PDA

View Full Version : Downloadable Content Question



Keir
24th Jul 2008, 14:16
Hi guys!

Pacific is on track and looking amazing. The team here at Eidos who are working with the devs in Hungary would like to garner some feedback from you about DLC.

The purpose of this thread is to gauge interest and preferences from the most loyal fans of the game. Battlestations could have some really nice DLC options and Eidos would like to thank the community for their strong interest by giving you an opportunity to choose and discuss what you’d like to see available for the game in the future.

Below you’ll see a list of downloadable content that could be made available.

Please bear in mind that we can't make any promises, and while development is on track (and BS:P is already looking amazing) this thread is just to get opinions. So whilst we would love to include all of these in one mega pack, this is only an ideal and unlikely. What we would like to do is give fans the opportunity to choose which are the best options to include.


PICK AND PRIORITISE WHICH FEATURES ARE MOST IMPORTANT

Which of the following features are most important to you? You've got 16 points to use. You'll notice each feature has an attached value, pick the most important but please don't exceed the 16 point limit. You can pick as many features as you like as long as it's under the 16 point limit


DLC POINTS TABLE

Menu / GUI skins (1 point)
Plane camouflage, nose and tail art (2 points)
Plane models from Europe (3 points)
Unit packs (3 points)
New single player missions (4 points)
New multiplayer maps (8 points)
Historical battles in multiplayer (5 points)
Midway maps in multiplayer (5 points)

I hope that's clear as mud ( :p ) any questions give me a shout.

Thanks!

chip5541
24th Jul 2008, 14:36
Multiplayer maps (8)
important to the long life and popularity of teh game for MP players and clans

Single Player missions (4)
Important for those without a good internet connection and those that prefer SP games.

Unit packs (3)
new units always a big bonus. Wider range of units prevent burnout.

Menu/GUI (1) just to get a full 16 points :rasp:
Not really sure about this one but I suppose it would be good for allowing teh person to select teh layout that is most comfortable.

Total 16

Arrow
24th Jul 2008, 15:36
I agree with Chip's statements. While new units can spice up existing games, it's definitely the new multiplayer and single player maps that will keep players occupied. New maps = entirely different strategies, whereas new units = only slightly different strategies.

MafiaD0N
24th Jul 2008, 15:41
New multiplayer maps (8 points)
-This is a must. New multiplayer maps bring extended life to the game, keeping matches fresh and fun. Community grows.
Historical battles in multiplayer (5 points)
-Look above. It is nice to see historical battles.
Unit packs (3 points)
-Nice to see more of a variety of units, especially in MP, it may be the same map but if you can choose different units, it will make it a new game.

Had a hard time trying to explain why I chose these, but I like these choices the best.

Total 16.

crazyhorse128
24th Jul 2008, 16:10
Multiplayer maps (8)


Single Player missions (4)

Unitpacks (3)

I know thats only a total of 15


PS. Whats GUI?



EDIT: Make it fair, please charge PC players as well for the download :)

chip5541
24th Jul 2008, 16:14
Multiplayer maps (8)


PS. Whats GUI?

graphic user interface.

Usually GUI changes would include changing the color scheme, screen layout or pointers of teh interface (compass, targeting, etc.).

Jack459
24th Jul 2008, 16:19
Multiplayer Maps (8)
-There vital to the games longevity and are always fun

Single Player Missions(4)
-These are always fun for me when i get bored of multiplayer or am away with no internet connection

New Unit pack(3)
-usually add some excitement. I was very happy about the P-38 and Iowa in the Sibuyan Sea DLC

ummmm thats 15 and the only one point thing is the Menu/GUI so i guess thats what i got. Although i dont spend a lot of time looking at the menu.

andy3536
24th Jul 2008, 16:20
You want to increase longevity of the game with dlc, so good selection of MP maps and single player missions would be more important than any extra units.

Nose art and skins are piontless in my opinion, rather you concentrate of actual gameplay, it's only my opinion though.

Dark Angel of Sin
24th Jul 2008, 16:31
Plane camouflage, nose and tail art (2 points)
It would be nice to not have multiple copies of the same unit.

Plane models from Europe (3 points)
I think it would be fun to have German, Brit, Russian or Italian units in this game

Unit packs (3 points)
Obvious reason.

New multiplayer maps (8 points)
Same as above.

com345
24th Jul 2008, 16:43
Menu / GUI skins (1)

Plane camouflage, nose and tail art (1 points)
(would be nice if we could make them ourselves)

Unit packs (2 points)

New multiplayer maps (10 points)
(very vital)

Midway maps in multiplayer (2 points)

crazyhorse128
24th Jul 2008, 17:16
Plane camouflage, nose and tail art (1 points)
(would be nice if we could make them ourselves)


No, keep it to pre-made stuff

com345
24th Jul 2008, 17:22
No, keep it to pre-made stuff


thought that already!

Legends Never Die
24th Jul 2008, 17:37
New multiplayer maps (8 points)
-This is a must. New multiplayer maps bring extended life to the game, keeping matches fresh and fun. Community grows.
Historical battles in multiplayer (5 points)
-Look above. It is nice to see historical battles.
Unit packs (3 points)
-Nice to see more of a variety of units, especially in MP, it may be the same map but if you can choose different units, it will make it a new game.

Had a hard time trying to explain why I chose these, but I like these choices the best.

