REEJ
L420: High Member
- Aug 26, 2010
- 437
- 176
this part needs some really clever signs pointing at it and everyone should be happy
- Thread starter Arnold
- Start date
this part needs some really clever signs pointing at it and everyone should be happy
I liked the change to second, it worked a bit better.
Middle wasn't changed at all though, and I think you were there when some more confused people asked what is going on. I don't think arrows alone will help it. If you want this to be accessible to the most broad group of TF2 players, I think you should simplify it. You said it was an experiment though, so maybe that isn't your goal!
Middle wasn't changed at all though, and I think you were there when some more confused people asked what is going on. I don't think arrows alone will help it. If you want this to be accessible to the most broad group of TF2 players, I think you should simplify it. You said it was an experiment though, so maybe that isn't your goal!
J4CK8
L11: Posh Member
- Mar 4, 2009
- 820
- 243
The mid point is annoying to be capping and then someone blocks the cap, but you can't see where they are or what class they are. I like cp2, seems balanced enough.
Not sure what went wrong with this 'cave':
And maybe give these spawndoors a no entry skin when they are disabled?:
Displacement through wall:
Not sure what went wrong with this 'cave':
And maybe give these spawndoors a no entry skin when they are disabled?:
Displacement through wall:
Mr.Late
L7: Fancy Member
- Nov 27, 2009
- 408
- 157
1st cp: I don't know, I really didn't like it. If you are on the point you should be able to see whole point.
2nd cp: This idea works. I like it. But I don't like the hole above the point. It is so easy to just spam from there to point.
Middle cp: It is confusing. Cap areas to classes except solly and demoman are far too small! A demoman can easily just spam stickies there anyone who is trying to cap the point.
But it looks nice (except those random graphic glitches)
2nd cp: This idea works. I like it. But I don't like the hole above the point. It is so easy to just spam from there to point.
Middle cp: It is confusing. Cap areas to classes except solly and demoman are far too small! A demoman can easily just spam stickies there anyone who is trying to cap the point.
But it looks nice (except those random graphic glitches)
also, the area under the last cap looks like a deathpit from a distance- the grille is way less visible from a distance.
Can i suggest putting a cappoint prop on each area that is a cap- at least at the last points? might that help people tell where the cap zones are?
Can i suggest putting a cappoint prop on each area that is a cap- at least at the last points? might that help people tell where the cap zones are?
Crunkatog
L1: Registered
- Oct 11, 2010
- 2
- 3
I like the idea of a point that's located in or surrounded by water.
The problems like others have said, demoman is OP and pyro is nearly useless with the current design.
One way to reduce demoman advantage on or near the point is to widen the distance between the cap point and the surrounding housing. He can place stickies on the walls of a small housing, and they will be close enough to kill anyone surfacing or on the point. If the housing is larger, and the surface area of water by the point larger, he must use stickies on the point itself or try to hit players with pipe bombs instead. Stickies on the walls will be too far away to do much damage to swimmers.
Another way to change the point area to help pyros is adjust the water depth close to the cap point. By making the cap point abruptly drop off into deep water, burning players can simply dive back in and come up behind the pyro on the other side. Instead of this, make the water around the point quite shallow for some distance around the CP, so burning players will take more damage as they retreat to deeper water. One way you could do this is put the CP on the summit of a sloping hill, and again, enlarge the CP housing to accommodate the deeper water leading up to it. The distance from the CP to immersive water should be measured so that MOST classes will take almost full afterburn damage before they reach the deeper water.
Both changes will also improve the space around the point so players can move more freely. You can still make the point primarily or solely reachable by swimming. Just make it so that when they get there, its not an ambush inside a closet.
I would add a second, dry land passage, one that is slightly tortuous and easily defended but off to the side a bit. This is so that attackers and defenders both have to go out of their way to use or defend this passage. A benefit might be that the passage continues on to the central point as well or has a secondary spawn in it. Or additional health packs.
As with water passages, beware of the temptation to be too generous with health/ammo, especially ammo because then the water areas and side tunnels become sentry farms.
The problems like others have said, demoman is OP and pyro is nearly useless with the current design.
