126

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Deleted a page of flame. If you guys want to do that, come do it in #teeworlds instead of spoiling a topic.

Not Luck, Just Magic.

127 (edited by Kintaro* 2013-02-20 18:52:09)

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Here an old survival map made by me.

I used the new Tilesets from Github for Teeworlds 0.7

http://i47.tinypic.com/dltgle.jpg

http://i47.tinypic.com/8yxnao.jpg

Here the downlaodlink : http://www.sendspace.com/file/yxximb

Vanilla FTW!
My Videos

128 (edited by Broken 2013-02-20 14:22:22)

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Hello, I would like to propose my two favorite CTF maps:



1. CTF Oasis

This is an old 0.5 ctf Zgokee found, author unknown, and I changed the pickups and sky color on it. The gameplay is just fantastic for me:

http://i48.tinypic.com/4ihops.jpg
http://www.mediafire.com/?mmi7xmvo7kadxho


2. Nilaya's CTF MoonDawn
I just love this map as well and it makes for a really fun wild game, flattish like oasis but with a more intricate bottom and open bases.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19925349/screenshot1.png
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19925349/ctf_moondawn.map
https://www.teeworlds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=9101

129

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Thank you for the proposals,I've already uploaded the maps on the public 0.7 server and I will check them later.
I'd also like to see some more feedback and critics about these maps smile

130

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

To ctf moondawn.. The Base looks strange... There is only One way to the flag.
the Tee respawner Are Too close at the flag... On the Top of the map u can Spam through the Whole map...
But the Design look good

Vanilla FTW!
My Videos

131

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Kintaro* wrote:

To ctf moondawn.. The Base looks strange... There is only One way to the flag.
the Tee respawner Are Too close at the flag... On the Top of the map u can Spam through the Whole map...
But the Design look good

Yep, but that's exactly how the map was intended as stated to me by the map maker. You should play a game on it, before criticizing it harshly. I have played some pretty nice games on it many times.

132 (edited by Variecs 2013-02-23 00:54:37)

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

ctf_oasis
Structure:
Quite simple. Still, i like the base, it looks unusual. There's bottom way, easy to defend, and top way, which defenders will probably stick to, as defending from there still allows to catch up on lower enemies. Mid looks also quite nice for me, but prebases are too straight and simple, i'd add something there, or even completely rework it.
Movement:
I really like the movements here. Still, the bottom way looks too straight and easy. You could probably make it harder. Platforms at middle, isle above flag and those vertical connections between two ways make good compilation. I would probably give a little less space at the top way, but that's not critical.
Pickups:
Those are horrible. Placing health so close to the flag isn't the best idea, as well as putting shotguns in those corners near the middle. On the contrary, some pickups seem to be too easy to reach, i'd place them better.
Graphics:
Nuff said, looks great, especially waterfall animation. But i'm not sure if it's teeish enough. That's not the question i can answer correctly.
ctf_moondawn
Structure:
Too simple. Flag is put wrong, it is too open to the spam while is leaving flagtaker in a horrible position. Unhookable tiles are used in quite strange way. I could accept that unhookable pit below as an alternative to death tiles, but putting grenade launcher there along with health denies this try.
Movement:
Also quite straight. Both top and bottom ways are very fast without any obstacles. Top of the map also lacks walls to hook, you could lower the ceiling. And definitely do something to those unhookable tiles.
Pickups:
Also put right on the ways, which together with straight movement creates devastating effect to the gameplay. And once again, grenade launcher at bottom.
Graphics:
Simple, but fine. Not the level of official maps tho.

As a conclusion, i wanna say, that ctf_moondawn doesn't seem as good candidate to addition to 0.7, at least now. ctf_oasis has more chances, even tho a lot of work should be done.

133 (edited by Broken 2013-02-21 01:19:41)

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Thanks for the detailed review Variecs. Yea I was thinking at least using these as a basis to make a ctf off of.