Total 16.

agreed :D

Zero-Sen
24th Jul 2008, 18:41
Once again, I am continually impressed by the dedication and consideration that the developers are apparently placing in the fans' suggestions! Nevertheless, here we go:

From the few messages that I have posted so far here, it seems that I have been on a crusade to ensure those who love Battlestations but do not have access to multiplayer or do not enjoy the hassle of setting up or competing on MP are given just enough consideration as the MP fans are. Please note that I am most certainly not making a knock on MP - it is quite evident that Battlestations has a huge MP following, let's just make sure the SP players have just as much to do as the MP players when Pacific comes out.

New Multiplayer Maps (0 Points) I AM NOT giving any points to this here, only because I am quite certain just by judging from the responses so far that most of the fans here do want new MP maps and that this is a priority for the devs. However, I will add this suggestion: from what I understand so far, SP skirmish mode will share the multiplayer maps for the skirmish battles that SP players set up - if that is the case, please remember to make it so that any new downloaded MP maps are also available for use in SP skirmish.

New Single Player Missions (8 Points) So of course new SP missions would go a long way to improving the SP game, but there is actually more potential here than you'd initially expect. Since these would be 'extra' missions, along with the obligatory historic battle here and there, I think it'd be okay for the devs to use their imagination (along the lines of the new Japanese campaign) and create semi-historical what-if campaigns, like an American invasion of Japan had the U.S. not used their atomic bombs, or a Japanese invasion of the U.S. had WWII progressed in such a manner that such an invasion was actually plausible. Or we could even add potential British missions in the Pacific or again, imaginary missions in which even the Kriegsmarine makes an appearance in aiding the IJN for a royal rumble with both the Royal Navy and the USN...

New IJN/USN Units/Unit Packs (6 Points) So I know the devs are hard at work putting new units into Pacific but here is actually the chance for them to improve the core game before thinking of other extraneous DLC or even sequals in different theatres: if it turns out that some of the USN/IJN units that we are hoping are included in the core game aren't, the devs can make sure they use the Pacific theatre to the fullest by including all the Pacific war units that they didn't before DLC. In this way, everyone's wishlist of Pacific War units may be fulfilled before we even begin to think about European units. As well, both SP Skirmish players and MP players would then be able to face off in whatever they're favourite units happen to be. Once again I make a plug for my single selfish demand: fingers crossed that the Nakajima Ki-84-Ia/b/c Hayate (Frank) gets included in Pacific! And,

New Plane Camouflage, Nose, and Tail Art (2 Points) This gets the least priority here, but this feature would definitely go a long way in adding some variety and customization to all the generic units you use throughout the game. This would also add to the historical accuracy - it would be awesome if the craft you used in each mission/map had the true to history paint schemes of the actual fleets and squadrons that actually took part in the battles you're fighting. It would also be cool to set up SP Skirmish or MP matches and play with specific historical units/aces with their particular paint schemes and all.

OK that's all! Once again I apologize for the length here but I give my thanks out to the developers as always!

sstoffels
24th Jul 2008, 19:35
new mutiplayermaps
this is just by far the most importent new map packs and such keep people playing like mei would rather have this then all the others combined. 8 points
old midway maps in just polish em up to par with the grapics and why not just for old times and put the new units in some of the maps they should have been in for BSM 5 points
unit packs just like the maps this one keeps it fresh i have to say it might be hard to do cause they might have run out of units. 3 points:D :D

TrpleD
25th Jul 2008, 00:18
-New multiplayer maps (8 points)
There must be some new maps to keep the game fresh or the included maps will be overplayed

-Historical battles in multiplayer (5 points)
It would be awesome if we could replay real battles

-Unit packs (3 points)

battleshipman
25th Jul 2008, 00:50
New multiplayer maps (8 points)
New single player missions (4 points)
Unit packs (3 points)

Dremora Warlord
25th Jul 2008, 01:45
New multiplayer maps (8 points) - This one is a given! ;)

Midway maps in multiplayer (5 points) -I assume this means maps from BSM? BSM had some great maps like Coral Sea. This one gets my vote for sure.

Unit packs (3 points) - Not too important, but I'm getting my points in! :p I do enjoy a variety of units, but how would this work? If somebody buys a unit pack and another player doesn't, you can't use it in the game or how would that work... As for what units you could add, why not give the Japs some crazy futuristic mech like a Knightmare frame that could launch from a carrier and the US a Longsword bomber? :whistle: I'm only joking of course. ;)

Would make for some interesting game play though...

But I think EVERYBODY agrees we need more multiplayer maps! Also, charging outrageous prices for them is not a good idea (Though I don't think the Iowa pack is THAT pricey). I'd say 250 points per map would be fair. But hey, that's just me.

LORD BLACKFIRE
25th Jul 2008, 02:42
360 Version

New multiplayer maps (8 points)
Historical battles in multiplayer (5 points)
Midway maps in multiplayer (5 points)


Let me make the case for old BSM maps to be upgraded and included in BSP.

Ghost Recon (Xbox) was an Xbox Live launch title. There were a number of maps that were favorites of fans. A few were included in later DLC for Ghost Recon: Island Thunder but the rest were never seen again.

I would hate to say goodbye to Coral Sea, Solomons, Sibuyan Sea, Samar, Philippines, and Steal Monsters. I would love to see updated versions.

Personally, I don't think single player is all that important. First, if somebody isn't a gold Live member, how likely is it that they'll spend the cash for dlc? Secondly, how many times have most people played the campaign missions? Probably once or twice is most likely. How many times have people played Sibuyan Sea? Hundreds most likely.

There is far more replay value in multiplayer maps than single player "play them once and forget about" missions.

