A discussion on Call of Duty 'MAPS'

[iw5000]

Aug 14, 2012 9:04:34 GMT -5 mw2baller said:

Quickscoping isn't really sniping. The same way that barrett spamming isn't sniping. I'll add to mouseys definition"

A sniper spot is one where a sniper is the most effective weapon and gives the a large enough view to get a sizeable amount of kills and make an impact on the game.

The maps in MW3 do not allow this. Every single sniper spot gives a very small amount of kills. It's effectively long range corner tactical loitering.

Maybe these aren't good examples, because we were grouped up in our clan last night...but nonetheless....here's just a small group of sniping shots which i know you are familar with Baller.....(all games are dom, so those are the references)

1. I watched one of our guys (Bull) drop a MOAB last night on Bootleg, sniping off the end of B street, looking into A. While AR's work on that spot....a scoped LMG or sniper will be the 'effective' weapon choice there. I came close to dropping a second, working off the other corner, with a RSASS (20 kills in a row)

2. Fallen. I went around 35-3 mostly sniping off the center courtyard area around B....sniping into the junkpile, into the center tunnell, and on top of the greenhouse. While an AR can work well here....the scope on a sniper gives a person the first shot usually (see enemy first)

3. Interchange. Left flank/side. Every ...single....game....we play on this map, someone puts up big numbers with a sniper either working the left flank (and the other spots aren't to bad either), shooting into the A spawn area. Sniper rifles are deadly here, shooting at ranges an AR can't hit at.

4. Arkaden. Right flank, just inside the mall, near A.....sniping down into the montage room. This sniping spot is a killzone x 100. Again, watched someone in our group roll up a 15 and 21 killstreak sitting right on this spot. I think with an RSASS.

5. For myself......I put up like 12 kills in a row on Outpost using the lame L118....shooting through the bunker...down the tunnell, into A. Again, a AR will work here...but to get the guys running way at the end, near the flag, you need an Sniper or scoped LMG.

6. Seatown. ...someone put up a MOAB last night sniping from the B flag courtyard, down the long alley that leads directly to C. 24 straight kills. I think they had a Barrett. Again, an AR works here, but a sniper, if used effectively, can be even more effective.

All the above examples, just from last night....were hard-scoping kills.


Sniping rifles work. IMHO though, they are a niche weapon, that need to be used in the right spots, at the right times, under the right circumstances. Just like in real life, they also need some backup too. People to work with them, alongside them, to cover flanks. When this is done....they REALLY work well, and can destroy an enemy team. One flank-secured sniper can hold off multiple opponents and dictate how their entire teams moves.

I think the problem rests with people trying to use them in the above situations....while playing solo. While playing with five or eight other retards in a Dom game, or worse yet, TDM. In those types of circumstances....one's flank will never ever ever be safe for long. The killzone will switch, or teammates will flip the spawn....you are knifed or shot in the back while aiming. Won't work.....as well. Maybe for 2 to 3 shots.....but then you are just buying time until you are killed.

[wwaa]

Aug 14, 2012 9:32:05 GMT -5 Mousey said:

Ah yes, the old, "I do well like this so it's true" argument

No, just saying sniper rifles are not useless… Someone stated above they are useless, I think sometimes it is even necessary to use them ...

[mw2baller]

IW, those points work simply because we're on a team and the areas that snipers can watch become the ONLY areas that enemies can go through. For example when we spawn trap on arkaden, there are only 3 paths out of the trap. Interchange and bootleg are the same. In fact all the maps we spawn trap on can be used with sniper rifles. However spawn trapping requires both teamwork on our part and ineptitude on our opposing teams part. If we do a 6v6 with our clan members only, it'll be very hard to stick to any of those areas without getting overwhelmed or flanked.

WWA, I played today for 1 or 2 hours. I died once to a sniper. That one death was to a railgunner who shot me in the back. The fact that I killed countless ghillie suited guys while only dying once to a sniper proves that sniping is worthless.

[iw5000]

Aug 14, 2012 18:10:39 GMT -5 mw2baller said:

IW, those points work simply because we're on a team and the areas that snipers can watch become the ONLY areas that enemies can go through. For example when we spawn trap on arkaden, there are only 3 paths out of the trap. Interchange and bootleg are the same. In fact all the maps we spawn trap on can be used with sniper rifles. However spawn trapping requires both teamwork on our part and ineptitude on our opposing teams part. If we do a 6v6 with our clan members only, it'll be very hard to stick to any of those areas without getting overwhelmed or flanked.

