So I have fixed everything that Fox has found, just waiting for now.
Last edited:
- Thread starter S.W.A.T.Y
- Start date
- Status
Left to right: Texture miss-alligned, add some steps in perhaps, and random props being eaten by floor... For a prop room this room really lacks attention and detail, other areas of your map have seen more detail than this and don't even really need it. This is where people spawn and the first thing players see, it's in your best interest to give a good first impression.
Left to right: Red light that does not cast red light, random clock prop placement, needs more considered placement, texture missallignment, server panels really should be accessable, not behind that glass. It makes no sense why they would be behind glass.
Texture missallignment, plus your use of concrete seems completely arbitrary throughout your map.. you'd probably be best either using concrete or mud in any given area. Or look at granary for reference. Your degraded concrete seems completely unrealistic and poorly executed. Trees growing through concrete? Then being cut down but not having their roots removed to tend to the ruined concrete? I can see the theme you went for but in terms of applying detail you have gone completely overboard.
This structure is needlessly sophisticated in design. Cut the pmarked x structure thing out and simplify the structure above. If you don't, atleast fix the roof so the "iron sheeting" goes beyond the wall.
Does not blend well with skybox. Needs sorting out..
Randomly sized steps.. or something. Dunno what you have going on here. Also, your curved concrete doesn't curve smoothly, in fact i'd recommend removing the curve altogether, it's not necassery and looks messy.
I'm not entirely sure what's going on with this rock and the stairs, either it grew from the ground or fell from the sky.... neither of which seem wholly plausable. Not to mention your steps are non-uniform.
corridor is boring. It doesn't need to be full of detail but it's just plain, also the ceiling is metal which doesn't make much sense, and your struts/trusses/beams are very thin and unrealistic/do not fit standard TF2 themed trims.
I get stuck in here.
Dirt road just stops randomly. Makes little sense. Also, that awning below that larger protruding wooden structure makes no sense/seems redundant.
There doesn't seem to be any logical reason for this wooden structure to be here. I can only imagine you have a missalligned displacement there that its covering??? Plus the fence that cordons this path seems to exist merely for the fact of restricting players to the map itself. The fact that i realise this means it is poorly designed. You need to give the fence a logical reason to be there beyond simply keeping players in the map boundaries.
Supports plx.
I'm not entirely sure why this isn't an overlay, you have 7 faces and a brush wasting away here, x4.
The layout here doesn't make much sense, you have to come out and then back around to get into that building. You're probably better off allowing people to walk straight through. Additionally, that ledge seems needless. You can jump up as it is, it just takes up space. Also, the slope on the otherside could atleast be steps, if not, just make it a simple plank of wood. It looks ugly as is.
Overlay dirt track is awefully blocky, not to mention that the tire tracks meet steps there. Wth?
These industrial bollards don't make sense here and do not match the environment. Replace them with a crate or a barrel or something if you want the cover their, but this prop doesn't have a place in your map and you have it all over the place.
Trim goes through a prop and overlay, and has a texture missallignment.
Fence does not conform to TF2 theme, check out the standard wooden brush fence on the Red building on the right here. Sorry i couldn't find an official map reference but i only figured to add a reference after getting screen caps and this is all i had at hand.
moar supports plx.
This layout design doesn't make much sense and it clutters the basic layout. The closed door provides the gameplay function you seem to have over designed for. I'd remove it altogether and bring the door to ground level.
I see what you've tried to do here but it doesn't fit the TF2 theme. put the texture rotation for the glass back to normal (45 degree orientation) or use the gravel pit glass. In fact most of the windows could use the dirty gravel pit glass.
P.S. excuse a couple polygon artifacts, my cards on the fritz, this is what i could grab before it went completely loopy on me.
Last edited:
Oh, excuse double post, but the previous is pretty extensive as is. But in this pic:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/grazr/cp_mainline_rc20003.jpg
The building i recommended modifying sticks out by a tiny amount, 1 or 2 hammer units. You'll probably wanna resolve that as well.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/grazr/cp_mainline_rc20003.jpg
The building i recommended modifying sticks out by a tiny amount, 1 or 2 hammer units. You'll probably wanna resolve that as well.
kankle_king
L4: Comfortable Member
- Jan 31, 2009
- 161
- 86
Yes that left door at last needs to be level, that room doesn't do much besides slow you down
- Jan 6, 2008
- 2,289
- 1,372
Right, I played this on gameday today, never tried it before. People need to shut the fuck up about this map's quality, bandwagon hate is not cool. It played pretty well in my opinion, all the paths and points were logical etc. Unfortunately I don't have much more to say because I was cut off early by an appointment.