Arrow
25th Jul 2008, 02:56
I think the moment there's a Skirmish mode and a map editor, I think we can more or less forget about single player.

I'm hoping for some specialist maps as well as some not-so-specialist maps. Luzon is one example of a specialist map. If there's going to be less lag, then a balanced all-flight map becomes less about who has the worse ping and more about who's the better aviator. A little more teamwork would be nice - ideally for me the first two slots of the four player team would be fighters, and the latter two be bombers. The first to knock out a target (likely a CV or AF) wins.

I also for some reason like PT wars, so a balanced version of Vella might be interesting. PTs have always been the underdogs =P

LORD BLACKFIRE
25th Jul 2008, 03:06
I think the moment there's a Skirmish mode and a map editor, I think we can more or less forget about single player.

I'm hoping for some specialist maps as well as some not-so-specialist maps. Luzon is one example of a specialist map. If there's going to be less lag, then a balanced all-flight map becomes less about who has the worse ping and more about who's the better aviator. A little more teamwork would be nice - ideally for me the first two slots of the four player team would be fighters, and the latter two be bombers. The first to knock out a target (likely a CV or AF) wins.

I also for some reason like PT wars, so a balanced version of Vella might be interesting. PTs have always been the underdogs =P

I also like the idea of specialist maps. American subs did not normally hunt in wolfpacks but it did happen at least once. Subs are very popular with the community. Perhaps an American wolfpack scenario versus Japanese DD's, seaplanes, and a convoy.

It3llig3nc3
25th Jul 2008, 09:14
Interesting poll.

My own choice would be:
New single player missions (4 points)
New multiplayer maps (8 points)
Historical battles in multiplayer (5 points)
but can not, since it's 17 points.

This makes me think what really is the difference between "New Multiplayer Maps" and "Historical battles in multiplayer"?
Would that mean that the historical battle option is more a co-op multiplayer vs. AI and the "new regular multiplayer map" is what we have seen so far in Midway?

Second comment is that it appears to be that the DEVs have ignored the MAP editor that the fan base was crying for since day 1 BS:M got released.
I do not really understand why it is so difficult to understand that letting a community create new content is the best way to keep the title alive and popular…


So after these questions how do I come to less than 16 points?
I exchange the single player mission with the unit packs
New multiplayer maps (8 points)
Historical battles in multiplayer (5 points)
Unit packs (3 points)


Finally as it looks obvious I’d rather give all 16 points to a DLC called “Map Editor” :D

drewey
25th Jul 2008, 09:26
HERE IS MY SELECTION AND HAVE BASED IT ON WHAT I FEEL WILL BENEFIT MIDWAY LEAGUE
NEW MULTI PLAYER MAPS 8 POINTS
HISTORICAL BATTLES IN MULTI PLAYER 5 POINTS
UNIT PACKS 3 POINTS

SORRY TO ALL THOSE ON SP

ANYBODY WISHING TO JOIN THE LEAGUE CAN VISIT THE WEBSITE AT
WWW.MIDWAYLEAGUE.COM
WE HAVE NEARLY 300 PLAYERS SIGNED UP AND 20 TEAMS ENTERED AND PLAY 3 LEAGUE GAMES EVERY WEEKEND AND WILL INCLUDE PACIFIC IN THE LEAGUE WHEN IT IS RELEASED:D

Kevyne-Shandris
25th Jul 2008, 09:30
imaginary missions in which even the Kriegsmarine makes an appearance in aiding the IJN for a royal rumble with both the Royal Navy and the USN...

I'm playing not Midway, but SH4, but their expansion pack does in fact include the Kriegsmarine subs battling not in Pacific per se, but the Indian ocean and a tad farther (historically accurate), with the possibility of helping IJN (how that is done isn't historically correct, but the subs was in the region prowling, so their auxillary is in the area to make it plausible. Forgot which islands in the Pacific were German protectorates before WWII, but there are some, which would make it accurate that such places would help Germany).

I get the impression there's some turf war between the products about historical accuracy and such, but if Midway is as accurate as it can be, it may help with drawing more WWII and the war history buffs to the franchise.

You highlight one aspect though: SP is critical in this venue, especially for those who take stragedy seriously. Seems the serious war games are still heavy with SP content, with MP thrown in for those who want it. This is one venue I'll strictly play SP, naval combat is TOUGH! Don't know how this game mechanics are, but I'm spending hours with protractors/rules/and forget the compass, but factoring degrees to sink ships.

All I can say overall is, please stress the accuracy of the naval armament. It's a sore point when Hollywood is more important, especially when so many now playing WWII games have zero connection to the past (and the vets are dying daily -- my uncle, a Seabee who helped laid down the airfield on Midway and other isles on the push to Japan, passed away years ago, too).

Cpt Nevil
25th Jul 2008, 23:38
...Mp Maps (8pts)
...Historic Battles (5pts)
...Camo and Nose Art (2pts)
...Skins/GUI Customization (1pt)

M0n3y
26th Jul 2008, 07:51
-MP maps (8pts)

make them for free!

-Midway maps in MP (5pts)

could be fun, just look at CoD2

-Unit packs (3pts)

just make more units than the Iowa mission pack

Kevyne-Shandris
26th Jul 2008, 10:04
If I was to play this game...

New single player missions (4 points)
New single player missions (4 points)
New single player missions (4 points)
New single player missions (4 points)

If there was an option for Realism, I'd give it 16pts!

Everything else is moddable or ignored, so rather stress the most important available.