WWA, I played today for 1 or 2 hours. I died once to a sniper. That one death was to a railgunner who shot me in the back. The fact that I killed countless ghillie suited guys while only dying once to a sniper proves that sniping is worthless.

That's kind of what I said 'baller. They work best as part of a team and a lone wolf guy, running with retards, won't have much success.

So with that, what's the alternative? Have map styles that have parts of maps jutting out with 300 meter long sightlines or open areas? That take opponent smb users 50 seconds plus to run down into? Do this so a 'sniper' can have an area that has no exposed flanks?

That sounds like a loser idea. Cause we know what will happen. EVERY single game, 2/3rds of the retards that play this game will rush back to these areas, WITHOUT FAIL....AND sit there, and sit there, and try to be 'CaptainOpticxxSniPeRxxx'...and they will all flock to objective games too....then watch how the pace of the game just breaks down into crap.

And let's be real. On Mw2, maps like Derail, this is exactly what happened.

[iw5000]

Aug 15, 2012 6:57:23 GMT -5 Mousey said:

Derail/wasteland were the other extremes when it came to sniping.

Saying sniping was OP on derail has about as much gravity as saying they were underpowered on rust.

You missed my point. Completely. Snipers have never been 'OP'. Never. The point is that a good many of the retards in CoD love to snipe though. Most to all of these clowns are terrible. It's a 'cool' weapon amongst the YouTube crowd, and that crowd = twinkies. You put enough of these retards into a game, and the game inevitably breaks down into a mess of bad game-play. For the solo guys, it's idiot teammates just lying prone in corners and not helping. For a clan guy, it's a group of opponents who are incredibly boring and lame. Lose/Lose situation for all....except for the 'tards, and they don't even know any better.

AND the point again....is that anything done to encourage the above trainwreck, is a bad idea. And let's be honest with ourselves, making more maps like Derail and/or new maps that have specially designed 200meter pockets off the side, with head'glitcher spots with only one access point, .....will only encourage the above said idiots to come out even more. Games break down where five people are playing...and six guys are just all climbing all over themselves to sit in the same spot.

CoD is a fast paced game. The developers want people back into the action in like 10 seconds or less. THAT is why the game is popular. Sniping is never going to be on par with the smg/AR's of the world, because the nature of the game forces most encounters in the 10m to 30m range...a range where those guns work best. Yes, 'some' people can force themselves to stay out of the pocket, 40m and out, do well with the sniper when solo.... but it's hard, especially if you are trying to win. Well, you can't do both. Very very rarely. It creates a terrible predicament.

If you start trying to make a game where sniping = AR/SMG... you are going to find a situation where the game starts to resemble BF3 more. Where a person dies, and then has to run for 30 to 45 seconds to find anyone. Most people don't want that.

[iw5000]

That's the dilemma here.

CoD is designed to be fast paced.

To the do the above, you need to force 'encounters' (if people want them of course) in about ten seconds or less. People can be back into the action by traveling 40 meters or so. (typical person moves between 4 to 6 meters per second) How to do the above? - One way is map size. A typical MW3 map is about 110m x 110m in size. Dome might be 80x80, Outpost maybe 150x150. A typical AR player can get from side to side in about 20 to 25 seconds. The above means....most people will have encounters in the 10m to 20m range (probably 2/3rds), and probably 90% in the 5m to 30m range. This also means.......snipers, on average, will NEVER be able to do as well as AR/SMG's. They can't. It's not feasible or possible, on average.

There is no way to resolve the above situation....without changing the underlying dynamics. namely, the maps. You either make them bigger (meter size).....add more levels/verticality.....or remove 'stuff'(cars, buildings, etc..), creating longer sight-lines.

And doing any of the above to a large degree...messes with the game dynamics.

[asasa]

Black Ops did it just fine. MW2 did it just fine. CoD4 did it just fine. MW3 failed.

[iw5000]

Aug 15, 2012 10:32:43 GMT -5 asasa said:

Black Ops did it just fine. MW2 did it just fine. CoD4 did it just fine. MW3 failed.

In your opinion it failed.

There are millions who don't think that.

There are also millions, like myself, who see things more objectively....and don't see the games in the extremist, black/white manner you do. Maps were either 'great' or they 'failed'. For the most part, through all these CoD games, the maps are mostly interchangeable.

