Yes I have tried!, Paying $$$ Experianced Mapper for My Concept

Status
Not open for further replies.

Richard.UK

L1: Registered
Aug 17, 2009
27
0
Yes. You could probably do it in half an hour.

From my perspective, it basically boils down to deleting the other two stages, deleting the intermediate points, and fiddling with some of the entities.


yes that is exactly what i thought.....and I have tried and been semi successfull with the entities...

Toruble was that when the map loaded when looking around some of the view became distorted and fuzzy etc like smudging hehe **I sense Map developer laughter!!!* lol

it looks like visual leaking or an infinity loop or something, any developer with the strictest knowledge on these things, provide me with a half hour slot of their time to make this whole dream possible?
 
Last edited:

Delusibeta

L3: Member
Mar 21, 2009
100
14
Toruble was that when the map loaded when looking around some of the view became distorted and fuzzy etc like smudging hehe **I sense Map developer laughter!!!* lol

it looks like visual leaking or an infinity loop or something, any developer with the strictest knowledge on these things, provide me with a half hour slot of their time to make this whole dream possible?
I believe that's the classic leak. You may have deleted too much stuff.
 

Terr

Cranky Coder
aa
Jul 31, 2009
1,590
410
The "hall of mirrors" effect is when you can see a "nodraw" texture. Your computer simply draws what was there a second ago.

Odds are it's because you deleted something (like a hill of dirt) and are seeing the mapper-placed nodraw items behind it, or because you've created a leak in your map (like a leak in a space-station) and are seeing out into the sterile and infinite void.
 

Richard.UK

L1: Registered
Aug 17, 2009
27
0
well thank you very much for all of the help today

back to my original question in the topic, do I have permission to borrow the time of an experienced developer here please to possibly make this simple (to you) process occur?

I am not distorting or harming the value or credit of the original Map developers in any way.


I am essentially looking to split the following current maps into seperate maps:

pl_goldrush -----> pl_goldrush1_2009 -----> pl_goldrush2_2009 -----> pl_goldrush3_2009

pl_hoodoo_final -----> pl_hoodoo1_2009 -----> pl_hoodoo2_2009 -----> pl_hoodoo3_2009

and each of these seperate maps will follow the talked about subject below as a guideline:

WARCHAMP: I think he just wants the stages into their own maps and for blue to only get a single point for reaching the end and for red to get a single point for stopping them
blue get no caps along the way to award points only for the final checkpoint

EDIT: And also, The teams will not switch around, so You will not change to defender if you loose on the attack, or you will not change to attack if you win from defending. Like you would on ctf or cp, ok so maybe your both doing a bit of both, but still payload should work like that too.

Does this help a kind someone out?
 

DJive

Cake or Death?
aa
Dec 20, 2007
1,465
741
Goldrush IS released by Valve and in the last few months they've made allowed the community to edit their maps.

Hoodoo is an added CUSTOM map and is not Valve made. It would be the polite and correct thing to do to send a PM or ask [ame="http://forums.tf2maps.net/member.php?u=185"]TF2Maps.net Forums[/ame] (Author of the map) If he would mind the changes you are attempting to do.
 

Richard.UK

L1: Registered
Aug 17, 2009
27
0
thank you Icarus...

DJIVE - Have you got a link to the author?

And to open this up to the community, you have authorisation to talk to me or approach me for Goldrush if you are feeling in the mood at any time in your week!, it would be very much appreciated if you could make this dream possible for me :)
 

Terr

Cranky Coder
aa
Jul 31, 2009
1,590
410
Why can't this* payload-scoring change be tracked and effected by a SourceMod plugin?

*Or whatever the heck is being asked
 

Richard.UK

L1: Registered
Aug 17, 2009
27
0
because payload has a messed up scoring system hard coded into entities held within the map themselves.
 

A Boojum Snark

Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado
aa
Nov 2, 2007
4,775
7,670
Richard, might I inquire how long you've been playing TF2? It doesn't sound like you fully grasp how the game flows and what players enjoy.

Now that we fully understand what it is you want, let me provide some points as to why I believe it's an unwise idea.

