Can we get more variety in the maps?

I've played maybe 300 games, and I've only bought 2 harvesters ~five times in my career.  ...With that said I too would like to see more map variety, but as iLikeToSnipe21 mentions, some decks would get wrecked by unpredictable maps (like if someone always builds expensive units and relies on 2 harvesters, but loads a map with no Tiberium).

Nevertheless, I think it would add some very interesting gameplay variety to load into a map that is something atypical of what we have now.

---

@iLikeToSnipe21 wrote:
I would love to see a system where you see the map and then select your deck. Would allow for more unique maps and make the game more competitive. We already have maps that heavily favor certain playstyles, deck selection after seeing the map should be a feature regardless.

---

That sounds like a seriously good idea to me.

---

@AcidSnowScArab wrote:

With that said I too would like to see more map variety, but as iLikeToSnipe21 mentions, some decks would get wrecked by unpredictable maps (like if someone always builds expensive units and relies on 2 harvesters, but loads a map with no Tiberium).

---

Yeah, I see your point. I think that AcidSnowScArab's suggestion would take care of that: You could choose between your three decks after seeing which map you are on, right before the battle starts.

---

@Mister_Crac wrote:

Currently, the maps in this game are by far not as varied as they could be: There is always the same amount of Tiberium, there is always a missile silo, there are always two or three missile pads, there is always land between your base and the other (never water)...

What I would like to see is:

-Maps with a bridge or two, so that any ground unit could only reach the other side of the map via bridges

-Maps where Tiberium is scarce (so that one harvester probably makes sense, but using two probably does not)

-Maps where there is no Tiberium at all (no-harvester play)

-Maps without a missile silo (you would have to win by attacking the enemy's base)

-Maps with just one single missile pad

-Maps with many missile pads

I think more variety can never hurt. At least, unique new maps could be tested during an event and if people like them enough, they could be added to the game permanently.

What do you think?

---

*starts slow clap*

---

@AcidSnowScArab wrote:

I've played maybe 300 games, and I've only bought 2 harvesters ~five times in my career.  ...With that said I too would like to see more map variety, but as iLikeToSnipe21 mentions, some decks would get wrecked by unpredictable maps (like if someone always builds expensive units and relies on 2 harvesters, but loads a map with no Tiberium).

Nevertheless, I think it would add some very interesting gameplay variety to load into a map that is something atypical of what we have now.

---

Oh well... learn to play more versatile! Lol

Why?  I just got off of a 21 win streak.  Getting 2 harvesters is overrated, I stomp ~80% of players that I go up against that use the strat.

@AcidSnowScArab 

no, I’m alking about the part where you said if a player that relies on high level tech units comes into a match with no tiberium. I’m not speaking about YOU specifically, I’m saying if anyone can only win with high level tech stuff that they need to learn to be more versatile. 

i miss urban maps, with garrisonable buildings for the infantry or tactical capturable buildings.

---

@AcidSnowScArab wrote:

Why?  I just got off of a 21 win streak.  Getting 2 harvesters is overrated, I stomp ~80% of players that I go up against that use the strat.

---

Well, how do you overcome their units which protect their harvesters? Oftentimes, you need something that is strong vs. infantry (Missile/Laser Troops), something that is strong vs. vehicles (Harvester), and their harvester is far away from you, and you need to charge the missile pads, and you need to build your own harvester. And pretty much all of that at the same time. Easier said than done, isn't it? 🤔