Discussion in 'Map Factory' started by Terwonick, Dec 26, 2011.
I'm just getting this out here, I'll add better/more screenshots tomorrow. night all.
I said it already, and I'll mention it here...
There is a point at which small is too small...
You can do a small map if the layout is well done, but for this, your layout isn't that good, the route is very simple and there isn't anything exciting... So this type of small is not a good small.
I would have something to say about this, but there's so little to it that there is nothing to say. So I won't say anything about it.
If it's in planning then MAJOR changes WILL occur, I know it's too small, but I don't think it will be a problem. I'm not quite sure what you mean by exciting, please elaborate further.
You map is a ring, there is no flanks, just a ring with a center courtyard and pole, you have a small ramp on each side for a minor height variation (does that sound exciting?)
If you look at other PLR maps, such as Pipeline it has excellent flank routes, it has a CROSS-OVER (this is PIVOTAL for PLR) and it's longer.... You REALLY do need a cross-over, I feel stupid for not seeing it last night.
Your map may be in planning, but the fact you named it a1, suggests otherwise. I suggest you go and look at Pipeline and Nightfall; those are some damn good Multi-stage PLR maps.
EDIT: I just realized that may sound a lot harsher than I want it to be. I'm trying to be mean or anything, I'm just trying to make sure you understand the basics of plr.
Also, the cart endpoint is right in front of the enemy spawn, this will lead to extrem spawncamping/killing. Don´t think thats a good idea.
But anyway, i think it would be fun to play this map, completely unTF2ish and only deathmatch, because of it´s simplicity.
last night I was getting crap for being in a0_test2, and now I'm getting crap for being in a1?
anyway, I dont think the lack of flanks will be a really big problem because the whole courtyard is a flank. The height variation and crossover may or may not be much of a problem, but I have two other stages with more of those planned in, so it probably won't be a huge problem.
Well, like bloodhound said, if you want a deathmatch PLR, then it'll be a bloodbath, but what I'm saying is that you are missing the pivotal part of PLR, the crossover is basically NEEDED... (in every stage)
You don't seem to realize how ridiculously simple and tiny this is. No TF2 map is this small, and that's for a damn good reason. This whole map will become one big meat grinder as everyone streams into the map's TWO ROOMS.
2fort is a meat grinder, and it's one of the most played maps, as is dustbowl (though not to the same extent). Look, I know you guys don't have much faith in me, but I'm going to wait to see how it plays.
EDIT: you tell me it's too small; that it'll be a bloodbath, and yet you want me to add a piece that would assure this? that's pretty hypocritical. Think before you speak.
Here's why we are saying to add a cross over...
The way your map is currently layed out, both teams can easily jump to the cart, and ride it to the end... this turns it into a "who can get the most people to fit on the cart" game.
The way your map is currently layed out, both teams will rush to destroy each other, and you create a bloodbath, and no one pushes the cart.
There really won't be any middle ground.
Now, if you add the cross over and proper flanks, then teams can choose "Should we push the cart, or should we go and try to weaken the other team... before we are forced to meet up with them at the cross-over" This is good, because now the map isn't going to be one sided, bum rush the cart, or bum rush the other team.
... I'm not hypocritical, I'm just telling you what your map needs to make it better. You can go ahead an wait for the test, but afterwards, you'll be hearing these same things. And, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say, even though I'm not the best mapper in the world nor may Sruman be, but we know more about mapping than you. So let us help you, and listen and try out what we are saying.
I'm just gonna wait for a test. If we have those problems then I'll fix them, but if they don't show up than I won't.
So, in on the gameday we saw that you layout was.. let´s say suboptimal.
I found an article that should really help you with plr_ maps.
Yeah, as I'm sure you saw, this map was... interesting. To say the least. Not exactly the best map in the bunch, to put it lightly.
It felt (and I don't want to seem to harsh here) like a Trade map. Even for a Stage 1, it still felt like a trade map. Heavies dominated at that range, Scouts were totally useless (by the time you got to the other side, the entire team was there to rip you apart), and Demomen couldn't get enough breathing room to kill the inevitable Sentry.
And you couldn't even see into the spawn. It was like having a broken areaportal right at the doors; Snipers or Heavies could just sit on the other side of the door without you even knowing they're there until you've died.
ya, at this point I might just scrap the first stage and go with the second and third stage's only, they are larger and have crossovers/side-by-side tracks.
the spawn thing will be fixed.
I'm not going to pull my punches, this map was awful. Seriously, if you want to make a map, you need to actually plan out the layout first. It's pretty fair to say that in order to play properly a map needs:
-More than 2 rooms
-Objectives that do not terminate 6 inches from the enemy team's spawn door
-Some form of height variation
-Areas with different ranges to give different classes a chance
-respawnroomvisualizers that are not opaque to the opposing team
Above all, please, PLEASE take advice. When people give you advice like me and Frozen did, we aren't doing it for our entertainment, we're doing it because we think that there are obvious flaws in your design. When you ignore our advice repeatedly it's frustrating to me, and ends with you submitting a map with severe issues for testing and getting it switched out after <5 minutes of play.
There are people here who know more about design than you do, and you would do well to at least consider constructive criticism.
Separate names with a comma.