Robin did respond, in the post you thanked.
TF2M Annual Major Contest # 3
- Thread starter Armadillo of Doom
- Start date
Robin did respond, in the post you thanked.
Warchamp7
L2: Junior Member
- Apr 4, 2009
- 73
- 16
Yes, he said "We'll see what we can do" back on the 10th.
I was saying remind them and see if anything is happening.
Theres been a little thing brought to my attention, right from the start ID was wrongly calling it push-CTF. which is wrong and not what he was instructed to say. 
And since he used it in the very first contest post.. you 'orrible lot have started calling it that too.
So. from this moment forwards. stop calling it push-CTF and start calling it "CTF" nothing more, nothing less.
If you MUST use a prefix description use "A/D CTF" or "Invade CTF" but a proper sentence based description is preferable since that avoids a single word getting stuck onto it by habit.
And since he used it in the very first contest post.. you 'orrible lot have started calling it that too.
So. from this moment forwards. stop calling it push-CTF and start calling it "CTF" nothing more, nothing less.
If you MUST use a prefix description use "A/D CTF" or "Invade CTF" but a proper sentence based description is preferable since that avoids a single word getting stuck onto it by habit.
bittman
L1: Registered
- Dec 7, 2008
- 32
- 2
Wouldn't Deliver the Flag (dtf) be a better description? Short, sweet, understandable...Anyway:
Started working on this yesterday, comp started whilst I was holidaying in Europe, so I'm probably behind the 8-ball. Gonna make a 3 point single stage of the new ctf. Won't be as large as 90% of the submissions probably, but I'll make with ingenuity in mind rather than just trying to make it work.
Ingenuity and glass...lots of glass...
Started working on this yesterday, comp started whilst I was holidaying in Europe, so I'm probably behind the 8-ball. Gonna make a 3 point single stage of the new ctf. Won't be as large as 90% of the submissions probably, but I'll make with ingenuity in mind rather than just trying to make it work.
Ingenuity and glass...lots of glass...
uma plata
L6: Sharp Member
- Jan 20, 2009
- 294
- 93
I believe I just counted 30+ contest entries for this, amazing
While I'm not participating, I will certainly be enjoying the outcome. Very exciting to see how all these maps are coming together
I hope everyone will follow through on their projects! Good luck to all
While I'm not participating, I will certainly be enjoying the outcome. Very exciting to see how all these maps are coming together
I hope everyone will follow through on their projects! Good luck to all
- Nov 25, 2008
- 782
- 849
I agree with ABBAttoir, I can't wait to see how most of these turn out. I am not participating myself as I am caught up in a side payload project, but I will def. be around to put the smackdown on some of these and spit out some harsh and maybe some not so harsh notes on what I like and didn't like about what they came up with.
The question is, how many of these contest entries will make it to the end? I'd wager roughly half.
Acegikmo
aa
- Jan 31, 2008
- 555
- 1,482
Am I allowed to make a special version of cp_glacier into an A/D ctf map and submit it for the contest?
It's within the rule's limitations:
It's within the rule's limitations:
- CTF (ctf_): Number of flags/caps per stage must be at least 2, and at most 4. The total number of flags/caps (across all stages) must be at least 3, and at most 8.
- CTF must also use the established team setup; Blu attacking and Red defending.
- Collaborations are not allowed. Aside from the fact that splitting prizes would be a nightmare, it also presents a significant disadvantage for everyone who works alone.
- Must be able to spawn 32 players (16 per team spawnroom)
Clearly not one of my better decisions, lol. If your map was originally designed for PLR or CTF, that's fine. But simply reconstituting an existing work really isn't fair to everybody else.
Last edited:
Icarus
aa
- Sep 10, 2008
- 2,245
- 1,210
I find it ridiculous that it's being accepted on a technicality.
Glacier had like a half-year head start. The contest should be who can make the best map from scratch.
How can you expect us to compete against a map that has already matured? This really makes the competition uneven.
Glacier had like a half-year head start. The contest should be who can make the best map from scratch.
How can you expect us to compete against a map that has already matured? This really makes the competition uneven.
Last edited:
- Nov 25, 2008
- 782
- 849
Just cause someone has a head start on something doesn't define it and make it better. It's the person that is making it(no offense). But there are some people who could work on a map for 6 months and it not be as good as someone who worked on a map for maybe 2 months.
I agree with Icarus, it's pretty unfair. I mean, I'm starting school in a few weeks and I'm going to have a tough time finishing HAARP. When time is the biggest obstacle, granting someone a head start like that totally sucks.
Plus take this scenario: what if hypothetically glacier's layout turns out to be perfect for A/D ctf? That would mean it would take Ace about 1 hour to add the necessary entity setup, and boom he's competing with people who've spent weeks working.
Nothing against Ace of course. It's cool that he wants to do that with glacier, but it's pretty unfair for it to be entered in the contest.
Oh really? OK, I think I should get an extra six months time for my entry, because I think I work 6 months slower than everyone else. That's fair, right?
Plus take this scenario: what if hypothetically glacier's layout turns out to be perfect for A/D ctf? That would mean it would take Ace about 1 hour to add the necessary entity setup, and boom he's competing with people who've spent weeks working.
Nothing against Ace of course. It's cool that he wants to do that with glacier, but it's pretty unfair for it to be entered in the contest.
Oh really? OK, I think I should get an extra six months time for my entry, because I think I work 6 months slower than everyone else. That's fair, right?
Last edited:
Acegikmo
aa
- Jan 31, 2008
- 555
- 1,482
It's just that I really want to join this contest, especially since Valve has dedicated time to support the gamemode and all. It's way too late for me to start a new map and so I thought that maybe I could remake glacier to be able to join the contest. I can see why you all think it's unfair though, so if you guys don't want me to do it I won't.
i´m fine with maps that have been started 2-3 weeks before the contest launched.
it would be hypocritical if i said otherwise, since i had such a headstart with cashworks and started working on the custom content for premuda 2weeks before the contest was announced.
so max. 3 weeks headstart is fine, dunno when glacier was started, but when i see the first post on cp_glacier being at the 15th of May, the layout was pretty much done and some detailing has been started
tbh, you could have slowed down or paused glacier and handled it as a sideproject for the time of the contest and started a new map :/
it would be hypocritical if i said otherwise, since i had such a headstart with cashworks and started working on the custom content for premuda 2weeks before the contest was announced.
so max. 3 weeks headstart is fine, dunno when glacier was started, but when i see the first post on cp_glacier being at the 15th of May, the layout was pretty much done and some detailing has been started
tbh, you could have slowed down or paused glacier and handled it as a sideproject for the time of the contest and started a new map :/
I apologize for this guys. I really wasn't thinking too straight, and I agree that simply reworking an old map presents a rather significant advantage. Clearly not one of my better decisions, lol. If your map was originally designed for PLR or CTF, that's fine. But simply reconstituting an existing work really isn't fair to everybody else. I will update the rules after Gameday to reflect this.