Having CPs before the final one provides "checkpoints" of sorts that gives the attacking team some sense of accomplishment. Without them, if they lose they will feel as though the entire round was fruitless and they accomplished nothing. This will result in an un-fun map that people won't wish to play.

To look back into history, in Team Fortress Classic most maps of this type only had the final CP (dustbowl only had 3 CPs, one for each stage). After ten years of development and testing on TF2 Valve obviously determined it's better to have checkpoints along the way to let the attackers feel they have made progress.

By extension, when we received payload these checkpoints provide a limit to how far back the cart can reverse. Again this helps with the psychological aspect of playing because the attackers know they cannot lose that ground once gained.

If you remove these checkpoints and allow the battle line to flow across the map from one end to the other you might as well be playing a map like Granary designed for both teams to push forward.

The stages are far too small to separate into their own map. Servers usually have maps change every 30-45 minutes, and nobody would want to play a single stage of a map over and over for that long. This is exactly why server admins usually set arena maps to have a smaller timelimit. This leads to my next point...

Switching teams is good. It gives people a chance to play a little different and see the other side of the action and experience the map in a different way. Keeping teams the same will only make playing the same stage over and over again much much worse. In their current multi-stage style, moving from stage to stage keeps things interesting and enjoyable even though you are still on the same side of the fight.

Lastly, why would anyone want to play these? What is the convincing argument to play much smaller, more repetitive, less attacker-accomplishment versions of these maps when they could instead play the full map as it was intended and is accepted by thousands of other players?
Although this point wouldn't matter if these were completely custom maps and not edits of existing maps, they would still suffer from all the previous points.
 

Richard.UK

L1: Registered
Aug 17, 2009
27
0
ABS:

No you have got it all completely incorrect. sorry.

My idea is to allow the attacker to move through all of the checkpoints as normal payload...They will always feel as thought they are achieving because they are trying to reach the last checkpoint? and they still won't lose the checkpoints before it...?

The difference you ask?, the defending team...who likes playing defending teams on payload at the moment...this is because as a defender you do not "achieve" anything, you just get to start attacking...but that causes maps and rounds to play for far too long...and you try telling em what players enjoy??, this causes instant confusion, and drags the games on making players leave the server.

So with my idea I am saying that you will play standard goldrush as the attacker, but as the attacker will only get rewarded one point for reaching the final checkpoint, and the defending team will recieve only 1 point if they prevent the attacker team from reaching their final checkpoint.

Very simple, but people find it hard to believe. That is because Payload at the moment is way too scattered, and messy. So people become less welcome to the more simple and common sense method, that is what I have learned today anyway...
 
Last edited:

mtv22

L3: Member
Feb 28, 2009
116
22
Thank you Mr Blue.

Ok for those who frown on official map editing I think you need to study the concept of basic payload gameplay forgetting the map. Regular Payload is irregularly and un-imaginative in comparison to the concepts of Control Point and Payload....

I think that everyone here as gone up their own armholes if im quite honest. Their mind are so single minded. Instead of talking to me properly and asking siple questions...

Instead I am alienated...

Ok?? you ask what is the concept....this has great potential...but let me guess Custom Mappers will disagree because of their mentality you tell me?....Ok Let me Explain thoroughly to hopefully explain why I am doing this or thinking this please....

I DO NOT WANT CREDIT OR REWARD FOR THE CONCEPT IN ANY WAY. I WANT TO TAKE VALVES CRAPPY PAYLOAD GAMEPLAY STRUCTURE AND ADVANCE IT INTO SOMETHING USEFUL, SIMPLIFY IT, MAKE IT LESS MESSY FOR ALL PLAYERS OF EVERY SKILL AND EXPERIENCE.[/B]



Payload 2009
Player Team Choices: Attacker or Defender
Total Map Stages: 1
Attacker Round Win: Last Checkpoint of Stage
Defender Round Win: Stopping Payload reaching last point.
Change Teams: No




So basically my proposal is to take the scattered payload structure simplify it and structure it alot better for measuring wins and rounds...The gameplay thus become alot more exciting and less anti climax, lets face in traditional payload if you are defending you are either wishing you were not...or if you manage to successfully the attacker reaching the last checkpoint in the last seconds its an anti climax because you are not rewarded as a defender...


