Community Mapping
Moderator: Moderators
XTA too. On most maps I can run t2 arm kbots and a few moho mexes easy with nothing but wind.I'm not sure i agree with this statement tbh, at least, not in XTA.
Ive been downloading maps at random, just because ive been sick of the same old maps- and most are unplayable. Bad econ with wind, metal, reclaim, or just a boring vechs-can-go-anywhere height map, at best broken up by a few straight-vertical hills.
I think the primary reason a lot of good maps dont get played is because they dont get hosted. I doubt many hosts check these forums or UF for new maps. In the sea of awful maps on UF, its hard to pick the diamonds in the rough, and easier to just play what other people host.
To the topic at hand though- where is my dog damn sea 1v1 map plox?
Saktoth wrote:XTA too. On most maps I can run t2 arm kbots and a few moho mexes easy with nothing but wind.I'm not sure i agree with this statement tbh, at least, not in XTA.
Ive been downloading maps at random, just because ive been sick of the same old maps- and most are unplayable. Bad econ with wind, metal, reclaim, or just a boring vechs-can-go-anywhere height map, at best broken up by a few straight-vertical hills.
I think the primary reason a lot of good maps dont get played is because they dont get hosted. I doubt many hosts check these forums or UF for new maps. In the sea of awful maps on UF, its hard to pick the diamonds in the rough, and easier to just play what other people host.
To the topic at hand though- where is my dog damn sea 1v1 map plox?
We need a DECENT map review site, with DECENT map reviewers!
Sands of war is a good 1v1 sea map
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
yeah, but it's not flashy nor easy to get to. (you have to rummage through a few links before finding it) and having it both accesable, and flashy looking would go a long way towards convincing new players to read it. TBH, TAMEC's way of handeling map reviews in tandem with map hosting was ideal. If cuppy would be willing to try and setup something similar to that, it would be great, i would also gladly volunteer to be a reviewer for such a site.neddiedrow wrote:The wiki still has our best reviews.
-
Warlord Zsinj
- Imperial Winter Developer
- Posts: 3742
- Joined: 24 Aug 2004, 08:59
TAMEC for TA had reviewers which were invariably bad at TA, and not competitive at all. The people who needed to be reviewing maps were generally too busy playing the game on already released maps, or the few 3rd party maps that managed to creep into the regular cycle.
A review process is good for weeding out crashy/crappy maps; but invariably it'll be staffed by people who have a bit more time on their hands to write lengthy reviews, and so you'll find the maps up the top are generally either very pretty, very simple, very porcy, but not necessarily a solid multiplayer map for higher levels of play.
Perhaps a good way would be for the lobby to highlight a 'map of the week' (or even 'map of the day'), which is linked to directly on the lobby; and everyone gets to vote on. If it gets over x/10, it gets put into the 'classic selection'. Maybe the maps in classic selection are then voted on to pick a few that are prepackaged with spring?
A review process is good for weeding out crashy/crappy maps; but invariably it'll be staffed by people who have a bit more time on their hands to write lengthy reviews, and so you'll find the maps up the top are generally either very pretty, very simple, very porcy, but not necessarily a solid multiplayer map for higher levels of play.
Perhaps a good way would be for the lobby to highlight a 'map of the week' (or even 'map of the day'), which is linked to directly on the lobby; and everyone gets to vote on. If it gets over x/10, it gets put into the 'classic selection'. Maybe the maps in classic selection are then voted on to pick a few that are prepackaged with spring?
Islands at war. As a 1v1? Its inappropriate. I can give you a very detailed critique if you like, but in brief- territory control is impossible, it is larger than comet catcher, there are few if any strategic locations to fight over, and the emptyness of most of the map makes meaningful coverage (especially with underwater mexes and expensive boats) impossible.in the spring release.
One could argue that this is because BA has poor sea balance, as on a lot of maps (Larger ones with expanses of sea especially) the dynamic just doesnt work. However on a small, well made map like Sands of War, 1v1 play is interesting, dynamic, and well balanced- perhaps even moreso than land, as it has many more viable strategies and starting factories.