The M00ps
26th Jul 2008, 15:17
Multiplayer maps for me, but I'd trade it all for a demo RIGHT NOW! This is my most eagerly anticipated title ever. Kudos to Eidos and they way they've repeatedly solicited user input on this game. All developers could take a lesson from them.

-Incline-
26th Jul 2008, 16:34
Without new multiplayer maps, the game will eventually grow stale and get boring as the community fades.

New multiplayer maps are capable of infusing life back into the game, and bringing players back.

Here is what I would choose:

Unit packs (3 points)
New multiplayer maps (8 points)
Historical battles in multiplayer (5 points)

Arrow
26th Jul 2008, 17:07
Historical maps have to be fun in order for them to work. I dunno about you guys, but I have fun blowing stuff up, not by knowing I'm fighting in a battle that happened EXACTLY the way its happening now. Besides, isn't changing outcomes based on YOUR actions what sets video games apart from, say, movies or books?

batman111
26th Jul 2008, 18:11
my choice is

new mp maps 8 points

i want tons and tons of maps with customizable options and maybe weather and daytime on one of the dlc maps

BSM maps 5 points

but souped up please! not only the graphics and stuff but also the map and units themselves

new unit packs 3 points

new classes maybe something better than a destroyer but not as good as a CL, maybe it could have better armor and better range idk just guessing. also maybe something between a destroyer and PT frigate or corvette it could play role as a minelayer also like the German Flottenbegleiter ? on a map like vella gulf?

Tex Vindictive
26th Jul 2008, 18:14
One thing I've asked for is the ability to change the starting point of vessels. This would be done by the host, and would make sure so we didn't have the same game over and over again.
As far as the plane art, just give us a tool to export the art to a dds. file, work it in photoshop, and import back into file. You know, it's called skinning.

Another thing, I don't know if this was addressed anywhere yet. Will we have the ability to host the game on a server?

Arrow
26th Jul 2008, 18:30
One thing I've asked for is the ability to change the starting point of vessels. This would be done by the host, and would make sure so we didn't have the same game over and over again.
As far as the plane art, just give us a tool to export the art to a dds. file, work it in photoshop, and import back into file. You know, it's called skinning.

Another thing, I don't know if this was addressed anywhere yet. Will we have the ability to host the game on a server?

If they're going to allow players starting positions to change, there should definitely be some kind of rules that prevent CVs from spawning next to each other or something ridiculous like that. I personally don't think it's worth it because it can be too easily exploited by the, as we all know, not-so-intelligent-gameplay-wise BSM Community.

CSF_FatalKontak
26th Jul 2008, 19:52
I will say,

Multiplayer maps (8)

and

Multiplayer maps (8)

Thats 16 :rasp:

Its so funny to play against humans, instead of playing against a computer.

And BSM had not enough multiplayer maps to my point of view

So add multiplayer maps and also if you can a map editor.

FatalKontak

sstoffels
26th Jul 2008, 21:39
hope the devs read this and notice everyone one would like new maps for downlaod every once and a while it would keep the game fresh

Cpt Nevil
27th Jul 2008, 15:58
hope the devs read this and notice everyone one would like new maps for downlaod every once and a while it would keep the game fresh

:thumbsup: ...agreed, I would rather keep playing one game with fresh DLC every few months instead of buying another $60 game with none. Ace Combat 6 for example, is releasing new content on a regular basis which keeps everyone coming back to play..if Eidos would do that with BS:P you don't need sequels anymore, just support the game and we'll keep coming back for more. Wish more devs would do this instead of beating the sequel horse into the ground like Call of Duty.

sstoffels
28th Jul 2008, 00:06
yeah but there will always be a need for a sequl new topic, gameplay chages etc
but new maps is by far the most importent thing to do after release like a new map or two every 2 months i could care less about gmer pics and themes and crap. new maps and units too are by far the most imporent. like i just got sibuyan sea to work and i have been playing that new map nonstop.:D

Cpt Nevil
28th Jul 2008, 00:51
yeah but there will always be a need for a sequl new topic, gameplay chages etc
but new maps is by far the most importent thing to do after release like a new map or two every 2 months i could care less about gmer pics and themes and crap. new maps and units too are by far the most imporent. like i just got sibuyan sea to work and i have been playing that new map nonstop.:D

...yeah, the Iowa pack was cool once those with HDTVs figured out how to make it work. But after that...nothing. Wish they would have released a few more to help pass the time until the next game.

Shamrock
28th Jul 2008, 02:21
By far my most important feature for DLC would be multiplayer maps. The one bad thing about BSM was not really the lack of maps, but the lack of the ability to change the units/objectives, etc on the maps we did have. The game could of had infinity replay value had we been allowed some customization options. It got real old playing same maps with same layouts several hundred times.:mad2:

So what I would want to see is more maps, but also the ability for us to customize how we play each map and what units/starting locations we have.




On another note I think it is very important that Edios also give the community editing tools to make mod's on the PC version. I'm a 360 guy, but had the PC version had the ability for the community to support the game with mods then I'd be playing the PC version right now and I think the PC community would be massive had the community made custom maps/scenarios/units, etc.... It was very frustrating that the dev's left out mod making tools when the PC content was free anyway. So it's hard for me to understand why they left it out because they didn't support the game to much after the 1 map pack, so why not let the community support it for them?



Also my vote is for Multiplayer maps X2 = 16 points.

sstoffels
28th Jul 2008, 02:38
...yeah, the Iowa pack was cool once those with HDTVs figured out how to make it work. But after that...nothing. Wish they would have released a few more to help pass the time until the next game.


