Func_Msgboard: Dm 4on4 Maps

News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Register | Log in

|  | Dm 4on4 Maps

Posted by bambuz [130.233.220.23] on 2005/01/18 12:35:32

Hi, I've been playing many of these excellent single player maps, and wondering that there might be another audience for these too: namely the quakeworld community playing deathmatch. Some of you might think that deathmatch mapping is hard to get right or that the maps are boring to do, but let me change your mind. I'll first tell you (or speculate) why so few custom dm maps are played in the qw community.
The nqr ( http://www.nqr.nu ) season seven, the pinnacle of deathmatch, namely 4on4, is winding to an end with just the finals left. It has been played with the map pool of dm2, dm3, e1m2, cmt3 and cmt4.
There's been lots of talk (and whine) about the maps, and many clans disapprove the cmt maps, stating various real problems about them. (But I can believe it can be said there is some conservativity there too :) ) Everybody is admitting that "the big three" (dm2, dm3, e1m2) will always be in the nqr map pool.
The community is talking
(http://www.quakeworld.nu ) now about next season's maps and also a custom map tournament.
The maps (besides the big three) that are considered for 4 on 4 league play are mainly:
1) id episode maps
2) slightly modified id episode maps (called exmx_tdm)
3) the cmt maps (http://www.nqr.nu/cmt/season1/cmt...
4) A few other custom maps, namely Schloss Adler I think.
Now, doesn't this seem to you a very narrow view?! Something must be wrong in the majority of the old custom dm maps made by mappers all around the world, so that they aren't even considered here!!
I can tell you some things, although i'm just a lowly low division 5 player with no tactics skill whatsoever.
Older dm maps are bad for 4on4 because:
1) too small
2) cramped (bunnyhop wasn't invented back then)
Newer maps suck because:
1) Too open: they're in essence trying to be something like Q3! >:(
All atriums and platforms and smooth jumping grounds, I mean come on we've already got a million of these maps and they are never played! Don't do another atrium-multistoreyplatform verticality map (with nice bright blue lines at the platform sides). Everybodys just running and hopping like mad and there's a million weapons around, and everything's connected.
2) Too gimmicky. Old quake style is safe and often good. :)
-
Now, there are many _duel_ or _2on2_ maps that are good although some points from above are true, for example, I think dm4 was the first "atrium-platform" map, aerowalk is a custom good example of fast gameplay, and skull is a very modern gimmicky-kinda map that works well. But all this modernism just seems to suck in 4on4.
-
Now, considering all the bad that I have said, you might be surprised of the next, good info:
I think many of the single player maps you guys have made might work well in dm!
They're not too open and many are of the right size. They also have a lot of pretty faithful quake-style architechture. (i.e. right size of everything, tasteful textures and just a feeling of ease.) There's also some very good, cool and innovative architechture coupled with all that stuff.
In short, maps that look like quake.
Put dm entities in your maps (ask advice* or look a little from the id/cmt dm maps), or you might even do a specific dm map, but just ... keep the good style! I'm sure people will get interested in them.
*dm 4on4: one rl at least, then more shaft/rl, some other weapons, no super-camping-positions with too much armor, health and rockets close by, adequate levels of ammo (not too much cells) a quad, and some maps have a pentagram too. Load up dm2 and admire. :)