I apologise for maybe not being as professional to begin with, but I am hoping that some well educated individuals here like me can team up and work something out here because my mind set is that I conjure these ideas and 95% of the time will make it happen...a couple of months of running a server and I am not into the realms of changing map logistics or at least trying...and yes I will learn how to start mapping if that is my only option but I am thinking that this is definitely something that tf2maps.net should be aware of and possibly try to understand. And at the same time, will not be hardly any work for someone with experience, so I gues yes I might be lazy in this instance? but this will be lazy work for someone with knowledge too so you know what I mean.

I Hope this Helps or Clearer,

All the Best,
Richard

You come here to pay to have us make maps, yet you say how single minded we are, you haven't even had the chance to look in the mirror, have you? You're a pathetic hypocrite who can't even attempt to do something, we map for fun not for money. And we make good maps, unlike you're pathetic excuse for an idea, you can't just come in here and pay to have somebody make a map and put your name on it, especially not for a measly $10. Gtfo stupid bitch.
 

drp

aa
Oct 25, 2007
2,273
2,628
this thread has given me a headache. im 100% serious.
 

Richard.UK

L1: Registered
Aug 17, 2009
27
0
you and me both, I think that people struggle to open their mind sometimes, which causes flames, shooting down etc etc...but me, I'm looking to improve the structure of the way which payload maps work. That is all....

As if that is so hard to understand...


PS I can not prevent people from superiority complexes and elitist opinions.
 
Last edited:

ChickenHunter

L4: Comfortable Member
Feb 12, 2008
163
13
No i think its that you are using too many techinical words in a single sentence, making it difficult to figure out what you are exactly trying to say. Or maybe thats just me.
 

A Boojum Snark

Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado
aa
Nov 2, 2007
4,775
7,670
We don't find it "hard to believe" we find it hard to understand. We all THOUGHT we finally figured out what you wanted but now again you say it's wrong.

Payload is not "scattered and messy" at all. In fact it is the most confined and neat game mode of any because the objective is on a track. The scoring system is not messy, it makes sense to everyone (except you?) and it made sense to Valve with their extensive testing.

Even with checkpoints the other issues still stand. It would be repetitive, and boring. Nobody wants to play the same small area as the same team with the same objective over and over and over.

Where are these people who you claim only want to play on one team and don't like switching? I'm quite certain that the vast majority of players will disagree with you on this no matter where you go and ask.

You are wrong. These are not improvements. The payload game structure has been proven with many many many maps (I think it's the most mapped-for game mode)

Also, you didn't answer my first question. How long have you been playing?
 

Richard.UK

L1: Registered
Aug 17, 2009
27
0
Payload is not "scattered and messy" at all. In fact it is the most confined and neat game mode of any because the objective is on a track. The scoring system is not messy, it makes sense to everyone (except you?) and it made sense to Valve with their extensive testing.
It is very messy, for controlling wins and rounds. 3 rounds you would think would be 3 different beginning of a round if you were a player...correct?, no!, it is actually 1 round when Attacker is defeated, so you could have 3 rounds before the attacker is defeated and that will only be calculated as 1 round!...making maps take far to long to change and become less popular.

Even with checkpoints the other issues still stand. It would be repetitive, and boring. Nobody wants to play the same small area as the same team with the same objective over and over and over.
What do you do on Capture the Flag, and Capture Point?
Do players of these maps get bored? NO. Most active Servers are 2Fort.....KOTH(SIMPLE AND REPETATIVE)....everyone is playing these.

Wow did you just say that?...


You are wrong. These are not improvements. The payload game structure has been proven with many many many maps (I think it's the most mapped-for game mode)
This is from a map developers point of view which I totally understand. But I am from a server owner and developer point of view! servers need rotation in my opinion. Payload will not work in rotation correctly with its current structure, obviously. But I appreciate everything that makes Payload work, I am just looking to simplify it for quick map rotation and stop players leaving the servers.
[/QUOTE]


More to the topic point, I have contacted Youme and I will see if he is a nice man, I'm guessing he will understand from a developer point of view what I am trying to achieve. With his intellectuality we may see something special for payload, servers and exclusivity to tf2maps.net.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.