By far my most important feature for DLC would be multiplayer maps. The one bad thing about BSM was not really the lack of maps, but the lack of the ability to change the units/objectives, etc on the maps we did have. The game could of had infinity replay value had we been allowed some customization options. It got real old playing same maps with same layouts several hundred times.:mad2:

So what I would want to see is more maps, but also the ability for us to customize how we play each map and what units/starting locations we have.




On another note I think it is very important that Edios also give the community editing tools to make mod's on the PC version. I'm a 360 guy, but had the PC version had the ability for the community to support the game with mods then I'd be playing the PC version right now and I think the PC community would be massive had the community made custom maps/scenarios/units, etc.... It was very frustrating that the dev's left out mod making tools when the PC content was free anyway. So it's hard for me to understand why they left it out because they didn't support the game to much after the 1 map pack, so why not let the community support it for them?



Also my vote is for Multiplayer maps X2 = 16 points.


true to both of u .new maps are need and customization i hope they get this point. and 5 new game modes should help i hope skirmish has some customization too.

Keir
28th Jul 2008, 09:20
Thanks very much for all the feedback gents :thumbsup:

Keep it coming and tell your friends, more the merrier.


Keir and the Eidos team.

andy3536
28th Jul 2008, 15:52
Don't forget of corse when it comes to the 360, sencible pricing.

Value for money is all important.;)

Ryback14
29th Jul 2008, 01:43
DLC POINTS TABLE





1: New multiplayer maps (8 points)

2: Unit packs (3 points)

3: Plane models from Europe (3 points)

4: Plane camouflage, nose and tail art (2 points)

:)

Ryback14
29th Jul 2008, 01:52
online co-op mode vs A.I....

non-linear sp mode similar to PTOiv...

day/night/weather options...

da888
29th Jul 2008, 08:49
New Multi player maps 8 points

Historic maps 5 points

And better servers. Never freeze up or lose conn. more than BSM. (hasn't stopped me from playing it for two years now) My favorite game.

M0n3y
29th Jul 2008, 10:54
New Multi player maps 8 points

Historic maps 5 points

And better servers. Never freeze up or lose conn. more than BSM. (hasn't stopped me from playing it for two years now) My favorite game.

you don't have 16 points in total >.>
bhut i do agree on better quality of the servers

Arrow
29th Jul 2008, 10:55
And better servers. Never freeze up or lose conn. more than BSM. (hasn't stopped me from playing it for two years now) My favorite game.

I think Eidos has already solved that problem, more or less. No one's found any hintings of Lamespy anywhere.

mclazyj
30th Jul 2008, 05:13
I would say more maps as a priority, but I have to ask whether my input counts as I am buying the PC version and will probably be abandoned after the game is released, similar to my Kane and Lynch experience.

jrchappe
30th Jul 2008, 07:18
I'd really love to see multiplayer maps, nose/tail art, and unit packs!

batman111
30th Jul 2008, 21:06
better balanced maps please!
too many maps favor the americans with the exception of a few.

LORD BLACKFIRE
30th Jul 2008, 21:26
better balanced maps please!
too many maps favor the americans with the exception of a few.

Solomons, Samar, & Suriago favor Japs.
Vela Gulf, Philippines, & Sibuyan Sea favor the Americans

Steel Monsters and Coral Sea are even (American planes better on Coral but Maya better than the Northhampton).

Operation MI I guess favors the Americans but I rarely play it. I've won from both sides on it.

Luzon? Who cares? Wasted map.

Arrow
31st Jul 2008, 00:06
Balancing is a tough thing to do, made harder when the sides aren't identical (but that's what separates the good games from the classic games).

And Blackfire, it may seem that way at first, but given how you can get idiots on each team, the maps remain quite balanced. =P

LORD BLACKFIRE
31st Jul 2008, 13:37
Balancing is a tough thing to do, made harder when the sides aren't identical (but that's what separates the good games from the classic games).

And Blackfire, it may seem that way at first, but given how you can get idiots on each team, the maps remain quite balanced. =P

QFT: the team that wins generally is the team with one less idiot than the other.

However, players being equally competent, I think Vella Gulf is the most unbalanced map followed by Suriago.

LORD BLACKFIRE
31st Jul 2008, 13:39
PC or 360??

I'm wondering if we shouldn't go back and edit our first posts here where we voted to indicate if we primarily play the 360 version or PC version. DLC usually refers to the 360 version.

M0n3y
31st Jul 2008, 15:55
Luzon? Who cares? Wasted map.
USA favors like a 1000% there...

Arrow
31st Jul 2008, 22:38
USA favors like a 1000% there...

You're kidding. In my experience, the Japanese always win. The Zero is a better interceptor than the Wildcat is a fighter.

battleshipman
1st Aug 2008, 00:44
You're kidding. In my experience, the Japanese always win. The Zero is a better interceptor than the Wildcat is a fighter.

I have never seen the japanese win on that map. Then again I've only played it twice.

David603
1st Aug 2008, 01:25
You're kidding. In my experience, the Japanese always win. The Zero is a better interceptor than the Wildcat is a fighter.Your right there. Given any half decent pass at a B17, I usualy get a kill on the pass and since I go for the outside edges of the formation to minimize the crossfire from the other B17s, it isn't unknown for me to get a second or even third B17 in the same pass if the Americans players aren't very good. If the Japanese had the Zero on Sibuyan the Americans would never get the bomber rush through. Compared to the Gekko, the Zero is as fast, has twice the firepower, has what seems to be the same armour points and is a smaller target.