Err
#1 posted by DaZ [80.43.69.246] on 2005/01/18 12:40:50
All atriums and platforms and smooth jumping grounds, I mean come on we've already got a million of these maps and they are never played! Don't do another atrium-multistoreyplatform verticality map (with nice bright blue lines at the platform sides). Everybodys just running and hopping like mad and there's a million weapons around, and everything's connected.
so you want a map full of boring corridors? sounds like fun!!!!! :D
Seriously, I dont think the mapping community and the hardcore qw players will ever actually agree on things ever. And there are already plenty of awesome custom maps out there which as you say never get played but are perfectly good.
qw players are way to fussy basicly :D
To DaZ
#2 posted by bambuz [130.233.220.23] on 2005/01/18 12:54:22
You're right, fussy they are.
But take a look at the cmt maps - they're not that modernistic platformary hell and not just long boring corridors either - that's why they even can be at least _considered_ for 4on4 competitive play. :)
Perhaps.
#3 posted by Shambler [82.38.194.13] on 2005/01/18 13:16:04
A more general Q1 DM custom map thread would have been more appropriate.
4on4
#4 posted by bambuz [130.233.220.23] on 2005/01/18 13:56:35
nah, I wanted special attention on this problem of 4on4, since it is the gravest. There are quite many good duel-maps already.
You might be interested in these tidbits on how the cmt maps were done:
http://www.challenge-smackdown.com...
These are the maps:
http://www.nqr.nu/cmt/season1/cmtm...
cmt1 and cmt5 have been updated a bit since:
http://www.nqr.nu/cmt/season1/inde...
4on4 Maps
#5 posted by Jago [81.197.201.94] on 2005/01/18 14:21:02
Ahh, the infamous 4on4 TDM maps issue...
I guess I'll be in the minority here when I'll say I have to agree with bambuz there are virtually NO good custom Q1 maps suitable for competitive 4on4 TDM play except for Schloss Adler (personally I despise the CMT maps).
I think the problem is that it's very hard for a mapper to create a map with good 4on4 gameplay that would also have the good looks every mapper wants to have in his map (damn the map word). The problem is exactly what DAZ points out.
There are a couple of maps containing "long boring corridors" that actually have very decent gameplay (see CMT maps) but look utter shit. Obviously, Schloss Adler is not completely without issues either.
Eh!
#6 posted by Vondur [81.195.0.1] on 2005/01/18 14:33:08
kikdm6 should do btw
Need Some Resources For DM Maps....
#7 posted by ProdigyXL [216.111.202.25] on 2005/01/18 14:41:38
Looking to find some maps for Team DM or just DM period, then try the following links. It appears that you and your community have really missed plenty of custom maps that have been floating around for years. Not many people create maps specifically for TDM because the demand for Q1 maps in the first place is trash besides our two communities, and seconadly because those who do play Quake typically don't screw around trying to setup team battles and what not.
Here are the links. Mind you these are incredibly dated, but still have a bunch of maps you might be interested in...
Prominence
http://www.planetquake.com/peek/
Ramshackle
http://www.planetquake.com/ramshac...
Gonzo's Graveyard
http://www.planetquake.com/gonzo/
Quakeworld Map Archive
http://maps.quakeworld.nu/?a=maps&...
Inspection
http://www.planetquake.com/inspect...
Those five should be a good overall place to start. All but QMA has been shut down but they can give you some place to start if you want to open yourself up to our style custom maps.
One Of The Problems
#8 posted by R.P.G. [24.136.230.101] on 2005/01/18 15:35:59
One of the problems is you can never get enough players together to test the map unless you're in a serious 4on4 clan. And you have NO IDEA how hard it is to try to please 8 people all at once. :( (See RPGDM1 testing for an example.)
Meh
#9 posted by NotoriousRay [69.250.90.110] on 2005/01/18 17:17:04
Something must be wrong in the majority of the old custom dm maps made by mappers all around the world, so that they aren't even considered here!!
More like clan players not wanting to brush up on tactics on maps that aren't the big three. What about ukpak? What about plpak? Wouldn't it be easier to adapt your playing to existing maps then try to find someone to create maps that fit your playing? Good luck...
Oh, and what RPG said.
I'll Do It
#10 posted by Blitz [66.31.114.159] on 2005/01/18 20:48:15
If you pay me
Eheh Blitz :)
#11 posted by Trinca [213.58.100.197] on 2005/01/20 12:04:40
me votes Vondur!!!
kikdm6 is a fu**ing great map!!! try with frogbot
http://trinca.no.sapo.pt/ways/map_...
#12 posted by Scampie [66.191.120.173] on 2005/01/20 13:51:30
FUCK COCK SUCK CUNT BLOODY WANKER SHIT PISS ASSHOLE MOTHERFUCKING TWAT SAILBOAT
You can swear here.
Scampie
#13 posted by R.P.G. [24.136.230.101] on 2005/01/20 14:06:38
No bloody swearing!
I Dont Like
#14 posted by pope [207.149.188.1] on 2005/01/20 19:29:21