However, there's one thing you really need to improve. In an RC - a likely candidate for release - attention to detail is extremely important. Stuff like the weird rock in the stairs and all the other things grazr pointed out are totally out of place. Mind your use of textures and overlays too - some of them are enormous ("Tresspassers will be violated" is as big as a billboard...), and you seem to follow the trend of using water damaged computer room walls where there's no likely water damage.
If you polish your details for RC3 this map will be great.
However, there's one thing you really need to improve. In an RC - a likely candidate for release - attention to detail is extremely important. Stuff like the weird rock in the stairs and all the other things grazr pointed out are totally out of place. Mind your use of textures and overlays too - some of them are enormous ("Tresspassers will be violated" is as big as a billboard...), and you seem to follow the trend of using water damaged computer room walls where there's no likely water damage.
If you polish your details for RC3 this map will be great.
Da_Man
L4: Comfortable Member
- Aug 23, 2009
- 173
- 39
Just a couple of things I noticed from gameday:
The door on the inside seems superfluous, but that's just me.
The ground appears to be eating the pipe's support's here. That seems odd, but not really too bad.
Considering all the wood textures you used, this metal walkway seems incredibly out of place. Same goes for the various other metal stairs you had around the map.
That door doesn't go anywhere, just a blank wall on the other side.
Useless awning is useless.
For having a light right there it seems like a very sudden transition to a black texture.
This room seems very grungy and damaged compared to the impeccably clean room literally down the stairs from it.
As for gameplay, it does play very well, but there are a lot of side routes that no one uses, such as the big dips in a couple of them. I think a couple of stairs need to be playerclipped, but that is nitpicking
The door on the inside seems superfluous, but that's just me.
The ground appears to be eating the pipe's support's here. That seems odd, but not really too bad.
Considering all the wood textures you used, this metal walkway seems incredibly out of place. Same goes for the various other metal stairs you had around the map.
That door doesn't go anywhere, just a blank wall on the other side.
Useless awning is useless.
For having a light right there it seems like a very sudden transition to a black texture.
This room seems very grungy and damaged compared to the impeccably clean room literally down the stairs from it.
As for gameplay, it does play very well, but there are a lot of side routes that no one uses, such as the big dips in a couple of them. I think a couple of stairs need to be playerclipped, but that is nitpicking
I'm using Granary's cap times but if the comp tf2 players start complaining about it, then I'll change it, but for now I'm going to keep it as it is.
Tinker
aa
- Oct 30, 2008
- 672
- 334
It played well on gameday, much improvement since Reelfoot especially on height differences, made it much more interesting.
That said, it generally feels like the map is too BROAD, like there's too much routes left and right, some of which seems pretty useless. I can't imagine that would make it better for the (relatively small) 6v6 matches you are wanting to have this play at. I'd recommend taking one route off every place where there's more than three.
That said, it generally feels like the map is too BROAD, like there's too much routes left and right, some of which seems pretty useless. I can't imagine that would make it better for the (relatively small) 6v6 matches you are wanting to have this play at. I'd recommend taking one route off every place where there's more than three.
Yeah, some other comp tf2 player said that too. I'm thinking of removing the far right route at the first point.
I have been thinking of removing this side route at the first point since not many people use it ?
kankle_king
L4: Comfortable Member
- Jan 31, 2009
- 161
- 86
http://tf2f.sishgupta.com/tf/demos/auto-20100115-2242-cp_mainline_rc2.dem
I'm gonna have to go back on what I said about the right door at last...we pushed from there a couple times and it is a good alternate route. It puts you up in the defending teams face and was more exciting than a traditional "slowly come out, spam, and trade ubers" CP1 fight. Could still be raised a little, I'm sure you will figure it out.
Random stuff:
This light post can sometimes get in the way, especially when sticky jumping to the right side of the roof
This stump can get annoying when RJ'ing to mid, not a big deal but could be moved
Another box (on the right) would really help soldiers get a better jump up to the roof/pipe
Also should mention several people missed the raised mid as opposed to how it is now, I personally don't mind it.
Good RC, map is a lot of fun to play.
I'm gonna have to go back on what I said about the right door at last...we pushed from there a couple times and it is a good alternate route. It puts you up in the defending teams face and was more exciting than a traditional "slowly come out, spam, and trade ubers" CP1 fight. Could still be raised a little, I'm sure you will figure it out.
Random stuff:
This light post can sometimes get in the way, especially when sticky jumping to the right side of the roof
This stump can get annoying when RJ'ing to mid, not a big deal but could be moved
Another box (on the right) would really help soldiers get a better jump up to the roof/pipe
Also should mention several people missed the raised mid as opposed to how it is now, I personally don't mind it.
