RD Excavation a9

Go big or go home!

  1. shadowslasher11

    aa shadowslasher11

    Messages:
    392
    Positive Ratings:
    357
    Suggestion: Make it based on the moon as a moonrock excavator and then tie it in with the Portal Storyline and get Aperture involved.
     
  2. Kube

    aa Kube Soon it will be different

    Messages:
    1,307
    Positive Ratings:
    1,750
    During the imp today, I felt like the large catwalks/chicken wire-sided bridges accessible from going up the excavator went a bit underused. An extra staircase up from each base to the bridge would probably be to the map's benefit.
     
  3. tyler

    aa tyler

    Messages:
    5,103
    Positive Ratings:
    4,618
    OK, I really don't like the layout and design of mid but I won't harp on it.

    I do like the new capture method. Unfortunately it clutters the hud a bit and like some people said looks really confusing and unintuitive. I think the majority of players, who don't have an understanding of maps on a technical level, would have a hard time understanding it. It's cleaner and easier to understand if you do know what's going on, though. If it's at all possible, a custom HUD might benefit this immensely. I don't know what it'd look like though.

    I have to say I don't really understand the motivation behind the game type. It plays more or less like KOTH with a bad mid, but with an added intel mechanic. But the intel is only available after a certain number of cores are collected--the actual number is irrelevant because no one will remember it ever--and I don't understand how it determines how many are stolen. Is it all of them? Sometimes it doesn't appear that way. Should I do intel or the point? I don't know. I hate CTF so I just stay on the point, but then half the time I lose despite only seeing the same 2-4 enemy players the whole round.

    Personally I don't really enjoy playing this map. It's just a 15 minute slog where I don't feel like anything I do really matters.
     
  4. Lain

    aa Lain heath ledger with some dreads

    Messages:
    745
    Positive Ratings:
    693
    Damn is this based on my Payload War idea? Nice to see those elements going into something.
     
  5. penguindood

    penguindood L1: Registered

    Messages:
    3
    Positive Ratings:
    0
    You should make it ounces of australium instead of gems because that would fit into the tf2 universe better.
     
  6. Lain

    aa Lain heath ledger with some dreads

    Messages:
    745
    Positive Ratings:
    693
    Or kilos of australium ;)
     
  7. YM

    aa YM LVL100 YM

    Messages:
    7,098
    Positive Ratings:
    5,928
    The original one was. The newer version involves no payload and much less of the original idea. I'll host the original version if you want to see the entities for it.
     
  8. Lain

    aa Lain heath ledger with some dreads

    Messages:
    745
    Positive Ratings:
    693
    I would love to see that, was it a problem with the gamemode or where you just not feeling it? Because the 72hr is coming up and I was thinking of doing something akin to the plw_ idea
     
  9. YM

    aa YM LVL100 YM

    Messages:
    7,098
    Positive Ratings:
    5,928
    I never had the movement tied to how many players were on the point like you suggested, but you could set that up easily. I ditched the movement because I wanted the excavators to be bigger, and bigger meant source's physics wouldn't cope with them.

    here it is


    EDIT:
    I think in this version I got an output wrong and the physboxes aren't killed. it is imperative that the physboxes are killed after a short period ( I found 3 seconds was about right) or else the server will slow down and experience CRAZY LAG before crashing.

    So make sure they're getting removed!!!