David603
1st Aug 2008, 02:04
Since I haven't voted yet, here is my opinion on the options availible.

Menu / GUI skins (1 point): If these are availible for free, then I'll download then, but I wouldn't pay for this.
Plane camouflage, nose and tail art (2 points): Interesting, but not very important. Again, I wouldn't pay for this.
Plane models from Europe (3 points): Great, I would love to see planes like the Bf109 and Spitfire, and this could pave the way for European Theatre ships and maps.
Unit packs (3 points):Also very good, and if the map editor is included then these would be even more important.
New single player missions (4 points): So-so about these, because the multiplayer maps will be playable as singleplayer skirmish maps.
New multiplayer maps (8 points): Hugely important, more so if the map editor is not included.
Historical battles in multiplayer (5 points): These should be included as a matter of course, and at least some DLC maps should be based around historical scenarios. This is so obvious, since some maps will be based around historical battles while others will be fictional, that I won't vote for this.
Midway maps in multiplayer (5 points): I'd like them, but none of the Midway maps strike me as classics that I would desperately want to play once there where new maps availible.

So my vote goes to,
New multiplayer maps (8 points),
Plane models from Europe (3 points),
and Unit Packs (3 points).
Since thats only 14 points, I'll choose Plane camouflage, nose and tail art (2 points), but I wouldn't pay for this unless it was bundled with the rest of the DLC.

Arrow
1st Aug 2008, 03:22
Your right there. Given any half decent pass at a B17, I usualy get a kill on the pass and since I go for the outside edges of the formation to minimize the crossfire from the other B17s, it isn't unknown for me to get a second or even third B17 in the same pass if the Americans players aren't very good. If the Japanese had the Zero on Sibuyan the Americans would never get the bomber rush through. Compared to the Gekko, the Zero is as fast, has twice the firepower, has what seems to be the same armour points and is a smaller target.

In the Gekko's defence (just playing devil's advocate here) the Gekko has a much sharper turn, so it's not entirely useless.

At any rate, I just kamikaze into the B-17s on the first pass for a relatively easy kill.

M0n3y
2nd Aug 2008, 10:55
I have never seen the japanese win on that map. Then again I've only played it twice.

same here, i used to play it alot when my fighting skills were at their top, bhut i was NEVER able to win as Japanese...

it looks like the MP maps r winning :D

Red October
2nd Aug 2008, 14:06
:D :D I won as the Japanese, I had the best ally stupid players on the other team. The guy controlling the airfield sent all his bombers and planes to Yamato and i snuck along the bottom of the map with my bombers and actually destroyed the American air fields. :D Ahh good times :)

crazyhorse128
2nd Aug 2008, 15:03
Ive been in the Yamato in the same position, the poor other platyer never gave up trying. The most dammage he would do the ship would be knocking out the smaller gun's on the ship

High Def Dave
8th Aug 2008, 11:14
For me it must be More multiplayer maps, and not just 1 map like they did with BSM & id welcome new SP missions but being a 360 fanboy id like to see new Achivements come with the DLC :thumbsup: :)

David603
8th Aug 2008, 22:00
For me it must be More multiplayer maps, and not just 1 map like they did with BSM & id welcome new SP missions but being a 360 fanboy id like to see new Achivements come with the DLC :thumbsup: :)
I think that more acheivements would be included by default, because most devs seem to do that with DLC now plus Eidos did do that with Kane and Lynch. Now that the multiplayer maps can be played in single player skirmish mode, I'm not so sure that its important to release specific single player maps.

xXRebornFireXx
9th Aug 2008, 20:43
I think that more acheivements would be included by default, because most devs seem to do that with DLC now plus Eidos did do that with Kane and Lynch. Now that the multiplayer maps can be played in single player skirmish mode, I'm not so sure that its important to release specific single player maps.

thier is a max of 1000 gamer pionts for each game, they could do more, but all the games ive played are up to 1000, and are u saying they could be litting us play the multi player maps for BSP on a 1 on 1 split screen game?:confused:




my opinion for the pionts
Multiplayer maps - (800 microsoft pionts)
Single player maps (Co-op, and single) - (400 Microsoft pionts)
New units - (150 microsoft pionts)
any thing else 100, or 50 microsoft pionts

andy3536
9th Aug 2008, 21:10
thier is a max of 1000 gamer pionts for each game, they could do more, but all the games ive played are up to 1000, and are u saying they could be litting us play the multi player maps for BSP on a 1 on 1 split screen game?:confused:




my opinion for the pionts
Multiplayer maps - (800 microsoft pionts)
Single player maps (Co-op, and single) - (400 Microsoft pionts)
New units - (150 microsoft pionts)
any thing else 100, or 50 microsoft pionts


800ms pionts is what they were going to charge last time round for 1mp map and a few units, and thats unaceptable, mabee you should put how many maps you would think would be good value for 400 and 800 ms points instead.

xXRebornFireXx
10th Aug 2008, 04:26
well for a 400 MP map, maybe 1 map, 4 new units
and 800 MP map, 4 new maps, 2 challanges, and 4 new units
for a 1200 MP map, 8 new maps, 4 challanges, and 8 new units (Im sure thier not going to use this)

andy3536
10th Aug 2008, 07:47
well for a 400 MP map, maybe 1 map, 4 new units
and 800 MP map, 4 new maps, 2 challanges, and 4 new units
for a 1200 MP map, 8 new maps, 4 challanges, and 8 new units (Im sure thier not going to use this)

Doesn't matter if they use it, just an example of what people expect.
I'd add another MP mp for 400.;)

David603
10th Aug 2008, 09:46
thier is a max of 1000 gamer pionts for each game, they could do more, but all the games ive played are up to 1000, and are u saying they could be litting us play the multi player maps for BSP on a 1 on 1 split screen game?:confused:
Microsoft now demands that games come with 1000pts in acheivements on the original disc and download content is allowed to add another 250pts to this, for a total of 1250pts per game.

