Field is still terrable.

[epicelite]

The changes did nothing to address the real issues. Just change the name to "Campground" because thats all the map is. Either you camp as infantry in the tunnels, or as a vehicle on the field. Here's my suggestions:

• Lower the floor of the infantry tunnels so it's not an uphill battle going into them and is harder for one team to hold.
  
• Add a lot of cover to the field so snipers don't dominate it so easily.
  
• Add a new tunnel system that takes infantry to the bottom of the waterfall, completely separate from the existing tunnel system.
  
• Change terrain around bottlenecks so there's more options for attackers and defenders. Maybe the refinery should be vulnerable to artillery units on the field?

Those new infantry ledges were a good addition but they need work.

[HaTe]

"Lower the floor of the infantry tunnels so it's not an uphill battle going into them and is harder for one team to hold."

Agreed.

"Add a lot of cover to the field so snipers don't dominate it so easily."

I think taking away access to the river (adding rocks and making the river full of rapids would do the trick) would help fix a lot of the issues on the map (including snipers using that as cover).

"Add a new tunnel system that takes infantry to the bottom of the waterfall, completely separate from the existing tunnel system."

I don't think that's necessary.

"Change terrain around bottlenecks so there's more options for attackers and defenders. Maybe the refinery should be vulnerable to artillery units on the field?"

I drew out an alternative base route long ago for Field in the original Renegade that I believe would help fix many of its stalemate siege issues. Perhaps I'll dig that up at some point (it was just a mspaint drawing, but the idea can be seen from it).

[Truxa]

Field has already been changed dramatically from what it was and compared to the original Field, this field should be called "Field II" just like they did with Mesa II. It's nothing like the original Field anymore.

The removal of the barricades is one of the things that is HUUUUUGE! People need to learn to rush and not camp out like they used to do. Learning new ways of accessing these bases is whats needed.

You want to retake the tunnels? Just keep rushing in with free-classes, mainly shotgunners and chemsprayers/mcfartlands.

You want easymode? Sorry, not this time, not this game.

It all depends on the teamwork, if it's not there, you wont win. You dont want to lead? Fine, dont complain in that case.

[SFJake]

I want ma barn.

Then the map is awesome.

[NodSaibot]

[*]Change terrain around bottlenecks so there's more options for attackers and defenders. Maybe the refinery should be vulnerable to artillery units on the field?

More whoring opportunities! Everyone loves those.

[RoundShades]

I want ma barn.

Then the map is awesome.

Agreed.

But no, seriously. What if field had two layer of tunnels, not too unlike complex? Then no team could truely have 100% coverage of every tunnel entrance. Especially if you add 2 tunnels leading to the bottom layer. The bottom one can lead out to the bottom or sides of the river. A lot of mapping, but maybe fun depending on the mood of the mapper.

What if field also had 2 base entrances? By which I mean, a very cleverly designed fork at the entrance, one goes underneath of the new infantry mountainpass ramp, and it also has a blocker ramp so it is exit only and enemies can't use it to fire in or come in because it is curved and exposes no opening to fire into base? The vehicles leaving base would have twice as much surface area to exit with compared to those camping outside, allowing the defender to recap the field using 2 prong attack methods, or simply leave base by the other exit and attempting to quickly drive away.

Also, it couldn't hurt to add chunks of rocks in the center, for tank and sniper cover. Because snipers won't opt for low ground when they have so much high ground available. If there were chunks of rock in the center, infantry as well as tanks could use them for some cover.

However, you guys exxagerate, field is a lot better, and under has the same problems and is also alright besides almost intentionally way too many climbing bugs...

[Ap2000]

The original Field wasn't much different.

Why can't we have a map that still plays in such a simplistic way?

Besides, the infantry sideways already make it possible for a heavy armed crew of 3~4 people to break up most sieges.

[RoundShades]

The original Field wasn't much different.

Why can't we have a map that still plays in such a simplistic way?

Besides, the infantry sideways already make it possible for a heavy armed crew of 3~4 people to break up most sieges.

Agreed. Tanks lose to anti-armor infantry from above. Those lose to snipers. You can counter some of their snipers with yours. You can also do tunnels. It has divided up the chances to more than old Field: Tunnel and base entrance, hold both and you can never lose them.

[cncforever]

You can counter snipers on the ledge with Marksmen if you are adapt at timing your evading and can think like a sniper. I actually had a sniper ask me to leave him alone lol. With the tunnells, when ever they have been taken over by snipers I simply get together a minimum of 5 shot gunners and go on a killing spree. How I deal with snipers on other maps when I am Nod is to creep around placing C4 on their back.

Some of them simply run away when they hear the countdown and don't waste time fighting back. I think it is not so much the design of the map that is the problem but the lack of team work. If a team got together, planned and rushed half of the issues you described would not exist.

I remember hearing how people thought Nod was weak and there were more GDI maps but I played on some Nod sides where there was team work and we obliterated GDI on almost all maps, especially all of the ones labelled as GDI maps. I used to think some maps were more GDI or Nod favoured but in most cases, the larger and / or improved maps simply highlights more the deficiencies in team play.