One way to reduce demoman advantage on or near the point is to widen the distance between the cap point and the surrounding housing. He can place stickies on the walls of a small housing, and they will be close enough to kill anyone surfacing or on the point. If the housing is larger, and the surface area of water by the point larger, he must use stickies on the point itself or try to hit players with pipe bombs instead. Stickies on the walls will be too far away to do much damage to swimmers.
Another way to change the point area to help pyros is adjust the water depth close to the cap point. By making the cap point abruptly drop off into deep water, burning players can simply dive back in and come up behind the pyro on the other side. Instead of this, make the water around the point quite shallow for some distance around the CP, so burning players will take more damage as they retreat to deeper water. One way you could do this is put the CP on the summit of a sloping hill, and again, enlarge the CP housing to accommodate the deeper water leading up to it. The distance from the CP to immersive water should be measured so that MOST classes will take almost full afterburn damage before they reach the deeper water.
Both changes will also improve the space around the point so players can move more freely. You can still make the point primarily or solely reachable by swimming. Just make it so that when they get there, its not an ambush inside a closet.
I would add a second, dry land passage, one that is slightly tortuous and easily defended but off to the side a bit. This is so that attackers and defenders both have to go out of their way to use or defend this passage. A benefit might be that the passage continues on to the central point as well or has a secondary spawn in it. Or additional health packs.
As with water passages, beware of the temptation to be too generous with health/ammo, especially ammo because then the water areas and side tunnels become sentry farms.
Soupstorm
L2: Junior Member
- Sep 22, 2009
- 67
- 12
You stole my recent crazy cap point ideas right out of my head.
I think the water cap should have at least one bridge leading on to it, otherwise you're forced to use Source's awkward water movement and water exiting (unless you're Scout), which might cause frustration when trying to cap under pressure. Also, a couple areas look a little bare of cover, but we'll see how it plays.
I really like your stone arches, by the way.
I think the water cap should have at least one bridge leading on to it, otherwise you're forced to use Source's awkward water movement and water exiting (unless you're Scout), which might cause frustration when trying to cap under pressure. Also, a couple areas look a little bare of cover, but we'll see how it plays.
I really like your stone arches, by the way.
Randdalf
aa
- Feb 14, 2008
- 1,051
- 931
They just look too smooth and ... arty, like they tend to look less like naturally carved structures and more like smoothed off polygons sometimes. As if they serve more of a functional purpose than appearing to have the map built around them. I guess I'd say they need to look more like natural landforms than displacements - some of them just don't make that much sense. Take Badlands for instance, that whole map looks as if it's built in and between the spurs of 2 of the great landforms you see in the 3D skybox, and it appears as though everything was carved naturally, for example, it's easy to see that the bridge was built over the middle of a small canyon, and the geological forms in it reflect this. I then look at Gullywash and I see displacements that look vaguely like something but were put there more because they looked nice than helped to convey the theme that the map was in an actual place that was based on reality. And then take Bazillion so far, that cool archlike structure sure looks nice, and is well-made, but I couldn't see that being naturally carved, nor on that sort of smallish scale. It's like geometry was converted to displacement, rather than features in the map being melded into a more overbearing structure of nature. (I would say also, that the Harvest theme would never really have that sort of displacement anyway, being based around relatively flat farmland, but I guess it's a derivation all the same).
all it takes is a nice rock to make a good map with you people. :/
My impression of your exterior theme is a bit mixed, add buildings with rock makes the theme pretty ugly, try to have one main theme, or rocks, or buildings, but do not mix the two .
In my opinion, I think you should play the card of natural and make the buildings very farmy with lots of wood and a bit concrete.
For what is your inside theme for your last, i would see something more open and very farmy, do you base on 2fort for have very good examples of themes.
In my opinion, I think you should play the card of natural and make the buildings very farmy with lots of wood and a bit concrete.
For what is your inside theme for your last, i would see something more open and very farmy, do you base on 2fort for have very good examples of themes.
- Jul 18, 2008
- 283
- 242
problem with going only buildings on a 5cp would be that it's very expensive to make everything a building. a lot more expensive than displacements are. my lay-out doesn't really allow me to while keeping steady fps.
So i'd rather keep the rocks and go mining. not that hard to scrap the farming since i wasn't really set on that yet. Although i still think some elements look nice.
So i'd rather keep the rocks and go mining. not that hard to scrap the farming since i wasn't really set on that yet. Although i still think some elements look nice.