Rejected Fort battle map : sectors/fields numbers

Should a coordinates system be implemented in fort battles.

  • Yes

    Votes: 35 63.6%

  • No

    Votes: 20 36.4%
  • Total voters
    55
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser

I think this is a good idea.Since i have noticed that some players aren't so sure of where north,east,west and south are.

So just saying go to square B3 would make everything easier.
 

DeletedUser9470

gogi4 said:
I think this is a good idea.Since i have noticed that some players aren't so sure of where north,east,west and south are.

So just saying go to square B3 would make everything easier.
Click to expand...

wheres square B3? is that in my inventory? or is that a quest?
no matter what you call the area, "north" or "B3", some just will not understand...
 

DeletedUser22575

gogi4 said:
I think this is a good idea.Since i have noticed that some players aren't so sure of where north,east,west and south are.

So just saying go to square B3 would make everything easier.
Click to expand...

If they can't learn which way north, south, east, etc is they have no hope at all of learning a system like this.
 

DeletedUser24989

gogi4 said:
I think this is a good idea.Since i have noticed that some players aren't so sure of where north,east,west and south are.

So just saying go to square B3 would make everything easier.
Click to expand...
thats exactly my point
 

DeletedUser

I don't see any benefits in this. The only thing that could come out of this is better ingame AI for offliners. And better AI for offliners means high probability of bots.

When this gets voted, I'll say no.
 

DeletedUser26406

Not sure If I already posted on this but again,
this is a very good idea,
I think charting the sectors would be more useful however.
So orders would be "move to sector B5".
 

DeletedUser

NIce idea even my teammates allready use it,but only for towers.
For example if you need swap or mount tower,just book it
A1 or S5 or W7 or D3
What mean A-adv S-sold D-duel W-work
numbers are
123
456
789

So my alliacne know where to move or whatever.But all map coordinates are very good idea.
 

DeletedUser

I think if it is going to be something like this, i like it ;) (SPOIL!)

[spoil]
1302092551-280.png
[/spoil]
 

DeletedUser22685

IMO, if it's going to be implemented, Stylie's idea is the best so far.
 

DeletedUser

This is too complexed.
I like the idea, but you have broken it down too much. For example if you just gave the WHOLE sector a number/name it would be much easier and simpler:
'Those in 06 push forward.'
'Those in 02 come back.'
Its a good idea, but make it simpler.
 

DeletedUser

I don't know about programming, I can't answer to JoxerTM. Strange reason of being against the idea.
555892hihi.gif

You don't see any benefits, I see a few.

And you would agree with the idea of numbering sectors/fields, but you still discuss about the visual aspect of the suggestion. No problem, what interest me is whether you like the idea or not. I explained why I thought the tooltip idea interesting, I understand why the highlighted grid is appreciated. Devs will choose.

I do not understand your message, Jack Elvin. Please read this message, maybe you will find an answer (?) Sorry.

I think numbering the two elements is interesting : everyone will find his account. Leaders can give global orders via sectors numbers as players communicate to each other via the fields numbers. One does not preclude the other. And you can still use N-W-S-E directions.
 

DeletedUser

superb idea A :up:

just the layout needs to be a bit as a display side, but as long as it shows co-ordinates its brilliant ;)
 

DeletedUser22685

Elmyr said:
That was mine, he just added color. :p
Click to expand...

I know that. Fine, if you want some credit.

Elmyr's idea is the best so far and Stylie's addition makes the already awesome idea a little bit better which is no mean feat as the idea was already amazing to begin with.
 

DeletedUser23359

Elmyr said:
I just don't think it's necessary. If it were implemented, I'd prefer something simple showing coordinates...

PvgBS.png


For the most part, specific directions should be up to the leader's communication skills. With a good leader I know exactly what he's talking about. The biggest problem is when they name specific players, e.g. "target x's sector" or "fill y's sector". Generally I know exactly who they're talking about, but occasionally I'll have no idea and spend the entire round hovering over different players to try to find them.

And I disagree that "move to zone A3" would save time. Anyone who has done any serious amount of fort battles can visualize the map and know exactly where they want people to go. Naming specific sectors would require translating what you know to the coordinate system. You can tell everyone in every sector to move west, but if you're naming specific sectors, you will have to tell each specific sector a different specific sector to move to, and know the coordinates of both. Which brings up a different problem with this kind of micromanagement: different sectors are different sizes.
Click to expand...

Beeing a lil more precise WONT be any harm
 

DeletedUser22685

Good Feather is away on holiday, you'll have to wait for him to come back :)
 

Deleted User - 1278415

hmmm only 10 votes so far and just 4 more days to vote.

Interesting.
 

DeletedUser

Maybe you should not remind me on this GF...

I said no back then because I don't want bots. And to make bots, you need first to get fort sectors marked.
So - no again. And now as a vote.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top