the blasphemous use of bad language.
Terra6 Dm Beta
#15 posted by bambuz [130.233.220.23] on 2005/01/25 05:40:00
I made a dm version of czg's excellent terra6. There's a beta here:
http://www.quakeworld.nu/forum/vie...
And while we're at it, is there some patent fix to stop entities (func_walls) from disappearing from view in sw? At certain places and angles this happened. I tried conservativizing the design and adding vis blockers and whatnot and it helped a bit but it still happened... is it just that most clients (original, fuh) have ridiculously low entity limits? Or what is it?
I then turned those u-walkway bars to non-entities and it works perfectly in sw now too. The vising didn't seem to mind that. (checked drawflat)
There's at least one texture misalignment spotted after compile that will be fixed in the final.
Is it too dark? Do you hit those light posts? Is it bad that it's different with dmm3 and dmm1? (dmm3: 1on1/2on2 settings where weapons stay when picked up - so they don't trigger anything. dmm1: 4on4 setting where weapons spawn after a delay.)
Yeah, it really is hard to get to test on 4on4.
Comments please.
I'm Getting The Impression
#16 posted by . [68.78.217.226] on 2005/01/25 19:16:27
You want less random DM maps and something with a plausible setting, like a particular building or area that also serves a good DM layout.
To Phait
#17 posted by bambuz [130.233.220.23] on 2005/01/26 05:47:54
Kinda, yes.
Well, just load up that kikdm6, run around. And then load up dm2, run around. What do you think? Really, do it guys and girls. :)
I've been trying to say it with a lot of words above. :/
Atmospheric, kinda pretty too, and interesting, functional usable architechture (i.e. prettiness isn't just some fancy brushes with clips on that you can't interact with them, although prettiness can also partly be just decorations). I mean prettines you can run on top of, hide behind and under or shoot through. Or all of them. Just use.
And not too bright lighting.
In dm2's case, one can see that it doesn't hurt if there's some lava, a few buttons that do something (crush a player at ya, or open doors or lava walkways or a trap). And bars through which to shoot the rocket (or hit the bars, just check near water) or a few narrow places where you can harass the quad-rl-guy (like below quad). A few moving platforms. The challenge of rj'ing from bigroom to the moving platform or risking a trickjump to get the gl & mega from the other side when the platform is coming your way. Or shooting people while on the platform.
Maps don't have to be numb and dumb and "easy-going" with just pretty ornaments.
Many of your (meaning this community) singleplayer maps are great and have functional and interesting architechture, it's just mind-boggling why the dm maps mainly are so much different when they really needn't be.
If you happen to make dm-maps, make NOT like this:
http://nalicity.beyondunreal.com/m...
That's my feeling. :)
Now, I know that the dm community is ultraconservative and it certainly feels frustrating from a mapper's point of view (I know, even with just this little experience of this terradm) to try to get even _some_ reaction on a new map.
One can consider it like this:
You can make a good single player map that gets played by 1000 people once. Or you can make 1000 dm maps of which ONE gets played by 1000 people - but 1000 times. - same expectation value :)
Ok, ok, enough ranting. This is all just my personal opinion that I felt had to be said. I haven't checked all already-made dm maps and I still have many to look at when I have time. (Have to lessen this forum-writing and also mapmaking.)
I Hate To Sound Pretentious Here...
#18 posted by . [68.78.217.226] on 2005/01/26 06:23:30
but I probably will anyway.
When I work on a DM map I always like the idea of trying to make it in a setting with a little backstory, reason to why it's there. Most won't care about this, but it actually aids in the mapping process for me because then I have a general idea of what I'm trying to achieve thematically, instead of just trying something predominatly cool and failing.
Right now on PH8DM2 it seems I'm going in the right direction with the layout, and some suggested fixes I'm implementing. Along with this I have an assortment of subtle and noticeable little flourishes.
Anyways, at first it appeared to be a 4on4 or FFA sized map, but I'm making the layout tighter as advised. I guess what I'm saying is I think I see your point, bambuz - and perhaps this map will seem a tad different. I don't know.
Bambuz
#19 posted by Shambler [82.38.194.13] on 2005/01/26 07:21:58
You have some interesting thoughts on this, it's good to read even though I don't agree with some of it.
BTW, have you tried the UKPak maps??
Ukpak2 For World Domination
#20 posted by inertia [134.53.210.34] on 2005/01/30 02:22:29
nt

Post A Reply:

Name: |
Title: |
Body: |

Website copyright © 2002-2011 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.