking with the game. (Inhibits the cultivation of the MAG culture, not to mention the maps are so big that they'll feel lost playing a new domination map every time.)

 

3) The new players who will buy MAG to go with their new Move controller are not here and represented in this vote.

 

The most important point I'm trying to make is that going faction-neutral only appeases the bored veterans of MAG, and is greatly outweighed by the fact that it's not the best for newcomers to MAG.

Please use plain text.
Message 12 of 85 (303 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Sackboy
Registered: 12/18/2009
Offline
566 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 15, 2010

Vote yes.

 

More variety, plus like ZIpper mentioned in ZipLine 20, It will be alot easier for them to bust out DLC.

 

I know alot of people are preaching about FACTION LOYALTY,to me this is a weak argument.

 

It makes me laugh, after witnessing so many players switch from SVER to RAVEN after the last patch, I believe faction

 

Loyalty no longer exists.

 

Now that we know for SURE the power bars move at different rates in Domo maps, this really is the only fair way to run things.

 

Please use plain text.
Message 13 of 85 (303 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 03/25/2010
Offline
7 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 15, 2010

no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps

Please use plain text.
Message 14 of 85 (303 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 07/16/2010
Offline
20 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 15, 2010

no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps no stop neutralizing maps

Please use plain text.
Message 15 of 85 (303 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Lombax Warrior
Registered: 06/04/2009
Offline
168 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 15, 2010

Ask yourself do you want people to break there disks like socom confrontation? Ask yourself do you want people to break there disks like socom confrontation? Ask yourself do you want people to break there disks like socom confrontation? Ask yourself do you want people to break there disks like socom confrontation? Ask yourself do you want people to break there disks like socom confrontation? Ask yourself do you want people to break there disks like socom confrontation?

Please use plain text.
Message 16 of 85 (303 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Splicer
Registered: 02/27/2010
Offline
48 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 15, 2010

i vote for no.... after domination will acquisition faction neutral too? it makes no sense... it is enough with the faction neutral maps we have yet

 

edit....

 

zipper... create more faction neutral maps in other locations.... for example: central europe, africa, russia or asia... not in the pmc home region


i know my english is not good... excuse me

all factions complete
4x veteran
42/44 ribbons - 60/62 medals
Platinum earned at july 7th 2010 23:09 GMT +1
Please use plain text.
Message 17 of 85 (303 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 04/22/2009
Offline
346 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 15, 2010

Nuetrality of maps should not be in this game at all, atleast the way it currently is. What it needs to be is how us vets have been requesting since the 1st beta - The contracts controlling who is defending and who is attacking. Simply apply that to every game mode, and it's good.

Please use plain text.
Message 18 of 85 (303 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
First Son
Registered: 04/07/2010
Offline
10 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 15, 2010

Why the hell are their more votes for YES!?

Click the "NO"!

Please use plain text.
Message 19 of 85 (303 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Sackboy
Registered: 07/06/2009
Offline
551 posts
 

Re: Influence MAG: Should Domination Go "Faction-Neutral"?

Sep 15, 2010

reposted from: http://magvets.blogspot.com/2010/09/valor-perspectives-by-thatid.html

 

My thoughts on the matter of reversible maps arise from the original beta last year. During the original beta almost a year ago, myself and others had first proposed the idea of reversible maps. Playing a different PMC every week or two, you notice map imbalance rather quickly, so my initial thoughts on a reversible map had been to allow players on any PMC to show how good they are on a fair battlefield by letting them play on all of them instead of giving any one PMC an advantage; whether or not it was simply perceived or in fact real. 

Once the game had launched, most of the beta players had locked in on a PMC and the shadow war for contracts had truly begun. My amended idea arose from my confusion stemming from the shadow war however. When we had no contracts, we would have to attack the other PMCs and when we had both contracts, we spent all of our time defending. This became rather stagnant, rather quickly. Anytime I do something more than twice in a row, I get rather bored. My idea was to make the ‘ownership’ of the map itself part of the contract. If one PMC has the contract for another’s map (in any game mode), then the PMC that owns that contract becomes the defender of that map. If Valor takes SVER’s contract for Syr Daria Uplink in Sabotage, for instance, then SVER (and Raven) would have to attack Valor at Syr Daria until Valor loses that contract. It was so simple, elegant and logical that I couldn’t understand why the game hadn’t been written that way. In fact the way it works now rails against the very definition of the term ‘contract award.’ 
At about the same time Zipper made Sabo ‘reversible,’ they also released Interdiction. While Sabo is ‘reversible,’ Interdiction is ‘Faction Neutral.’ While I definitely like the new era of ‘Faction Neutral’ maps with the latest being ‘Escalation,’ I do miss having maps that a PMC owns, for better or worse. Each map’s color-tone, layout and overall feel are very well designed and geographically located to be inherent to one PMC or another. Defending your own map can be a bitter-sweet matter of honor and frustration, but will always evoke these emotions whether the map is ‘reversible’ or ‘faction neutral,’ easy or hard, seriously lacking or OP. 
As most, I do like to play every map from every angle of attack or defense; Interdiction and Escalation have brought about a paradigm shift for MAG players when it comes to ‘ours .vs. theirs.’  While in Interdiction your PMC will always spawn in the same position, Escalation has taken it one further and randomized the spawn points between the 3 PMCs, leaving only the coloring, textures, architecture and feel of the map to any one PMC, with almost no other sense of ownership of the map. 
While I somewhat agree with those proponents for ‘giving us our maps back,’ I definitely have to state that I prefer the fairness of competition of being able to compete on any terrain from any side. I would, however, love to see these ideas masterfully blended by giving the ownership of the map itself to the ‘contract awardees.’ I could imagine no greater feeling than one PMC winning a map from another that they felt was over powered, then having to defend it as their own, or the rallying battle-cry that would be heard from a PMC that had lost their map to insurgent rivals. While I feel that there are several issues that all circle around the ‘shadow war’ and it’s contracts, several points of confusion and many code tweaks that need to be done to the calculations, queuing and the meaning shadow war in and of itself, I think that reversible/faction neutral maps need to take on a greater role at the very heart of the shadow war. Zipper, give the map to the contract, make that the reason behind the switch. I think you’ll find players a lot happier with a logical reason to it and one that gives heightened purpose to the singular plot point of this game – the ‘Shadow War.’
Please use plain text.
Message 20 of 85 (303 Views)
Reply
0 Likes