Alright, you argue that the reviewers in Tamec had no skills, and plenty of time to write stuff. You are absolutely right. HOWEVER that is not a reason not to do things that way, let me explain.Warlord Zsinj wrote:TAMEC for TA had reviewers which were invariably bad at TA, and not competitive at all. The people who needed to be reviewing maps were generally too busy playing the game on already released maps, or the few 3rd party maps that managed to creep into the regular cycle.
A review process is good for weeding out crashy/crappy maps; but invariably it'll be staffed by people who have a bit more time on their hands to write lengthy reviews, and so you'll find the maps up the top are generally either very pretty, very simple, very porcy, but not necessarily a solid multiplayer map for higher levels of play.
Perhaps a good way would be for the lobby to highlight a 'map of the week' (or even 'map of the day'), which is linked to directly on the lobby; and everyone gets to vote on. If it gets over x/10, it gets put into the 'classic selection'. Maybe the maps in classic selection are then voted on to pick a few that are prepackaged with spring?
The skill level of the reviewer matters little because the most skilled players know what they like to play in the first place. However, the new guys have no idea what the good maps are. Now, I myself may not be very good, but its not because I don't attempt to work at the strategies that all the skilled players use, (my multitasking ability and micro just sucks
)Spring reviews could actually be based on different criteria than the Tamec ones, for instance, "Mechanics" there is no need for that in spring, because we are not working with tiles, we are working with grayscale bitmaps. We could replace "Mechanics" with "balance" as a reviewing criteria. There would also of course be "Graphics" and "Gameplay".
It would also help if people actually took the time to rate files on UF as well, and then maybe we could have a "sort by rating" function on the site. Ultimately there is a lot we could do that would certianly be better than leaving it the way it is.
Saktoth wrote: Islands at war. As a 1v1? Its inappropriate. I can give you a very detailed critique if you like,
Do give me a detailed critique, after I finish restoring my windows install I will be touching up the map and resubmiting it to the devs.
http://spring.clan-sy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=11209
What do you define as a strategic point? the size is too big?Saktoth wrote: but in brief- territory control is impossible, it is larger than comet catcher, there are few if any strategic locations to fight over
The emptyness was so you would have room for a sea battle, origonaly I made the map a horizontal strip. However, adding space on the sides of that strip gave it more of an open sea feel. Esp when we starting using large ship groups.Saktoth wrote: and the emptyness of most of the map makes meaningful coverage (especially with underwater mexes and expensive boats) impossible.
DO respond in that thread. I will try and see what I can do to improve the map.
No offense Take Neddie you are quite right about it (My best selling Maps are sm (which has no Metallmap) and Atuminoa which was predesigned by IvoryKing -(AWalldividesIt- which sells for the Boobs )- & Interoncontinental: The First Map i really massivly used advice from the boardsneddiedrow wrote:You missed my point - that is the most played of his I have ever seen, and I've spent an estimated 75,000 minutes in lobby.
That said, I must note that this was on the "fun" assertion tangent. None of his maps have reasonable resource placement - no offense, Picasso - and none of them are balanced.
the worst mess i made with lilith - now after some time going - i don`t remember what drove me into that madness of using copyied and pasted greyscale renderpictures for the Metallmap of that first work...
I sometimes wish, Players could do there own Metall & Geosplacing, i am pretty shure that some of my Maps could be saved by others, having better ideas of Metall placement. I have to say i don`t play much (having my time limited)... and that won`t change.. So how about a Feature allowing people to use there own Metallmaps.. with every Map..
Well, since this is an idea throwing session, here're some todos I think we should be focusing on:
Listed by importance...
Listed by importance...
- 1. FIX THE DAMNED LOBBY MAP MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.
Cool, now that that's over with...
2. Port over more of the old OTA classic maps over.
Why do this you say, instead of making original maps? Well, for one thing, you don't have innovate too much, you just have to implement. And another point for me is that many of the old maps were fun, and I don't know about you guys, but I miss them. [ie Caldera Rim, air only maps, aquatic maps, Gasbag Forest, Acid Foursome, etc.]
3. Continue SM3 map type development. In the overall scheme of Spring engine development, I think this should fit somewhere in between bugfixes / stability improvements and graphics engine development.
4. Create new, innovative, beautiful maps using a thoroughly stable and usable SM3 creation tool.
Yeah, that last one is like, long-long term I hope this will happen someday.