New Map - Tulwar Canyon

New Map - Tulwar Canyon

All map release threads should be posted here

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Envy
Posts: 34
Joined: 05 Jul 2007, 01:09

New Map - Tulwar Canyon

Post by Envy »

http://spring.unknown-files.net/file/33 ... nyon_V1.3/

This map has 2 main entrances to the canyon floor on each side. There are also 2 entrances near the center that are only accessible by kbots. The map is also a bit on the porcy side, but I plan to change the map as I get suggestions. There are currently only geo's as features (4 on each side). I plan on adding some trees and rocks. Units also move significantly faster on this map to help make it so porcs can be bypassed more easily.

Version 1.2
-Rivers no longer crossable by ground
-Unit speed slightly reduced
-Start points fixed
-Metal moved slightly

Version 1.3
-Did lots of visual work. Ill do a larger visual update next week.

Works for 2v2 to 4v4, 5v5 is possible.

Image


Image

Vehicle
Image

Kbot
Image
Last edited by Envy on 07 Aug 2007, 02:37, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Post by Neddie »

I assume you have an all-purpose type map speeding play? To what factor does it speed the units up?

Many games on the engine do poorly with multipliers as marginal differences in speed suddenly become much greater, and in games like Gundam and E&E, the play is balanced for a smooth flow with a variety of speeds.
User avatar
Envy
Posts: 34
Joined: 05 Jul 2007, 01:09

Post by Envy »

neddiedrow wrote:I assume you have an all-purpose type map speeding play? To what factor does it speed the units up?

Many games on the engine do poorly with multipliers as marginal differences in speed suddenly become much greater, and in games like Gundam and E&E, the play is balanced for a smooth flow with a variety of speeds.
2x speed. Ill change it if I need to after I play a few games on it.
User avatar
Neddie
Community Lead
Posts: 9406
Joined: 10 Apr 2006, 05:05

Post by Neddie »

Yar, I suspect you'll need to moderate it somewhat, I would have tried 1.6 at the very outside.
User avatar
Envy
Posts: 34
Joined: 05 Jul 2007, 01:09

Post by Envy »

I just got finished with a game. I need to redo the center metal, deepen the rivers (units go over them), and I need to do the start points. 1.6 speed will be good, players like the unique play the speed gives.
User avatar
AF
AI Developer
Posts: 20687
Joined: 14 Sep 2004, 11:32

Post by AF »

speed multipliers are a HUUUGGEEE NO NO.

get rid fo them, they unbalance mods.
Saktoth
Zero-K Developer
Posts: 2665
Joined: 28 Nov 2006, 13:22

Post by Saktoth »

So does Speedball, Speedmetal, Greenfields, etc.

If you want your map to be one of those maps, that is a mod-in-a-map, keep it.

If you want it to be universally usable with the default playstyle of the mod, then remove it.

Personally i dont see much point making a porcy map then increasing the speed to make it less porcy...
User avatar
Envy
Posts: 34
Joined: 05 Jul 2007, 01:09

Post by Envy »

Wouldn't removing the speed just turn it another crossings? Spring needs more unique maps IMO. Is not every single map you see played aside from greenfields and sm, played the exact same way?

I say more people should experiment with new, unique maps. Spring has had the same style of play and maps since it came out.

People have said they liked the speed of it, because it was something new. As far as balance, it does not affect it. After all, does not each player have the exact same opportunities and speed. If you claim it speed to unbalance it way to much, does not every single map unbalance certain mods? 'Too much metal here, not good for this one, too little here not good for that one'.

Balance really is equal opportunity for land and resources for each team, not things like "ground will be more effective on this map then most; UNBALANCED!!!!".

The speed allows for more possible strategies, and requires more active attention. The speed stays for now until more testing, because people said that without the speed it would turn into a map with the same exact game play as every other map.
User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22309
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Post by smoth »

*edits*
how many times will I type this.

speed messes up mod balance. The units are meant to go a certain speed, if they move faster they close in on range faster. They can dodge bombs better. They can dodge some projectiles easier. units with higher speeds when bumped move away further. They do wierd things with pathing some times. You effectively shorten the map size. Distance becomes less of an issue.



We who make the content that run on your map have a design in mind. the units are at their speed for a reason.


Now, I think the layout is kinda neat but I still feel the texture needs a lot of work. Now, before someone says I am being too hard. I said the same thing to genblood back in the day and he has made massive strides since then.
User avatar
Envy
Posts: 34
Joined: 05 Jul 2007, 01:09

Post by Envy »

smoth wrote:*edits*
Now, I think the layout is kinda neat but I still feel the texture needs a lot of work. Now, before someone says I am being too hard. I said the same thing to genblood back in the day and he has made massive strides since then.
I just finished a lot of texture work. I still know I need to do quite a bit more, but I do not have the time nor the attention span right now.
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Post by Pxtl »

If you want units to cover the same distance in half the time, why not just make the map half as big, rather than use a speed multiplier? The problem is that players expect a mod to work a certain way, and speed multipliers screw that up.
User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22309
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Post by smoth »

much better. Now, can you make some more grass in the valley with some dirt paths from wear?
User avatar
Quanto042
Basically OTA Developer
Posts: 778
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 03:01

Post by Quanto042 »

Its definitely not the WORST map I've seen. And for a first texture, it's not "god awful" so you can be thankful for that. It does still need work, but i wouldn't be ashamed to be caught playing this map.
User avatar
hrmph
Posts: 1054
Joined: 12 May 2005, 20:08

Post by hrmph »

I've gotta agree with Quanto here. It is a decent looking map but it could use some work. The texture is okay; maybe a bit too grey. The canyon walls are too straight for my taste; a bit of variation could definitely make it more interesting. Also a bit more variation on the water pools in the middle would help.
User avatar
REVENGE
Posts: 2382
Joined: 24 Aug 2006, 06:13

Post by REVENGE »

The concept is just fail really. You keep people off your ramps until your bottom player ecos enough to make a brawler rush.
User avatar
MR.D
Posts: 1527
Joined: 06 Aug 2005, 13:15

Post by MR.D »

On larger maps, a speed increase is tolerable and keeps the game from being an air only war, or Hide at the far end and techrush, but for small/medium sized maps it really does just screw up the game.

I just got done with a game of this, and tbh it doesn't play horrible, but its porcy still, and there are some real problems with the height map, wierd edges, overly bumpy terrain, and some anomalies on the high sides, where the ground has a jagged lip but no texture to show there is a lowered area.

The texture and metal layout are decent enough, but the game I played it was just a porc standoff and techrush untill I air Transported waves of AK's to eat my enemy :D
Post Reply

Return to “Map Releases”