One thing Variecs, especially about Moondawn is the ctf was made to be different and although you can technically say that and that is bad placement etc., when you actually play it, it has a nice flow and makes sense.

Sure the base is hard to defend, and the spawns are close, but getting back is harder then you think. All the of the features, such as unhookable bottom, make more sense in gameplay. It's simply a movement punishment for getting nades/hiding out down there, etc.

The oasis pickups are 4 hearts 8 shields in base. I don't find that outrageous, and in gameplay it doesn't pay to camp in base at all.

134

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Broken wrote:

Thanks for the detailed review Variecs. Yea I was thinking at least using these as a basis to make a ctf off of.

One thing Variecs, especially about Moondawn is the ctf was made to be different and although you can technically say that and that is bad placement etc., when you actually play it, it has a nice flow and makes sense.

Sure the base is hard to defend, and the spawns are close, but getting back is harder then you think. All the of the features, such as unhookable bottom, make more sense in gameplay. It's simply a movement punishment for getting nades/hiding out down there, etc.

The oasis pickups are 4 hearts 8 shields in base. I don't find that outrageous, and in gameplay it doesn't pay to camp in base at all.

I'm afraid the gameplay will become too chaotic and straight on professional scene. It will be just running around from flag to flag randomly killing people on the way. But i didn't test it in a good match, so i'd say everything is possible, that's just first look.
Still grenade launcher opposes the idea of denying movement at the bot. Even tho the idea is good, it is not thoroughly followed and doesn't cause the effect meant to occur.

135

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

It is definitely chaotic, but honestly a nice break from how predictable and orderly a map like ctf3 is.

136

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

I would like to post my map for consideration.  I think at first glance people might think "this map is huge," but in reality the playable area is just about the same size as ctf_5.  The reason it may look bigger than ctf_5 is because the area in ctf_5 that is above and below the playable area is just blank space, while my map contains pits and spikes.  The amount of health/armor/weapons are basically all identical in terms of quantity on the map.

Now, I know a lot of people like smaller maps designed for things like 3v3, but in my experience most servers are hosting 16 players and the most played map seems to be ctf_5.  This is why I chose to design my map based on the specifications of that map.

Here is the link to the thread on my map where any feedback is encouraged:

https://www.teeworlds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=10119

Here is a screenshot:

http://i.imgur.com/SBeUCSn.jpg

Here is the download link: ctf_maims.map

137

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Lol people still getting their panties in a bunch over my maps. I don't even feel like defending them anymore. Just play and try to have fun, I know that's the hard part for some of you. Besides I can think of a dozen worse maps than mine including even, *gasp* some official maps. Moondawn is fast paced, fun, teeish, stylish, and many other words that end in ish. If that's not what teeworlds is about then I don't know what is.

138

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Nilaya wrote:

Lol people still getting their panties in a bunch over my maps. I don't even feel like defending them anymore. Just play and try to have fun, I know that's the hard part for some of you. Besides I can think of a dozen worse maps than mine including even, *gasp* some official maps. Moondawn is fast paced, fun, teeish, stylish, and many other words that end in ish. If that's not what teeworlds is about then I don't know what is.

Please, if you're not able to stand criticism, do not post your maps. Every map has disadvantages, and if you will react to any of those like that, you won't ever recieve constructive replies.
Of course, your map isn't worst. It is better than 80% of the maps created. But that's not enough to consider it as official. The level established by maps such as ctf2 and ctf3 is very high, competing them is hard and requires in-depth analysis of the game and a lot of testing. You can't call for a map to be included in the game just because it's fun. ctf2 is played for 5 years and is still fun. I bet your map will not be fun for that long, because it's not competitive and unbalanced.
I know, it's hard to accept disadvantages of your map, I feel the same, but they do exist, and you have to be objective to them. However, if you will, you may leave some really interesting details of your map like that unhookable floor and rework the rest.

139

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Variecs wrote:

Please, if you're not able to stand criticism, do not post your maps. Every map has disadvantages, and if you will react to any of those like that, you won't ever recieve constructive replies.

