Map Discussions

[Merowingg]

It is all clear, what I request, is an obligatory box, which will state how the map was made. Not empty box that will allow a player say "Have fun Gentlemen " but an obligatory one.

I think Rman have given us very nice example how it could look like.

Iluvalar second my/our point/s here (I dare to simplify your opinion Ilu to one sentence )

vexed as you can see there are some people in this 1% mentioned before.

I do hope it will be implemented as it is perfec timing now I assume. Also I fear the discusion will fail with no action.

Speaking of old Pumpkin maps, whaere I can take from those?

Duda your post seem for me as a fair trial to tell us that using height maps generators is not extremely simple. In some points it is in other not. Although I will say in most cases it is in some way shorted. I just want obligatory information.

The statment, what for if only 1% will care is inappropriate here, it is like with a sort of medicine, that one percentage dies, because too much of something was added. And the company decides "oh well only one percentage dies, go on!"

Rman

Merro

Am I Spanish now

[Rman Virgil]

.

Oops. Sorry Mero. I was typing fast and I am part Spanish and when we get to talking the tempo gets to be very fast.... a lot faster than normal English. Sometimes I trip myself moving between the different worlds of English, Spanish and Native American, especially if I don't make for Zen transitions..
.

[vexed]

Um... Perhaps a picture (or two) is worth a thousand words?

Then you see the one you want, and get


Erm, well, below the Description box, is where you see what they typed, and also the link back to the forums, where the author of said addon can do whatever they want.
If they want to say how they made it, fine.
If not, and they only want feedback, fine.

It is up to them.

Make sense ?

BTW, the above shots are not final!

[Merowingg]

I have to say it looks really good.

But vexed, you are saying they will type if they want.. it was mentioned before, most of them will not, as they simply will not have the knowlenge, willingness, or they will see no reason.. we all have seen the description in Addons yes?

I do think it should be an obligatory option, and their choice will appear as the rest, in this nice information field.

It is for the sake of the information..

Rman, it is all ok, it made me laugh

[zydonk]

There are real constraints on WZ maps, regardless of post-Pumpkin developments (for this, compare a WZ sk map with one from the Earth 2150 franchise, where there are bridges and navies). Pumpkin's Pit and Great Rift exemplify the radial structure of the basic maps, with or without the central playground. Rolling Hills is also a radial type map, but here the centre has been designed as a series of plateaus and hills which break up the battlefield into a series of focal points. A map like Bananas tries to break this pattern by folding the bases into a series of loops, with no clearly defined battle area. Whether this kind of map works is probably down to the taste of the player.

A hm that does not conform to the basic pattern will not work. It will be too unbalanced, complicated or just plain uninteresting. As a matter if fact, I have never used a hm in designing a map. It is extremely difficult to set out the basic plan otherwise, I agree, but I think an hm would be too confining. One can mold the basic contours in two ways, either by raising terrain to form the actual contours you need, or by raising broad plateaux in various parts of the map and gouging out the lower levels (in Unreal style). You will usually use a mixture of these methods, with the latter technique producing the final detail, for example.

The idea of specifying a source for an hm is absurd. Will copyright permission need be obtained if one uses an existing map or pattern?

[Vicky]

[attachment=1]wz2100-20120522_084127-Marna_Pro-T1.JPG[/attachment][attachment=1]wz2100-20120522_084127-Marna_Pro-T1.JPG[/attachment]I dont care how others makes there maps .

I care about how the map is playing .

I care about gameplay and different tactics that works at the same map so its a dynamic map in use .

I care about maps where you can use vtols/transports instead off delete all vtols from this game .

I care about al kind of players . I care about all feedback because then i can make a nice map for most players no matter new players or pro players .

I am not a good player but i love to make a map that players like to play at . I make my maps from scratch and dont use extern programs or images to make a good looking map . Al made with Flame basic tools .Click by click .

And offcourse , after a map i made is working good i can make hills or what ever on that map to make it nicer looking but thats the last part i am care about .

Have a nice day all :)

[duda]

everything has advantages and disadvantages
this is the principle of our dual view point of our world
including mapmaking workflows or different terrains
as well as players favourite maps or type of playing

[Rman Virgil]

everything has advantages and disadvantages
this is the principle of our dual view point of our world
including mapmaking workflows or different terrains
as well as players favourite maps or type of playing

Yup. Or as the French put it:

Vive la différence.!

.

