Custard1 submitted a new resource:
Bendigo - 3 stage Australian Payload
Read more about this resource...
Bendigo - 3 stage Australian Payload
Read more about this resource...
- Thread starter Custard1
- Start date
- Sep 10, 2016
- 531
- 398
I'm writing this primarily because I was all pumped up to watch the cp_bruhstbowl2 demo since it was played approx. 14 hours ago, but as it turns out there was just no demo file recorded for that playsession.
That left my creative spirit without a target, so I turned to a few interesting-looking maps that happened to be in the vicinity.
This means that B will roll essentially every time A is capped, as RED doesn't reach it in time.
This is, of course, with the exception of the miracle scenario that the initial scuffle over the B backward hold is actually won by RED, who subsequently pushes forward and assumes a forward hold.
But my guess is that you're well aware of this, and the purpose of B is simply to change BLU's spawn.
I think this is a bad way to use a control point - control points are something players expect to defend, and they'll go into the concept that defending them will be memorable. So, including a control point that totally subverts this is gonna rub some players the wrong way.
If you want to change spawns a certain distance after a control point, you can simply do it invisibly.
I did this on pl_boatload between B and C. No one noticed or cared and it never caused any issues.
Enough with minor nitpicks. From now on, I'll be considering A and C this map's only two points, like an actual multi-stage map.
So, I can now move onto the balance issues with them:
However, this also means that the distance RED has to walk between C and A is longer, so having them spawn at C for the entire round doesn't work anymore.
This throws off the balance of A. Commonly, RED will attempt to fight BLU off at the forward hold:
But then, they'll die, and they won't actually get a backward hold, since they have to spend so long walking back - the furthest they reach by the time A is capped is here:
You might say "oh, well RED should've had a teleporter", or "if RED was good they wouldn't have all died", but these are both sort of unjustified for a similar reason:
TF2 is a game where you get to play the class you want to play, and where if you're a great player, you have a chance to save the round all on your own.
Teammates bickering over who has to play Engi doesn't fit that.
And neither does retreating back to the backward hold instead of dying as the only good player on your team, only to figure out that the rest of your team did not do that, and it's now a 1v9 - An almost guaranteed loss for you, despite you not making any mistakes.
Letting RED get to the backward hold in time even if they all die is a perfect way to grease the gears of TF2 gameplay, and it's why I spawn RED so close to the point in all of my maps.
It's not actually 100% necessary - on average, a few players will survive and stall the cart for long enough (so around 80% of rounds will be totally fine), but I like to design my maps to prevent all unfun scenarios, even the most improbable ones.
Or rather - doing this will make it so that your map can resist just a little more team imbalance before the gameplay breaks.
Anyway, the situation to this is incredibly simple - just give RED a forward spawn until A is capped.
Actually, I just realised that the existing spawn already has a shortcut door aimed at solving this very issue.
So, just make damn sure RED players don't miss this door by spawning them right in front of it. Even simpler!
It also doesn't roll, and BLU spawns close enough for RED to not be able to push into, and hold, their lobby.
RED's rotate times are also short.
In other words, it has the makings of a nice, balanced, tough-to-attack final point already.
So why do we need the train mechanic?
The train mechanic, in the Cactus Canyon style you've used it in, is essentially a way to simulate a control point with a very long captime.
It's a relatively unexplored mechanic which has potential to create a Payload point which only has one hold area, but which is still balanced.
Using it in an already balanced point is just sadistic.
A potential way you could do it which would be more fun is to "call" a train every time the cart reaches the end of the track, and it will always hit the cart 5 seconds afterwards.
This would remove the frustrating element of randomness (as-is, the time you have to hold the cart at the finale is much longer if a train has just passed) while maintaining the intense feeling of "we just have to stay on the cart for a little longer".
Also, if you do eventually make the map multi-stage, you'd probably want to move the end of the track further back into the arena and just make it a normal Hoodoo-style shed.
Huh, those both ended up actually being pretty minor issues with major fixes.
So yeah, I'd say remove B and turn it into an invisible OnPass output, and implement these two small fixes, and this is a pretty fun map design.
Good job!