Good RC, map is a lot of fun to play.
From GotFrag (me)
On removing the far right route on last point;
As it is, it is a very long travel to get a decent flanking position, however arguably too long to be worth the time it takes, and the back capture possibility it offers the other team.
More over, almost every popular competitive CP map, has: two main entrances and one flank route that gives the attackers better positioning in relationship to the Control Point. Mainline has 3 main routes, and one flanking route, which as I said before offers no advantage in terms of positioning. This long right route to last needs to be removed entirely.
Obviously we can't leave it without a flanking route, otherwise the entire last point will be a cluster fudge of spam. For a replacement I suggest a drop down hallway, similar to that of Granary's in the top of second, that drops you down in the end of the Yard. This should be a very direct, cramped hallway that tones down the power of the route. It will be in the left attacking room (from attackers perspective) on last. The room will have added depth and stairs that run up into the attic of the room, where the hallway will be. It should drop the player down (without harm) approximately half way between the attacking rooms, and the spawn of last, where the fence on the left is (from defenders perspective).
Also, as the player gets closer to the drop down point there will be glass that allows Defenders to see into the tubing, also as a measure of precaution for 'OPness'. The glass allows aware defenders to obtain and early warning, and perhaps scare off the attacker, but still lets the preocupation of the defending team to be caught off guard by a well timed flanking Scout, much like the small entrance on Badlands that lets the player out just by the point.
That takes care of the flanking route problem, but we will still have three main, large entrances that take away the climax of the battle at last. Now, in my opinion the lay out of the attacking rooms are decently positioned, so there is no need to change that radically. So, I propose enclosing the upper balcony the outlooks the last point, and like upper lobby on Badlands, place glass in the front wall, that allows a sneak peak into the attacking teams preparation for Defence.
As it would then be, there would be little point for the attacking team to go up into this former balcony, so I suggest opening up the other side of the balcony to the opposing attacking room. This allows for mobility and lets the attacking team peep without actually peeking.
I could see the implementation of these items allowing for too much spamability for the defending team, effectively making it extremely difficult for a capture. If this happens to be the case, I see a possible solution. Make an 'unglassed' section of the former upper balcony. In this section place a small, one way gate that lets the attacking team out, but keep the Defence on last. You would have to place some sort of plank or pipe that lets the players run out of this one way gate. The gate would give attacking teams another option, without overwhelming the defensive team.
On removing the far right route on last point;
As it is, it is a very long travel to get a decent flanking position, however arguably too long to be worth the time it takes, and the back capture possibility it offers the other team.
More over, almost every popular competitive CP map, has: two main entrances and one flank route that gives the attackers better positioning in relationship to the Control Point. Mainline has 3 main routes, and one flanking route, which as I said before offers no advantage in terms of positioning. This long right route to last needs to be removed entirely.
Obviously we can't leave it without a flanking route, otherwise the entire last point will be a cluster fudge of spam. For a replacement I suggest a drop down hallway, similar to that of Granary's in the top of second, that drops you down in the end of the Yard. This should be a very direct, cramped hallway that tones down the power of the route. It will be in the left attacking room (from attackers perspective) on last. The room will have added depth and stairs that run up into the attic of the room, where the hallway will be. It should drop the player down (without harm) approximately half way between the attacking rooms, and the spawn of last, where the fence on the left is (from defenders perspective).
Also, as the player gets closer to the drop down point there will be glass that allows Defenders to see into the tubing, also as a measure of precaution for 'OPness'. The glass allows aware defenders to obtain and early warning, and perhaps scare off the attacker, but still lets the preocupation of the defending team to be caught off guard by a well timed flanking Scout, much like the small entrance on Badlands that lets the player out just by the point.
That takes care of the flanking route problem, but we will still have three main, large entrances that take away the climax of the battle at last. Now, in my opinion the lay out of the attacking rooms are decently positioned, so there is no need to change that radically. So, I propose enclosing the upper balcony the outlooks the last point, and like upper lobby on Badlands, place glass in the front wall, that allows a sneak peak into the attacking teams preparation for Defence.
As it would then be, there would be little point for the attacking team to go up into this former balcony, so I suggest opening up the other side of the balcony to the opposing attacking room. This allows for mobility and lets the attacking team peep without actually peeking.
I could see the implementation of these items allowing for too much spamability for the defending team, effectively making it extremely difficult for a capture. If this happens to be the case, I see a possible solution. Make an 'unglassed' section of the former upper balcony. In this section place a small, one way gate that lets the attacking team out, but keep the Defence on last. You would have to place some sort of plank or pipe that lets the players run out of this one way gate. The gate would give attacking teams another option, without overwhelming the defensive team.