The multiplayer maps will all be playable in single player skirmish mode, with the AI replacing the player opponents, so I would place more importance on new multiplayer maps rather than single player only missions.

xXRebornFireXx
10th Aug 2008, 13:13
Microsoft now demands that games come with 1000pts in acheivements on the original disc and download content is allowed to add another 250pts to this, for a total of 1250pts per game.

The multiplayer maps will all be playable in single player skirmish mode, with the AI replacing the player opponents, so I would place more importance on new multiplayer maps rather than single player only missions.

what, no no no

400 pionts for 2 maps, 4 new units for Multiplayer and single
800 pionts for 4 new maps, 4 new units for Multiplayer and single
1200 pionts for 7-9 new maps, 7-9 new units for Multiplayer and single

David603
10th Aug 2008, 14:04
what, no no no

400 pionts for 2 maps, 4 new units for Multiplayer and single
800 pionts for 4 new maps, 4 new units for Multiplayer and single
1200 pionts for 7-9 new maps, 7-9 new units for Multiplayer and single
I think you are confusing achievement points with microsoft points. Achievement points are the system of unlocking achievements ingame, different achievements unlock different numbers of points and these count towards your gamescore total as a way of showing what games you've played and how good you are at them. Microsoft points are currency, used to download things from Xbox Live Marketplace and are a way for Microsoft to avoid having to price each item in each different currency.

andy3536
10th Aug 2008, 14:21
I think you are confusing achievement points with microsoft points. Achievement points are the system of unlocking achievements ingame, different achievements unlock different numbers of points and these count towards your gamescore total as a way of showing what games you've played and how good you are at them. Microsoft points are currency, used to download things from Xbox Live Marketplace and are a way for Microsoft to avoid having to price each item in each different currency.

Looks like you both got the wrong end of the stick, he was talking about MS pionts and assumed you were when you were actually talking about gamer pionts.:nut:
Mabee he didn't read the quote you had with your post?

xXRebornFireXx
10th Aug 2008, 17:07
I think you are confusing achievement points with microsoft points. Achievement points are the system of unlocking achievements ingame, different achievements unlock different numbers of points and these count towards your gamescore total as a way of showing what games you've played and how good you are at them. Microsoft points are currency, used to download things from Xbox Live Marketplace and are a way for Microsoft to avoid having to price each item in each different currency.

yeah i was confused :( i understand now

anyway i think that downloaded maps should atlest have 50 Gamer Pionts
and the game atleast have 1100, comes to around 1350 pionts, if they release the number of maps i expect..not just two maps in the pack

DarkUranium
13th Aug 2008, 09:16
When I saw this topic (first time ever on these forums anyways), I immediately registed to throw in my 2 cents...
I hope I'm not too late.

Here's what I'd like to see:
New single player missions (4 points)
New multiplayer maps (8 points)
Unit packs (3 points)

That leaves me 1 point, so I guess I can throw that into GUI (even though I almost never customize/skin the look of any game).

sstoffels
13th Aug 2008, 13:56
800ms pionts is what they were going to charge last time round for 1mp map and a few units, and thats unaceptable, mabee you should put how many maps you would think would be good value for 400 and 800 ms points instead.


well for a 400 MP map, maybe 1 map, 4 new units
and 800 MP map, 4 new maps, 2 challanges, and 4 new units
for a 1200 MP map, 8 new maps, 4 challanges, and 8 new units (Im sure thier not going to use this)






i would rather get a new map and some units maybe once a month insted of 7-9 all at once. and 800 points is to much for one map.

Jetu
14th Aug 2008, 03:31
16 point limit

Anything new would attract people right, Its always like "Oh I wonder what they added here, I wonder if it's enjoyable"
And generally speaking, paying a bunch for extra content makes some into unhappy campers. XD


New Multiplayer Maps : 8 points
People love to cruise through uncharted waters with their enormous guns :cool:

New Units : 6 points
More vessels to set to sea from the harbors, even more variety of planes onboard your aircraft carriers/airbases to launch at oncoming enemies, how fun is that? Everyone wants to try out something new on old/new maps.

New SP Missions : 2 points
Killing the AI is always fun for players who have yet to renew their Gold Subscription :P
Considering they got it BEFORE it ran out lol

ShinRa Inc
16th Aug 2008, 01:01
I'd put everything behind New Units, so long we get to select units for maps, instead of them being preset and unchangable again.

I also hope that we don't get stuck paying for a DLC pack that contains stuff advertised for the released game like we did with Midway...

David603
16th Aug 2008, 09:26
I'd put everything behind New Units, so long we get to select units for maps, instead of them being preset and unchangable again.

I also hope that we don't get stuck paying for a DLC pack that contains stuff advertised for the released game like we did with Midway...
Yeah, all the pre-release trailers for Midway had an Iowa class battleship at the end, yet we had to pay for the Iowa DLC to get it.

Arrow
16th Aug 2008, 13:53
...yet we had to pay for the Iowa DLC to get it.