That said, they still have certain nitpicks. Their leaves are basically solid colours, and at certain angles you can really notice the fact that the leaves are basically three sprites/cards at perpendicular angles:
This is partly because of the difference in colour between the different cards. Which in turn makes me wonder if these eucalypts could look ultra awesome with a combination of high-resolution prop lightmapping and $textureshadows.
I find that the map lacks greenery.
As research, I tasked myself with what I always do when I think "could this theme be in TF2?", and asked myself "what would this look like in a painting?"
So here are a few 19th century paintings:
Pretty green, aren't they?
(This is admittedly not a super fair test - no one was painting the deserts in the 19th century cause barely anyone had even been out that far!)
I recognise that it's still in alpha. But right now, there's really not much (other than the eucalypts) to differentiate the map from pl_phoenix visually, and you may notice that that map is distinctly not set in Australia.
Now, here are the parts of this map that I think are immediately successful:
This creek area is really low to the ground and cozy, and something about the water looks so right.
Something about the framing of this scene (although it's an angle no player would ever look at) feels like home.
One thing that bugs me is that the ambient light is bright enough that it can easily be added to a little too much by bounced light and start to just look kinda wrong in some scenes:
But, since it looks completely fine in nature scenes, it seems like this is a problem that's gonna totally disappear after alpha.
By the way, those wood/metal barrier props are weird.
For quite a while, I thought they were the coalmines fence props with a few 2fort corrugated metal props strapped to them (like how you would normally do it), but it seems like they're actually a completely separate prop.
Considering there's a way to do this with default assets and I just described it, these props might be taking up filesize without the most tremendous benefit. They are undeniably well-made, though.
That left my creative spirit without a target, so I turned to a few interesting-looking maps that happened to be in the vicinity.
Regarding the gameplay:
B is too close to A, and C is too close to B.This means that B will roll essentially every time A is capped, as RED doesn't reach it in time.
This is, of course, with the exception of the miracle scenario that the initial scuffle over the B backward hold is actually won by RED, who subsequently pushes forward and assumes a forward hold.
But my guess is that you're well aware of this, and the purpose of B is simply to change BLU's spawn.
I think this is a bad way to use a control point - control points are something players expect to defend, and they'll go into the concept that defending them will be memorable. So, including a control point that totally subverts this is gonna rub some players the wrong way.
If you want to change spawns a certain distance after a control point, you can simply do it invisibly.
I did this on pl_boatload between B and C. No one noticed or cared and it never caused any issues.
Enough with minor nitpicks. From now on, I'll be considering A and C this map's only two points, like an actual multi-stage map.
So, I can now move onto the balance issues with them:
RED spawns too far from A.
This map has a lot of distance between A and C, which is great because it means C is balanced and doesn't roll.However, this also means that the distance RED has to walk between C and A is longer, so having them spawn at C for the entire round doesn't work anymore.
This throws off the balance of A. Commonly, RED will attempt to fight BLU off at the forward hold:
But then, they'll die, and they won't actually get a backward hold, since they have to spend so long walking back - the furthest they reach by the time A is capped is here:
You might say "oh, well RED should've had a teleporter", or "if RED was good they wouldn't have all died", but these are both sort of unjustified for a similar reason:
TF2 is a game where you get to play the class you want to play, and where if you're a great player, you have a chance to save the round all on your own.
Teammates bickering over who has to play Engi doesn't fit that.
And neither does retreating back to the backward hold instead of dying as the only good player on your team, only to figure out that the rest of your team did not do that, and it's now a 1v9 - An almost guaranteed loss for you, despite you not making any mistakes.
Letting RED get to the backward hold in time even if they all die is a perfect way to grease the gears of TF2 gameplay, and it's why I spawn RED so close to the point in all of my maps.
It's not actually 100% necessary - on average, a few players will survive and stall the cart for long enough (so around 80% of rounds will be totally fine), but I like to design my maps to prevent all unfun scenarios, even the most improbable ones.
Or rather - doing this will make it so that your map can resist just a little more team imbalance before the gameplay breaks.
Anyway, the situation to this is incredibly simple - just give RED a forward spawn until A is capped.
Actually, I just realised that the existing spawn already has a shortcut door aimed at solving this very issue.
So, just make damn sure RED players don't miss this door by spawning them right in front of it. Even simpler!