[asasa]

Thats funny, because almost everyone I've asked agrees MW3 maps suck. There's a few who like them. But for the most part those are my casual playing friends, not competitive ones.

MW3 maps do not follow the same criteria as the past titles. They said this before it even came out. Of course, you deny this... too bad we've got tweets to say otherwise.

[iw5000]

Aug 15, 2012 11:29:29 GMT -5 asasa said:

Thats funny, because almost everyone I've asked agrees MW3 maps suck. There's a few who like them. But for the most part those are my casual playing friends, not competitive ones.

It is funny, because i don't see how you and your six bros(?) make up a large enough sample to offset the fact that massive amounts of people are still playing this game every single night. By and large, people don't continue to sign on everynight, play something they think 'sucks'. For example. I think frolicking around in dog poo would 'suck. (or at least I can imagine it would be) So therefore, I don't play in dog poo. See how that works?

MW3 maps do not follow the same criteria as the past titles. They said this before it even came out. Of course, you deny this... too bad we've got tweets to say otherwise.

I'm not denying or confirming anything. I'm just stating the obvious. I play Domination mostly. Most of the older maps, recent maps, and the MW3 maps play almost the same. They are the same size, roughly the same amount of verticality, buildings, slightly more crap in the maps with the later ones....really now, not much has changed. You could go slip in Crossfire, District from MW1 and the game will mostly play the same. It's not THAT different, to the ridiculous extent people will suck the d*ck of MW1...and then say MW3 sucks.

Give me a break.

[asasa]

Uhh, I think the maps suck. Did I say I didnt like the game? No. Jeez, you'll pull out a straw man whenever you can. And thats just about every post.

DLC MW3 maps are nearly as good as typical CoD maps and they are very, VERY clearly separate from regular MW3 maps. Same amount of vertical gameplay? Oh LOL. LOLOLOL.

Same dimensions =/= same size. Uhkay bra?

[iw5000]

Aug 15, 2012 12:27:15 GMT -5 asasa said:

Uhh, I think the maps suck. Did I say I didnt like the game? No. Jeez, you'll pull out a straw man whenever you can. And thats just about every post.

I don't think i do...but i do know you seem to pull out your "MY FRIENDS DON'T LIKE ..." card every chance you get. Listen up, I don't really care what your 'friends' think. I find it pretty irrelevant to know they think the MW3 maps sucks, seeing how there are millions playing the game every week, who do like them. Your pillow fighting bros, that hang out with you....their views are irrelevant.

DLC MW3 maps are nearly as good as typical CoD maps and they are very, VERY clearly separate from regular MW3 maps.

I never commented on that, funny you should mention 'straw man' stuff before.

Same amount of vertical gameplay? Oh LOL. LOLOLOL.

You're laughing at your own comments now?

Same dimensions =/= same size. Uhkay bra?

I'm not your 'bra'. And if you go measure the maps, you'll see what i am talking about.

[asasa]

@m: Funny coming from you. You said that 60fps is pretty much the same as 30 because you cant see a difference, when almost everyone else can. I also stated, some DO like hte maps, but they are few and far between.

--

@it: People can play a game they dont like, even though, AGAIN, I stated the maps. Not the game. Sad little you.

Straw man? How so? I said that the DLC maps are nearly as good as regular. This is not a straw man in any way, merely clarification and separation of the base maps [which suck] and the DLC maps [which are decent] Again, sad little you.

Nope, just laughing at the bullshit you are spouting. This is another completely understood and accepted thing. These maps lack vertical gameplay.

I dont care if the dimensions are the same. They have less playable area.

[asasa]

No, you pretend that. You clearly denied that there were advantages to 60fps when you threw insults at me claiming I was trying to show off, as if I possessed some power. Sorry kid, its not flying.

[iw5000]

Aug 15, 2012 12:50:38 GMT -5 Mousey said:

Aug 15, 2012 12:48:24 GMT -5 asasa said:

@m: Funny coming from you. You said that 60fps is pretty much the same as 30 because you cant see a difference, when almost everyone else can. I also stated, some DO like hte maps, but they are few and far between.

Except that is not what I fucking said. You misunderstood every one of my posts in that topic and shoved words up my ass.

Assasa do something like that?

Of course he does!!!

[asasa]

Aww, look at the two cuties. They cant even argue back! They just keep making more bologna up. Its really adorable, I must say.

[asasa]

Really? Because I would agree. Its really far away.

