A throwover from the old thread, renamed. http://www.teamfortress.tv/32454/control-points-marsh#bottom
This is a 5CP map adopted from a TFMaps user known as Hanz. It was built Granary style, and I think it has a lot of potential.
TFMaps Thread http://tf2maps.net/downloads/marsh.1386/
TFMaps Download http://tf2maps.net/downloads/marsh.1386/download?version=2594
Pictures of A3 http://imgur.com/a/9BQKK
I'd love to hear some feedback on this map!
A throwover from the old thread, renamed. http://www.teamfortress.tv/32454/control-points-marsh#bottom
This is a 5CP map adopted from a TFMaps user known as Hanz. It was built Granary style, and I think it has a lot of potential.
TFMaps Thread http://tf2maps.net/downloads/marsh.1386/
TFMaps Download http://tf2maps.net/downloads/marsh.1386/download?version=2594
Pictures of A3 http://imgur.com/a/9BQKK
I'd love to hear some feedback on this map!
Where is the marsh??
edit: on a more serious note the last looks really easy to push into considering the defenders have almost no elevated positions around the point while offense get 2 high ground positions from upper lobby to push off of. It's also really strange that if you are defender there is a 1-way door into the left room with the health+ammo but the only way to get out is to either go forward right next to upper lobby or go all the way around and somehow not get spotted in lower lobby/2nd.
2nd also looks really easy for the attackers to hold since there's realistically only 2 ways to get in and both ways the attackers have high ground.
Mid looks fairly good though. It's not very wide but fairly long, promoting efficient soldier aggression similar to snakewater.
Overall the issue for me is that it looks like if you win mid it's a VERY uphill battle for the defenders.
Where is the marsh??
edit: on a more serious note the last looks really easy to push into considering the defenders have almost no elevated positions around the point while offense get 2 high ground positions from upper lobby to push off of. It's also really strange that if you are defender there is a 1-way door into the left room with the health+ammo but the only way to get out is to either go forward right next to upper lobby or go all the way around and somehow not get spotted in lower lobby/2nd.
2nd also looks really easy for the attackers to hold since there's realistically only 2 ways to get in and both ways the attackers have high ground.
Mid looks fairly good though. It's not very wide but fairly long, promoting efficient soldier aggression similar to snakewater.
Overall the issue for me is that it looks like if you win mid it's a VERY uphill battle for the defenders.
^ do you two know what alpha means?
^ do you two know what alpha means?
It's like you guys didn't even look at the recent transformation reckoner made
It's like you guys didn't even look at the recent transformation reckoner made
I actually like this map concept a lot. For some reason (ik im gonna get hate for this) I also like the textures the way they are. Idk why, just do.
I actually like this map concept a lot. For some reason (ik im gonna get hate for this) I also like the textures the way they are. Idk why, just do.
the point of dev textures isn't to look pretty, its to clearly signal to players which parts of the map are owned by each team. you shouldn't be concerned with the dev textures (either negatively or positively) at this state in a maps feedback cycle. think about how the map is going to play, not how its going to look. the looks will get better over time during the development cycle.
the point of dev textures isn't to look pretty, its to clearly signal to players which parts of the map are owned by each team. you shouldn't be concerned with the dev textures (either negatively or positively) at this state in a maps feedback cycle. think about how the map is going to [i]play,[/i] not how its going to look. the looks will get better over time during the development cycle.
i think if you removed some of the more claustrophobic areas (doorways,ramps,etc) this map could be pretty cool.
i think if you removed some of the more claustrophobic areas (doorways,ramps,etc) this map could be pretty cool.
nitethe point of dev textures isn't to look pretty, its to clearly signal to players which parts of the map are owned by each team. you shouldn't be concerned with the dev textures (either negatively or positively) at this state in a maps feedback cycle. think about how the map is going to play, not how its going to look. the looks will get better over time during the development cycle.
actually no the point of dev textures is so that devs don't waste effort making the map look pretty before they have to majorly change areas for gameplay reasons - it would suck to spend hours designing a wonderful floral arrangement just to have to cut it to widen the map. you bang out a map with dev textures and rapidly iterate on it until it plays well, then you work on the terrain and aesthetic. it's also far, far easier to compile maps made up of purely dev textures.
[quote=nite]the point of dev textures isn't to look pretty, its to clearly signal to players which parts of the map are owned by each team. you shouldn't be concerned with the dev textures (either negatively or positively) at this state in a maps feedback cycle. think about how the map is going to [i]play,[/i] not how its going to look. the looks will get better over time during the development cycle.[/quote]
actually no the point of dev textures is so that devs don't waste effort making the map look pretty before they have to majorly change areas for gameplay reasons - it would suck to spend hours designing a wonderful floral arrangement just to have to cut it to widen the map. you bang out a map with dev textures and rapidly iterate on it until it plays well, then you work on the terrain and aesthetic. it's also far, far easier to compile maps made up of purely dev textures.