I don't think C needs the train mechanic.
C already has a very well-defined forward and backward hold:It also doesn't roll, and BLU spawns close enough for RED to not be able to push into, and hold, their lobby.
RED's rotate times are also short.
In other words, it has the makings of a nice, balanced, tough-to-attack final point already.
So why do we need the train mechanic?
The train mechanic, in the Cactus Canyon style you've used it in, is essentially a way to simulate a control point with a very long captime.
It's a relatively unexplored mechanic which has potential to create a Payload point which only has one hold area, but which is still balanced.
Using it in an already balanced point is just sadistic.
A potential way you could do it which would be more fun is to "call" a train every time the cart reaches the end of the track, and it will always hit the cart 5 seconds afterwards.
This would remove the frustrating element of randomness (as-is, the time you have to hold the cart at the finale is much longer if a train has just passed) while maintaining the intense feeling of "we just have to stay on the cart for a little longer".
Also, if you do eventually make the map multi-stage, you'd probably want to move the end of the track further back into the arena and just make it a normal Hoodoo-style shed.
Huh, those both ended up actually being pretty minor issues with major fixes.
So yeah, I'd say remove B and turn it into an invisible OnPass output, and implement these two small fixes, and this is a pretty fun map design.
Good job!
Regarding the visual style:
I went into this expecting to hate the eucalypts, but the colouration and overall shape is right enough that they actually kinda pass the feeling test for me.That said, they still have certain nitpicks. Their leaves are basically solid colours, and at certain angles you can really notice the fact that the leaves are basically three sprites/cards at perpendicular angles:
This is partly because of the difference in colour between the different cards. Which in turn makes me wonder if these eucalypts could look ultra awesome with a combination of high-resolution prop lightmapping and $textureshadows.
I find that the map lacks greenery.
As research, I tasked myself with what I always do when I think "could this theme be in TF2?", and asked myself "what would this look like in a painting?"
So here are a few 19th century paintings:
Pretty green, aren't they?
(This is admittedly not a super fair test - no one was painting the deserts in the 19th century cause barely anyone had even been out that far!)
I recognise that it's still in alpha. But right now, there's really not much (other than the eucalypts) to differentiate the map from pl_phoenix visually, and you may notice that that map is distinctly not set in Australia.
Now, here are the parts of this map that I think are immediately successful:
This creek area is really low to the ground and cozy, and something about the water looks so right.
Something about the framing of this scene (although it's an angle no player would ever look at) feels like home.
One thing that bugs me is that the ambient light is bright enough that it can easily be added to a little too much by bounced light and start to just look kinda wrong in some scenes:
But, since it looks completely fine in nature scenes, it seems like this is a problem that's gonna totally disappear after alpha.
By the way, those wood/metal barrier props are weird.
For quite a while, I thought they were the coalmines fence props with a few 2fort corrugated metal props strapped to them (like how you would normally do it), but it seems like they're actually a completely separate prop.
Considering there's a way to do this with default assets and I just described it, these props might be taking up filesize without the most tremendous benefit. They are undeniably well-made, though.
Last edited:
So for some reason I didn't get a notification for the absolute essay Tiftid wrote up, so I'll give a reply here.
First up, thanks for the feedback and analysis. I'm probably gonna run another test (ideally with less bugs and some tweaking) to get a better feel for how the map plays.
This was also made in a rush for the 72hr so all things considered, there were bound to be pacing and gameplay issues. Map barely made it in 20 minutes before deadline.
Judging from the first imp, I do agree with you on this one. There's probably not enough space for Red to reset defence at B nor enough space to delay blue long enough to not take B arena. Haven't looked too much into this yet for a2 but this area might receive a substantial rework if this project continues.
I wanted to have the train here to create a high risk, high reward pathway for both Red and Blue to pass between areas, and to allow flanking defenders like Spy and scout a quick shortcut to the attackers back lines. Furthermore, the final stretch of payload track at last is relatively well covered which I hope to believe can be counterbalanced by the difficulty of a train last detonation. The train speeding through also splits the last arena in half for any non-mobility classes, so even if Blu miss the train, they get a brief moment of cover to move the cart forwards and to regroup.