[asasa]

Yeah, right. Moron.

[iw5000]

Aug 15, 2012 13:16:56 GMT -5 asasa said:

Aww, look at the two cuties. They cant even argue back! They just keep making more bologna up. Its really adorable, I must say.

is it more adorable then when you and your bros get together, play mariocart on the Wii and have pillow fights? That's what we really want to know!!!

[iw5000]

Aug 15, 2012 13:42:29 GMT -5 Mousey said:

hey mariocart wii is totally boss

EDIT: Though i think i curse more at that game than I do at CoD. Mariokart is where friendships have very bloody endings.

But do you do this with your bros after playing MarioCart? He sent me this pic a few months ago

[asasa]

I dont even understand the purpose of that picture.

[iw5000]

Aug 15, 2012 13:49:23 GMT -5 Mousey said:

THATS NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUSINESS

Aug 15, 2012 13:49:03 GMT -5 asasa said:

I dont even understand the purpose of that picture.

It's three dudes having a pillow fight, what else is there to understand?

;D

[cmck]

Wait that isn't some random pic on the internet? Thats.... even funnier/creepier? I don't know I'm totally flummoxed by it.

[mw2baller]

Ignoring the hissy fits, asasa's point that the maps were designed differently makes sense. If you look at the maps from the previous games, they essentially started out as open fields. From there, interactive positions were added like buildings, tunnels, and overwatch points. Lastly, the remaining area was broken up a bit with exploded vehicles and blown up buildings.

MW3 maps don't have these interactive positions. Sure there are a couple of maps with them like fallen, but for the most part the maps are designed the way I explained before, where 2-10 meter sightlines are mixed and matched.

IW, the map situation isn't black and white. You can easily mix long sight lines with short ones just by putting them alongside each other. In cod4 and MW2 this was the case. Even the sniper friendly maps like creek, rundown, and wasteland could easily be navigated with a silenced smg. In fact this is exactly what I did most of the time on these maps. By staying out of the long sightlines i'd easily flank the snipers and get tons of free kills. Very rarely would I get sniped, since all the snipers were busy countersniping each other. In some games I wouldn't even get shot at once.

[asasa]

Aug 15, 2012 14:04:02 GMT -5 cmck said:

Wait that isn't some random pic on the internet? Thats.... even funnier/creepier? I don't know I'm totally flummoxed by it.

www.tineye.com/search/3677d6261f60cc9ee08d6482877ca269e93f29de/?pluginver=firefox-1.1

[iw5000]

Aug 15, 2012 14:52:57 GMT -5 mw2baller said:

Ignoring the hissy fits, asasa's point that the maps were designed differently makes sense. If you look at the maps from the previous games, they essentially started out as open fields. From there, interactive positions were added like buildings, tunnels, and overwatch points. Lastly, the remaining area was broken up a bit with exploded vehicles and blown up buildings.

MW3 maps don't have these interactive positions. Sure there are a couple of maps with them like fallen, but for the most part the maps are designed the way I explained before, where 2-10 meter sightlines are mixed and matched.

IW, the map situation isn't black and white. You can easily mix long sight lines with short ones just by putting them alongside each other. In cod4 and MW2 this was the case. Even the sniper friendly maps like creek, rundown, and wasteland could easily be navigated with a silenced smg. In fact this is exactly what I did most of the time on these maps. By staying out of the long sightlines i'd easily flank the snipers and get tons of free kills. Very rarely would I get sniped, since all the snipers were busy countersniping each other. In some games I wouldn't even get shot at once.

Some of my best games on Wasteland, were with a shotgun or smg. I simply moved fast, got to the flank, and rolled up a crapload of kills, 3, 4,5, 6 plus or more.

I am also aware of the comments IW made, about the maps. I can read fairly well at times. But you guys are missing my point. Regardless of whether you start from an open space construct....or a "here's a series of hallways" design to force more engagements, the end result isn't that much different. Sorry, but take MW1 maps like Ambush, Countdown, Backlot, District......compare them to MW3 maps like Bootleg, Seatown, Bakara......no Foxtrotting way anyone can say one group is THAT fundamentally different from the other, in terms of how they play....