[Merowingg]

I make my maps from scratch and dont use extern programs or images to make a good looking map . Al made with Flame basic tools .Click by click .

A soulmate mapmaker I sense

The idea of specifying a source for an hm is absurd.

I do not agree, the more information the better..

Information has always advantages, and I seek for it if a mapmaker not given what to say in basic terms, they will almost always reduce it to minimum.

A very good example is me, and NoQ (don't be scared, I am talking about some descriptions to your maps) How many players make statements where from its maps names comes from, or make a special story or shall I say plot, to involve them in the particular maps type? How many describe them step by step. Yes many give the most necessary details, but yet not always.. How many type what they wanted to achieve by it?

To sum up, shall I draw back from this discussion being informed I am in a lost position?

[aubergine]

Regarding how a map is made, personally I don't care. I like variety in maps and for me the minimap picture is where I look first to see if a map is going to be very different to anything I've played before.

What about having 3 separate ratings:

* Skirmish rating - how much fun is the map to play against AI opponents
* MP rating - how much fun is the map to play against human opponents
* Eye Candy rating - how aesthetically pleasing is the map

To me this would seem to cater to different player styles quite well:

A lot of people I've shown Warzone to say they were put off by the basic looking maps (they were referring to the various NTW style maps) - so having some eye candy would be a good way to make them take a second look at Warzone.

Then, there's lots of people who mostly play Skirmish mode - they want a nice looking map that Nullbot works well on, ideally with Scavenger support. BTW, it would be great to be able to filter to maps that have scavengers - using Ultimate Scavenger Mod makes such maps huge fun for us skirmish players!

Finally, there's the more hardcore mutliplayer gamers - I don't really play MP so I can't really speak for this group, but I imagine they have a very different paradigm about what makes a good map to someone that only ever plays skirmish.

There can then be 3 leaderboards of maps Top 10 Skirmish Maps, Top 10 Multiplayer Maps, Top 10 Eye Candy maps. The top rated map in each section can be shown on the addons home page, or even the main website home page. Also shown could be a few of the most recently added maps.

[duda]

What about having 3 separate ratings:

* Skirmish rating - how much fun is the map to play against AI opponents
* MP rating - how much fun is the map to play against human opponents
* Eye Candy rating - how aesthetically pleasing is the map

great idea
maybe the solution

[Giani]

* Eye Candy rating - how aesthetically pleasing is the map

That rating is like for how good the terrain of the map is, and stuff like that?

[vexed]

But vexed, you are saying they will type if they want.. it was mentioned before, most of them will not, as they simply will not have the knowlenge, willingness, or they will see no reason.. we all have seen the description in Addons yes?

I do think it should be an obligatory option, and their choice will appear as the rest, in this nice information field.

It is for the sake of the information..

This doesn't make sense, you can't force anyone to divulge the information that you are looking for.
Like I said, they post a link to a thread dedicated to the addon in question.
Whatever they want to discuss in that thread is their own business, and I am not about to require people to talk about things they may not wish to share.

What about having 3 separate ratings:
* Skirmish rating - how much fun is the map to play against AI opponents
* MP rating - how much fun is the map to play against human opponents
* Eye Candy rating - how aesthetically pleasing is the map
[snip]

That will make voting / rating way more complex, and how would you weight the categories anyway ?

There can then be 3 leaderboards of maps Top 10 Skirmish Maps, Top 10 Multiplayer Maps, Top 10 Eye Candy maps. The top rated map in each section can be shown on the addons home page, or even the main website home page. Also shown could be a few of the most recently added maps.

That isn't going to be on the addon page, stats will have their own page.

[Rman Virgil]

.

I think a map maker can state upfront that they designed their map to be played predominantly -

1.) humans vs. humans

2.) humans vs. bots

and for the maps to be categorized and judged on those terms.

This would actually reflect the real player audience division that has always existed and it would also liberate map makers from feeling compelled to make fundamental design compromises in an attempt to serve both audiences in one map.

This is really nothing new. We've not only spoken to this on many occassions since '99 but also encouraged map creation along these lines in previous community web site incarnations and then subsequently distributed those maps clearly acknowledging these very catagorical distinctions. It served both audiences well in a straightforward manner. DL statistics for any given map or mod file at that time averaged 30,000 + a month.

.

[Merowingg]

It is 06:06 a.m. here

I withdraw from the asking, I may be, but not necessarily, discussing now

Thank you for all Gentlemen

I cannot wait the new Addon page