First of all, Nilaya is the most underrated mapper. I enjoy all maps made by Nil. If you were to look at the thread for moondawn, you would see that Nilaya stated the reasons for placing and doing parts of the map as they are. It was made to be different. Plus, Nilaya didn't even ask for the map to be on the 0.7 group. It was suggested by Broken because it is good, and i back it up. If someone suggests an old map, it has to be for a reason. I interpret your criticism as invalid.

https://www.teeworlds.com/forum/viewtop … 708#p94708

Variecs wrote:

Unhookable tiles are used in quite strange way. I could accept that unhookable pit below as an alternative to death tiles, but putting grenade launcher there along with health denies this try.

Variecs wrote:

leave some really interesting details of your map like that unhookable floor and rework the rest.

What? You contradict yourself. And what do you mean by rework the rest? Are you actually criticizing this map well, or simply putting out a random mess of things? Maybe if you actually played the map, you will understand the map better. How about we learn to not criticize maps until w play them? When i give my input on maps, i give my initial impression of it, then i play the map and give my advice again after giving the map some thought.

140 (edited by Variecs 2013-02-23 18:49:24)

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Stop please thinking that i don't know what am I talking about. I do like the idea of unhookable floor, but the way it was made is horrible. That's my point. At second, i told Nilaya that insulting about his map getting criticized is not the best way to prove anything. If it really wasn't his desire to post the map, he could ignore this feedback, especially if it was already discussed and proven wrong.
At third, i have some mapping and gameplay experience, and it is quite big. I realise i'm still not one of the best mappers, but i think i am capable of forming my own feedback without the need of complete game. Of course, i did say that i can't be sure and it's just my opinion, but it should have something in common with truth.
Please, do not react on my words like i'm completely disregarding the possibility that this map is good, The only thing i can say right now is that ctf_moondawn is MOST LIKELY bad IN MY OPINION. Nothing more. But i do play the map ingame, even tho i'm playing alone, you probably got me wrong.

141

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

yikes Whatever Variecs. Lol.

142 (edited by Theolol 2013-02-24 00:30:15)

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Got a (T)DM map, which may be taken in consideration:

https://www.teeworlds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=8273

// example Screenshot
http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/6756/screenshot2011080115104.png

I've already postet it a while ago but i think it's time to revive it in here tongue

143

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

You did a great job on it Theolol.  A hundred times better than dm7.

144

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

dm7 is personally my most-played and favorite map. It is NOT "a hundred times better".

Ex-King of Teeworlds

145

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Okay, I exaggerated. Ten times better.

146 (edited by XC220318 2013-03-02 00:28:11)

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

ctf_grasshopper by Alias

Gametype: CTF
Players: 3v3

Image

http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/4697/teeworlds.jpg

Download Link

http://www.solidfiles.com/d/d56a894dc8/

I know some maps are unfixable but I hope you guys are fixing flaws in potential maps and testing again or taking ideas from them rather than scrapping the map ideas altogether just because there are a few minor design choices.

147

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

I've played tons of games on Grasshopper. It's a pretty solid 2v2 ctf.

I think it would make more sense if the ctf number (ctf1-7) was how many players per team, in essence a 1-1 thru 7-7.

148

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Broken wrote:

I've played tons of games on Grasshopper. It's a pretty solid 2v2 ctf.

I think it would make more sense if the ctf number (ctf1-7) was how many players per team, in essence a 1-1 thru 7-7.

I completely agree about this but it's a bit too late now. If new names come up I'll never get used to them. What would we call ctf2? ctf45?

Ex-King of Teeworlds

149

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

Added ctf_grasshopper and ctf_guano to the server.

some news are coming up soon. wink

150

Re: A new "Map Working Group"

i would like to apply for the map group that you telling about ..if theres a open spot.
thank you love from:Dremy

If you want a perfect map for your own server you can PM me to make you one ^^

Please also try play nodes you may download it here!. And as always.Have a nice day