[Ap2000]

I remember hearing how people thought Nod was weak and there were more GDI maps but I played on some Nod sides where there was team work and we obliterated GDI on almost all maps, especially all of the ones labelled as GDI maps. I used to think some maps were more GDI or Nod favoured but in most cases, the larger and / or improved maps simply highlights more the deficiencies in team play.

Yeah, I remember during the first ~3 days after b4 launched, so many people were crying about GDI being totally OP.

But in reality it just took people some time to adapt to the new maps and balancing.

[RelentlessChaos]

I spent 3 hours on a Field match last night...

I feel dirty.

[[JTeK] Josh]

There are just some maps that marathon servers shouldn't use. Field/Under definitely shouldn't be used on marathon servers. I've hated marathon servers for years. Lately, I've realized that I actually like them as long as they're on non-base-d maps. Some are fine, but the traditional tanking maps like field and under should certainly have time limits.

[Goku]

We used to run a mod that killed base defences after say an hour. But people bitched..... Stomped their feet etc so we removed it.

I like under myself.

[RoundShades]

We used to run a mod that killed base defences after say an hour. But people bitched..... Stomped their feet etc so we removed it.

I like under myself.

Modify the code slightly, to instead kill the tower and everyone in the game? That way, they all have to start off fresh from their own spawn points, and that gives a relatively fair shot to either team depending on things like credits beforehand. Mines can easily be placed before SBH, APCs can rush both ways and emp nades and at mines can be employed. Nod can deploy armor faster, GDI will have more often a win if they can get 5 minutes into a tank war though because without base defenses the tanks will be unstoppable.

That sounds much better. Or a map in it's own right, but I would settle for a bonus event occuring at the end of every base defense map on marathon.

[SFJake]

Josh":2rloo3c7]There are just some maps that marathon servers shouldn't use. Field/Under definitely shouldn't be used on marathon servers. I've hated marathon servers for years. Lately, I've realized that I actually like them as long as they're on non-base-d maps. Some are fine, but the traditional tanking maps like field and under should certainly have time limits.

But base defenses can be fun. I just wish more maps had big, multiple paths. What the hell is the point of a base defense map with only 1 vehicle chokepoint? That is the worst part of Renegade maps.

Give me the old City Flying. Two huge vehicle paths + base defense = so much better.

[Goku]

We used to run a mod that killed base defences after say an hour. But people bitched..... Stomped their feet etc so we removed it.

I like under myself.

Modify the code slightly, to instead kill the tower and everyone in the game? That way, they all have to start off fresh from their own spawn points, and that gives a relatively fair shot to either team depending on things like credits beforehand. Mines can easily be placed before SBH, APCs can rush both ways and emp nades and at mines can be employed. Nod can deploy armor faster, GDI will have more often a win if they can get 5 minutes into a tank war though because without base defenses the tanks will be unstoppable.

That sounds much better. Or a map in it's own right, but I would settle for a bonus event occuring at the end of every base defense map on marathon.

Thats a pretty good idea.

[RoundShades]

We used to run a mod that killed base defences after say an hour. But people bitched..... Stomped their feet etc so we removed it.

I like under myself.

You also realize, you ran that mutator before field map changes, before AT mines and EMP nades, before nerfs to cloak, and before various other balance adjustments?

Might have luck with the mutator again in beta 4 with new items involved....

[salarite]

Yeah, in 90% of public games B4 Field plays just like the old one. I suggest removing the walls from the Refineries also.

On a sidenote, not long ago I played a Field match where both AGT and Obelisk were desroyed early. Suddenly, GDI patrolling for SBHs, Nod fearing for Hotwires, etc. It was truly a refreshing experience.

[RoundShades]

Yeah, in 90% of public games B4 Field plays just like the old one. I suggest removing the walls from the Refineries also.

On a sidenote, not long ago I played a Field match where both AGT and Obelisk were desroyed early. Suddenly, GDI patrolling for SBHs, Nod fearing for Hotwires, etc. It was truly a refreshing experience.

Honestly, every map with a base defense, functions fine with infantry infiltration against the base defenses.

The fact that they fire off, is in and of itself an assisting factor. The defense scoring a guranteed kill against anyone that tries it, or having a very ambiguous path to escape it's shot, is not necessary. Especially the second one, it just mean "good veterans" can infiltrate and "newbies" can't, which brings the playerbase to 200 players up to 220 and right back down to 200 again the very same day the entire +20 gets fed up with that.

The smoke grenades and being able to sprint to get into a base despite getting shot and warning the entire base, so far is working every game I played so far. As well as the Emp Nade cluster-disarm on tunnel entrances.

The job of the base defense, is to set off an audio cue that infantry came in, and to discourage any enemies freely accessing the base particularly by tank and tank-mob, which make them play out as siege maps instead of rush and burn maps.