I didn't!! :rasp:

chip5541
17th Aug 2008, 06:16
Remember, it is MS that prices this stuff :D

And I didn't pay either. PC baby!!

com345
17th Aug 2008, 06:37
poor MS needs money lol

crazyhorse128
17th Aug 2008, 09:19
poor MS needs money

:eek: Dont tell me you are serious!?

DarkUranium
18th Aug 2008, 19:33
:eek: Dont tell me you are serious!?
Something tells me he's not :P

Well, that's part of the reasons why I hate Microsoft... They try to charge everything.
What they can't/don't charge, they make overcomplicated to get (refering to stuff like Visual C++... part of why I don't use it, even if a small part) or use (refering to all the standards that they wrecked (think JScript as opposed to JavaScript and OOXML as opposed to OpenDocument)...)

andy3536
18th Aug 2008, 21:00
Something tells me he's not :P

Well, that's part of the reasons why I hate Microsoft... They try to charge everything.
What they can't/don't charge, they make overcomplicated to get (refering to stuff like Visual C++... part of why I don't use it, even if a small part) or use (refering to all the standards that they wrecked (think JScript as opposed to JavaScript and OOXML as opposed to OpenDocument)...)


Same as any other big company. Just they happen to sell somthing everyone needs.

Arrow
18th Aug 2008, 22:03
Absolute power corrupts absolutely, though.

Fun quote that uses above quote: "Knowledge is power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Study hard, be evil!" -Anon

japfighter
21st Aug 2008, 18:29
we do need more multiplayer maps. and a skirmish mode like japs have 2 shipyards and us have 2 shipyards.

Arrow
21st Aug 2008, 23:29
The problem with giving the AI a choice like that is that it's ridiculously hard to code it so that it makes the right decision as to what to launch. Given how each unit requires a different strategy to work, I highly doubt the comp will be able to make a good decision about whether to launch a sub, destroyer, or battleship (it gets even more confusing when you throw cruisers in).

xgamerms999
4th Sep 2008, 22:03
Unit Packs (5 points)
New maps (5.5 points)
Midway maps (5.5 points)

Midway map I want back Coral, Philipenes, Samar, Sibuyan

Optional: Monsters, Vella (improved)

(is that all the maps not including Air Sup?)

rawj7
22nd Sep 2008, 19:47
Multiplayer maps (8)
important to the long life and popularity of teh game for MP players and clans

Single Player missions (4)
Important for those without a good internet connection and those that prefer SP games.

Unit packs (3)
new units always a big bonus. Wider range of units prevent burnout.

Menu/GUI (1) just to get a full 16 points :rasp:
Not really sure about this one but I suppose it would be good for allowing teh person to select teh layout that is most comfortable.

Total 16

i agree as well

It3llig3nc3
23rd Sep 2008, 11:49
The problem with giving the AI a choice like that is that it's ridiculously hard to code it so that it makes the right decision as to what to launch. Given how each unit requires a different strategy to work, I highly doubt the comp will be able to make a good decision about whether to launch a sub, destroyer, or battleship (it gets even more confusing when you throw cruisers in).

I respectfully disagree. There are many RTS games out with skirmish mode and the AI in most of them can put up some good competition for an AVERAGE player. Especially with the "old tricks" when programming it such as shorter build times, variable "hit" ratios, AI can see just a little bit more about the map and the enemy as the humans, etc... :)

You are right in saying that the AI in BS:M was more reduced to the actual unit handling rather than strategical context which was heavily scripted. Let's hope BS:P is an improvement in this.

(I can't help but insert my best/worst experience in BS:M about the disadvantage of scripted AI - last single player map: Endgame at Midway. Try to detach the Houston with one DD from your carrier group and head towards the Jap fleet. Funny as it is, the AI is going to keep sending it's bomber and torp planes against your CVs despite the fact that a CA is approaching them fast. Even on REGULAR level (I can't always win with the "Houston strike force" on Veteran...) this CA is more than enough the finish the Jap fleet, including secondary objectives (taking out the extra cruiser group showing up after sinking the first CV). This is a serious problem that takes away from replayability.)

Eagle1Division
23rd Sep 2008, 22:54
I'd easily pour all 16 points down the "moddability" slot. Sadly however they'd probolly prefer to charge us with DLC instead of giving the ability to mod. At least theres still a glimmer of hope for an editor... though not really much.

I got the game for the 360 and It REALLY isn't fair to charge DLC for LIVE, And not for PC... Everything on live has a price :( . I've never seen DLC have a price tag on the internet.

Hmm... Modability... I'd cry with joy if they had something like WC3's map editor.

Polarshark
16th Oct 2008, 23:51
suggestions for new units (DLC)

montana
super yamato

you know to spice up the game

or even planned ships that were never build or ships that were suppose to be made into a battleship but converted to a CV

well anyways

new multiplayer map

new units

and single player mission is all i'm going for

crazyhorse128
17th Oct 2008, 14:24
or even planned ships that were never build or ships that were suppose to be made into a battleship but converted to a CV


But where would they fit into the game, if the campaign for example is historical?

Polarshark
19th Oct 2008, 14:19
But where would they fit into the game, if the campaign for example is historical?

you know skirmish.....

new multiplayer maps

or map editor (if it's there)

The Yamato
21st Oct 2008, 14:58
New maps for sure, it was awesome when the Iowa dlc content came out for BSM. :)

By the way anyone calling the Japanese japs is deemed extremely offensive to them but I am not going to mention who.