However, allowing Red to quite easily bomb attackers from the railway bridge is quite broken and makes last a little harder than I hoped. Frankly I don't think I consciously noticed it at the time of submission. I'm experimenting with a train door that partially blocks it off here for a2.
Ultimately, I still want to include the train here. I consider it something to help set the map apart from other similar payload maps (and I really like trains tbh). Obviously, this is gonna need more balancing, but I'll see how a2 plays here first.
As for stages, I don't really like the idea of multi-stage but the small size of the map was more down to lack of time rather than a design decision. Definitely considering adding more points between A and B if I find a way to work it in nicely.
I also don't think its worth getting into the visual style of the map for now. A lot of art is work in progress stuff made by Freyja and myself for the Australia Pack, and whilst I do think having a style is important in alpha, I really didn't consider location theme for any areas besides A.
Appreciate the feedback though, I'll keep it in mind.
First up, thanks for the feedback and analysis. I'm probably gonna run another test (ideally with less bugs and some tweaking) to get a better feel for how the map plays.
This was also made in a rush for the 72hr so all things considered, there were bound to be pacing and gameplay issues. Map barely made it in 20 minutes before deadline.
Judging from the first imp, I do agree with you on this one. There's probably not enough space for Red to reset defence at B nor enough space to delay blue long enough to not take B arena. Haven't looked too much into this yet for a2 but this area might receive a substantial rework if this project continues.
Yeah I probably should have made the shortcut door more obvious. Its one of the major changes I made for A2
Yipee!
This area was the last one I finished at 2am or so, so as expected there are problems here with how I expected the game to play vs what actually happened.I don't think C needs the train mechanic.
C already has a very well-defined forward and backward hold:
It also doesn't roll, and BLU spawns close enough for RED to not be able to push into, and hold, their lobby.
RED's rotate times are also short.
In other words, it has the makings of a nice, balanced, tough-to-attack final point already.
So why do we need the train mechanic?
The train mechanic, in the Cactus Canyon style you've used it in, is essentially a way to simulate a control point with a very long captime.
It's a relatively unexplored mechanic which has potential to create a Payload point which only has one hold area, but which is still balanced.
Using it in an already balanced point is just sadistic.
A potential way you could do it which would be more fun is to "call" a train every time the cart reaches the end of the track, and it will always hit the cart 5 seconds afterwards.
This would remove the frustrating element of randomness (as-is, the time you have to hold the cart at the finale is much longer if a train has just passed) while maintaining the intense feeling of "we just have to stay on the cart for a little longer".
Also, if you do eventually make the map multi-stage, you'd probably want to move the end of the track further back into the arena and just make it a normal Hoodoo-style shed.
Huh, those both ended up actually being pretty minor issues with major fixes.
So yeah, I'd say remove B and turn it into an invisible OnPass output, and implement these two small fixes, and this is a pretty fun map design.
Good job!
I wanted to have the train here to create a high risk, high reward pathway for both Red and Blue to pass between areas, and to allow flanking defenders like Spy and scout a quick shortcut to the attackers back lines. Furthermore, the final stretch of payload track at last is relatively well covered which I hope to believe can be counterbalanced by the difficulty of a train last detonation. The train speeding through also splits the last arena in half for any non-mobility classes, so even if Blu miss the train, they get a brief moment of cover to move the cart forwards and to regroup.
However, allowing Red to quite easily bomb attackers from the railway bridge is quite broken and makes last a little harder than I hoped. Frankly I don't think I consciously noticed it at the time of submission. I'm experimenting with a train door that partially blocks it off here for a2.
Ultimately, I still want to include the train here. I consider it something to help set the map apart from other similar payload maps (and I really like trains tbh). Obviously, this is gonna need more balancing, but I'll see how a2 plays here first.
As for stages, I don't really like the idea of multi-stage but the small size of the map was more down to lack of time rather than a design decision. Definitely considering adding more points between A and B if I find a way to work it in nicely.
I also don't think its worth getting into the visual style of the map for now. A lot of art is work in progress stuff made by Freyja and myself for the Australia Pack, and whilst I do think having a style is important in alpha, I really didn't consider location theme for any areas besides A.
Appreciate the feedback though, I'll keep it in mind.