So I have made some gameplay changes from all the comp tf2 feedback that I have gotten lately. These changes fix the back capping issue.
I moved the route that was on the left to the right and its a lot shorter now and more useful.
Closed off the balcony since that was the biggest issue with the backcapping.
And added this connector which helps with the issue with the backcapping.
I moved the route that was on the left to the right and its a lot shorter now and more useful.
Closed off the balcony since that was the biggest issue with the backcapping.
And added this connector which helps with the issue with the backcapping.
We played it on ukcs last night and there people didnt realy like the map (basic response to any linear 5cp map) in the beginning. Later on that did improve a bit as they noticed that the map actualy had very good attack options on both side (even though the attacking side had it easier). It played very balanced on a 16 vs 16 instant respawn and not that crowded except at the last cp which is normal in such situation.
However, after about 15 minutes of the planned 20 they realy wanted to go to the next map.
Also, that response didnt mean its a bad map. People said it looked great, played ok and they compared it a bit with fastlane. The map felt similar to it. Thats a good sign. They normaly allways want to go to the next map in any ctf map or linear cp map after about 15 minutes.
However, after about 15 minutes of the planned 20 they realy wanted to go to the next map.
Also, that response didnt mean its a bad map. People said it looked great, played ok and they compared it a bit with fastlane. The map felt similar to it. Thats a good sign. They normaly allways want to go to the next map in any ctf map or linear cp map after about 15 minutes.
Last edited:
Caliostro
L6: Sharp Member
- Jul 6, 2009
- 261
- 110
This is one of the worst possible settings to test anything. Instant respawn makes most defences nigh-impenetrable if the team has even the most modest idea of what they're doing, while, specially when allied to 32 man, also crowding everything insanely. Generally speaking when 32 man instant respawn feels right, most normal game modes will feel terribly empty.
The only partial exception to instant respawn servers is CTF, since you can lose the flag in the mere second you gain from clearing out a room. This map is 5 point linear CP though...
Everyone on the server already knows that its the worst possible situation to test a map in. They dont even expect it to be balanced at all. They however do expect it to play a bit like well and granary... Or fastlane (which was in this case).
You also forget that most servers do use the worst possible setting and so a test in that setting is at least needed. Its allways welcome to test a map in any situation even if in some cases it doesnt turn out that well.
There are a few advantages you get from testing it that way. You will be 100% sure that the map will run properly in fps. And if a map works on that situation it will work on any public. And you will be able to find problem bottleneck areas much easier as they will be overused. The map didnt show any issues in the test which does give a good sign.
We do test any map in that situation because thats the worst possible situation. If it passes that we can be sure it will also pass 13 vs 13 IR and 16 vs 16 reduced respawns (which ukcs normaly has on the servers).
Dont throw away any feedback from 16 vs 16 IR... Feedback is usefull even if its just a minor part. If you purely focus on 5 vs 5 normal respawn feedback your map will suffer in public servers for sure. People that play in publics will not like long respawns and often are the type that massively go engineer or demoman just to camp the last point. This is exactly what hoodoo suffers allmost any game i see.
Im not saying this type of feedback should change your map. but at least this feedback does tell if your map is suitable for publics even in the worst case. And this test did say it was suitable. Thats ALL you need to know unless there are some minor parts you want to focus on for publics.
You also forget that most servers do use the worst possible setting and so a test in that setting is at least needed. Its allways welcome to test a map in any situation even if in some cases it doesnt turn out that well.
There are a few advantages you get from testing it that way. You will be 100% sure that the map will run properly in fps. And if a map works on that situation it will work on any public. And you will be able to find problem bottleneck areas much easier as they will be overused. The map didnt show any issues in the test which does give a good sign.
We do test any map in that situation because thats the worst possible situation. If it passes that we can be sure it will also pass 13 vs 13 IR and 16 vs 16 reduced respawns (which ukcs normaly has on the servers).
Dont throw away any feedback from 16 vs 16 IR... Feedback is usefull even if its just a minor part. If you purely focus on 5 vs 5 normal respawn feedback your map will suffer in public servers for sure. People that play in publics will not like long respawns and often are the type that massively go engineer or demoman just to camp the last point. This is exactly what hoodoo suffers allmost any game i see.
Im not saying this type of feedback should change your map. but at least this feedback does tell if your map is suitable for publics even in the worst case. And this test did say it was suitable. Thats ALL you need to know unless there are some minor parts you want to focus on for publics.
- Status