The usual midfild

[o_addicted to morphine]

Nezumi, do you just have the func push go horizontal into the ramp?

[mervaka]

doesnt func_push have a pitch/yaw/roll? if not, it needs it!

[o_alligator]

Originally Posted by Nezumi

You can make launchers that work pretty well in source. You just need the launcher to be a ramp.

Stuff like these can send you all the way across the map at a good altitude.

just like haste, very very fun map (props Stayne ).

[o_nezumi]

In the original l337sk337 the launchers were indeed just pushes that pushed horizontally. In this version there's a second overlaping push that pushes you down into the launcher. This makes you go further. Actually, the speed of the horizontal push is less so the two pushes together make you go about as far as in the original. Doing it this way makes it so you don't have to land directly in a launcher from a height to go furthest, and you can't really get 'bad' launches like you could in the CS version. The downward push is only in the back of the launcher, so if you jump in the middle you won't go very far. This way is much more predictable and you can choose to make a less powerful jump.


Also you can't get stuck in the launchers like you could in CS :D

[o_addicted to morphine]

Do you guys think it would be possible to make a traditional diagonal jump pad by having a few func_pushes next to each other, all pointing up, that would push the player up and then against a diagonal clip brush to move them diagonally in the correct direction?

[Circuitous]

I would be thoroughly amused by a map that had a pathway leading to a pit, at the bottom of which was a series of powerful vents, rigged to func_pushes that were just enough to counter-act gravity, causing you to hover over it - then you could airstrafe and pick up speed over it and zip to the other side.

Thoroughly amused.

[o_darthgreg]

Designing a midfield that doesn't have the potential for round-stopping offense vs. offense encounters, while allowing for courtyard flag holds, is a more interesting challenge, in my mind. In modern TFC matchplay the midfield is either ignored - simply run through or conced over - or a place for each team's offense to fight each other rather than trying for the flag.

[o_imbrifer]

Do you guys think it would be possible to make a traditional diagonal jump pad by having a few func_pushes next to each other, all pointing up, that would push the player up and then against a diagonal clip brush to move them diagonally in the correct direction?

It seems theoretically possible. Give it a shot, I'd be interested in how it turned out. You'd probably have to make it a pretty powerful push, though..

[o_addicted to morphine]

I'd give it a shot, but I'm posting from China at the moment, and I'm sans Hammer. I won't be home for another month.

I'll try it out when I get home, but you're welcome to try it yourself in the meantime.

[o_own3r]

Originally Posted by Imbrifer

It seems theoretically possible. Give it a shot, I'd be interested in how it turned out. You'd probably have to make it a pretty powerful push, though..

Just had a thought, can someone try this

[o_bokko]

Originally Posted by Caesium

Work will continue on aardvark again soon btw, though tbh there's not much to be done now until FF is released with all the textures and bits and bobs.

ohic, adding cowe it sune?

[o_ian.de]

midfields are consistently boring because all they are is a passageway to the enemy base, nothing more. Theres no camping, fighting, defending or anything going on in the yard. People take the fastest possible route to the enemy base. A long, drawn out, confusing yard isn't fun for anyone.

I'm talking from a competitive play stand-point. Nothing pisses me off more than a yard that is way too large or long. I just want to get back into the action.

Focusing fighting into the yard is also not a good idea because you then get HW spam, snipers, pointless chaos.

Concrete boxes are retarded, I'll agree, but no one who plays offense (competitively) likes a long drawn out yard. It can make the difference between 100 runs in a match or 60-70.

[o_own3r]

Originally Posted by ian.de

midfields are consistently boring because all they are is a passageway to the enemy base, nothing more. Theres no camping, fighting, defending or anything going on in the yard. People take the fastest possible route to the enemy base. A long, drawn out, confusing yard isn't fun for anyone.

I'm talking from a competitive play stand-point. Nothing pisses me off more than a yard that is way too large or long. I just want to get back into the action.

Focusing fighting into the yard is also not a good idea because you then get HW spam, snipers, pointless chaos.

Concrete boxes are retarded, I'll agree, but no one who plays offense (competitively) likes a long drawn out yard. It can make the difference between 100 runs in a match or 60-70.

If there were alternative routes does that not add more tactics and therefore more interest to an otherwise boring a repetitive action of running backwards and forwards. That much I am sure does not change no matter why you are doing it. A plain yard sucks, that much we can all agree. No matter what your doing in it there's no variety and there's no interest. So we need to design more varied and interesting mid fields!

[o_stino]

how do you call the midfield of badlands then, its not just passing trough, there are 2 levels, 3 fields, most action is taking place in 2 of those midfields in front of the bases

Originally Posted by Imbrifer

Question for fellow mappers:
Would it be too hard on someone's system to have no VIS barriers in the map?

For example, I'm considering making an open forest map with assorted wreckage and towers, and then two bases that are concrete pits in the ground. Would peoples' videocards asplode if there were 20 people on this map?

wait for ep2 and judge for yourself, i suppose everything is in the hands of LOD instaid of VIS.

[o_bumgravy]

It would be doable if you were sensible with the layout, if you could hint brush over the tops of your base pits so they cant be seen from your outside area, you could desgin an outside area that is fairly big. Ive found with my map that fps can still be kept very high with large areas, but as you say I dont know what it will be like with a high server load.

[mervaka]

what about a very minimal base design with no definite boundaries? a bit like the UT CTF maps, especially the face maps. two towers would rock. i might try starting a map like that next summer

[o_own3r]

Originally Posted by Mervaka

what about a very minimal base design with no definite boundaries? a bit like the UT CTF maps, especially the face maps. two towers would rock. i might try starting a map like that next summer

This would only work when the players cant conc across the map get the flag and conc back like they could in an open field. This style is only possible when either concs are disabled (bad) or there are sufficient geographical features to stop concing across it.

[mervaka]

of course. UT is very different in that respect, so obstacles would be needed. could even be a giant indoor map!