...to the overblown degree that some say, that the MW1 maps are 'awesome', 'cock-sucking' worthy, all that.....while the MW3 maps suck. Anyone who says that...i'm going to say they are full of sh*t. Just speaking my opinion there. I've played all these games to death...a map like District plays Dom no different from a map like Seatown. Some second floors...some elevated areas, mostly level ground, almost the same exact sq meter area, mostly same sightlines, same freaking distance on sightlines. Same distances on the flags. Just about......the same freaking map. A new person wouldn't even know the difference, that's how closely they play. I could provide dozens of examples showing the above.

[iw5000]

It's not a bad thing to say the maps are great on a particular CoD game. Personally speaking...i can't think of any CoD games where the maps in general, viewed as a 'whole'....aren't great. They are always good. Yes, some individual maps aren't as fun as others, but that's kind of a gametype, personal flavor sort of thing.

I just don't get the whole "MW3 maps suck", like the entire group.....while the other prior year CoD game maps are great. It's almost like saying a Red 2010 Honda Civic drives great.....but a Blue 2010 Honda Civic drives like azz.


28.4 38.4

[mw2baller]

Any further explanation will require me to make diagrams which i'm much too lazy to do. I don't know about dom, since I only play that when i'm with our clan, but there's a huge difference between a map like countdown and dome. With countdown being much better.

Another point that i'll make is that the MW3 maps are much less suited to flanking. The previous maps had fighting that centered around, well, the center. That area contained houses and other spots that were very advantageous to control. As such, there was a lot of flanking one could do around the perimeter of the map. In MW3, there're no flanking routes since the entire map is now used instead of having the edges reserved for spawning, campy snipers, and boosters.

[danoski666]

Aug 15, 2012 19:12:05 GMT -5 mw2baller said:

Any further explanation will require me to make diagrams which i'm much too lazy to do. I don't know about dom, since I only play that when i'm with our clan, but there's a huge difference between a map like countdown and dome. With countdown being much better.

Another point that i'll make is that the MW3 maps are much less suited to flanking. The previous maps had fighting that centered around, well, the center. That area contained houses and other spots that were very advantageous to control. As such, there was a lot of flanking one could do around the perimeter of the map. In MW3, there're no flanking routes since the entire map is now used instead of having the edges reserved for spawning, campy snipers, and boosters.

And they said Countdown was bad.

[iw5000]

Aug 15, 2012 19:12:05 GMT -5 mw2baller said:

Any further explanation will require me to make diagrams which i'm much too lazy to do. I don't know about dom, since I only play that when i'm with our clan, but there's a huge difference between a map like countdown and dome. With countdown being much better.

Another point that i'll make is that the MW3 maps are much less suited to flanking. The previous maps had fighting that centered around, well, the center. That area contained houses and other spots that were very advantageous to control. As such, there was a lot of flanking one could do around the perimeter of the map. In MW3, there're no flanking routes since the entire map is now used instead of having the edges reserved for spawning, campy snipers, and boosters.

No need for diagrams, i know what you are trying to say. MW1 had maps like Bog and Countdown...which were essentially empty sandboxes, big spaces, with obstacles dropped in (Boxes, containers, stuff, etc..). You are saying that MW3's maps are the opposite....basically, maps built upon maze like paths, with stuff put into the dividers (junk, buildings, etc..)

To some degree, you are right. But you and others kind of exaggerate things for effect, imho. There are MANY maps from mw1 that follow the MW3 style of mapmaking ( a series of maze like paths around obstacles). Maps like Ambush, Backlot, Crash, District, Downpour, Showdown, Vacant, Wet Work ....this all come to mind, thinking back. These maps are all almost identical to MW3 maps like Seatown, Bootleg, Underground, Resistance, etc...Go map it out. Similar map size, similar sight lines, similar limitations, similar no. of buildings, 2nd floor buildings, etc...And while MW1 had some 'sandbox' style maps described above, so to does MW3. Bakara is a pretty open map in the middle. So is interchange, etc...

So we really aren't discussing completely different styles of maps....but more along the lines of a fine shade of grey. One game leaned more towards a certain way, the other game another. And imho, it's a bit ridiculous to tag one game's maps with a 'suck' label, and the other as 'great'.

As far as flanking. Speaking for Dom games...i see ZERO difference in flanking between any of those games. From MW1 all the way, five games later to MW3. Nothing has changed. Go up the middle towards 'B', where more people are.....or go off a left or right flank, where there is potentially less people, but it will take longer. No difference....whatsoever.

Take a MW1 map like 'Ambush'. Take a MW3 map like 'Interchange'. Exact same principles. The maps are identical in design. B up the middle...two flanks to the side. Pick and choose.