[WIP] de_citygardens

    This is my entry to the Mapcore 2017 competition; the map is titled "de_citygardens" and pulls heavily from the themes of brisk inner city gardens.

    My plan is to build a singular bombsite and construct and further map around it. Here is the layout of Site A initially:

    [Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/wexaSq5.png]

    With some screenshots from testing:

    [Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/UvLC1FD.jpg]

    [Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/UwM1nzu.jpg]

    [Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/L8Zyny0.jpg]

    [Blocked Image: http://i.imgur.com/ps28ETd.jpg]

    Here is the workshop link for feedback: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/fi…s/?id=952222063

    Ahmm I think in this mapping contest it's the meaning to create a competetive map (Hostage Rescue or Bomb Defusal) and not a casual map (Demolition).

    To give feedback on your map anyhow. On the overview it seems T's have only one route to the bombsite, they have no choise at all and CT have like too many options...

    They can just camp and wait for the T's to come and shoot them from so many angles...

    I suggest to look to the official competetive maps and hopefully learn something from looking at them. I would go for two bombsites and with that you could ofcourse experiment some with a totally different layout as you wish. Not saying your map should be like a official map, but they do work well and you can learn from them. Size wise, this current map seems like atleast one fourth of how big a bomb defusal map should be.

    Quote from Roald

    30 minutes ago, Roald said: Ahmm I think in this mapping contest it's the meaning to create a competetive map (Hostage Rescue or Bomb Defusal) and not a casual map (Demolition).

    He said he would start with the A site and construct around it, but yeah, I agree that its incredibly CT sided

    Oh I missed that part. Anyhow.. idk if it's smart to create a layout this way... but yeah each of us have their own work flow and style so..

    Go finish your full layout and when that's ready and all basic things like timings, angles and etc have been tested ur self, go ask for feedback.

    Please don't ask for feedback on something that isn't ready for feedback yet.. It's like you showing me the back of your t-shirt with the question what I think of it while not showing me the front..

    To reply to you Roald, I stated in the second line of my post I am building a map around a single site. I am basing this way of building around 3kliksphilip's mapping process (found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCZqVrjydDM). I find it easier to have a slow unrestricted creation process and by the end I can fix timings and perfect nading spots. This is purely to test site layout, as well as how taking and holding the site feels and works.

    As for your comments on it being extremely CT sided, you lack evidence displaying such. Through both my initial bot testing I found it to be T sided as the bots were found stuck on the stairs to site window and stuck on the CT spawn window frame, thus T's rushed site and spawn. Therefore I added extra steps and improved bot pathing to prevent these "stuck" spots. Furthermore, I added a large wall that was angled against CT's as I found AWP'ing T's were cover-less.

    Through my extensive player based testing I have actually found it to be extremely T sided, a simple 4 riflemen and 1 awper watching site T's can easily push and over power CT's who just arrived to hold site. I continued to increase the distance for the T's to travel to site.

    I appreciate feedback but rather than pick and choose and not read my actual post or download the frequently updated Workshop version is insulting at most, instead do some testing yourself and make exact suggestions to map improvements. Not just "check out Valve's maps". As for your t-shirt comparison, it is nothing like that. If I asked you to grade the back of my shirt, I'm asking for the back of my shirt to be graded. You can make educated and intelligent comments based off what you can see so far. Saying you can't give feedback to how the site plays or the pacing of rounds is a lie and makes the creation process even slower, when would you suggest I ask for feedback? After I've completed an untested map without timings and lack of concern for play? Doing so at that time would only hinder the maps creation and make it more difficult to edit.

    I honestly suggest you boot up my map and make exact suggestions to changing the site. For example I can say Dust II's A long pit is broken and unnecessary (obviously I don't believe this) however in stating this, it has no effect on B site or the mid and only has to do with the playing of A. This is what I'm inquiring feedback on.

    Quote from D!o

    5 hours ago, D!o said: To reply to you Roald, I stated in the second line of my post I am building a map around a single site. I am basing this way of building around 3kliksphilip's mapping process (found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCZqVrjydDM). I find it easier to have a slow unrestricted creation process and by the end I can fix timings and perfect nading spots. This is purely to test site layout, as well as how taking and holding the site feels and works.

    As for your comments on it being extremely CT sided, you lack evidence displaying such. Through both my initial bot testing I found it to be T sided as the bots were found stuck on the stairs to site window and stuck on the CT spawn window frame, thus T's rushed site and spawn. Therefore I added extra steps and improved bot pathing to prevent these "stuck" spots. Furthermore, I added a large wall that was angled against CT's as I found AWP'ing T's were cover-less.

    Through my extensive player based testing I have actually found it to be extremely T sided, a simple 4 riflemen and 1 awper watching site T's can easily push and over power CT's who just arrived to hold site. I continued to increase the distance for the T's to travel to site.

    I appreciate feedback but rather than pick and choose and not read my actual post or download the frequently updated Workshop version is insulting at most, instead do some testing yourself and make exact suggestions to map improvements. Not just "check out Valve's maps". As for your t-shirt comparison, it is nothing like that. If I asked you to grade the back of my shirt, I'm asking for the back of my shirt to be graded. You can make educated and intelligent comments based off what you can see so far. Saying you can't give feedback to how the site plays or the pacing of rounds is a lie and makes the creation process even slower, when would you suggest I ask for feedback? After I've completed an untested map without timings and lack of concern for play? Doing so at that time would only hinder the maps creation and make it more difficult to edit.

    I honestly suggest you boot up my map and make exact suggestions to changing the site. For example I can say Dust II's A long pit is broken and unnecessary (obviously I don't believe this) however in stating this, it has no effect on B site or the mid and only has to do with the playing of A. This is what I'm inquiring feedback on.

    Friendly advice: when using the 3klikphilip style of making a map, make mid first. Thats the way he recommends it. 2nd of all, don't rely on bots to determine sidedness of a map. They, as a general rule are terrible and are worse than silver 1s. I'll take a look around and give you some specific advice later on. Cheers!


    EDIT: After running around the map, it is most definitely CT sided. CTs have easy access to good spots, cover, and etc. Terrorists only have one entrance. The windows allow for CTs to reposition, hide, and hold angles easily, and with a good team that uses utility, it is very easy for CTs to dominate.

    Well I am not about to get into a fight with you because that would be totally wrong. I saw a line in your post about feedback so I decided to spend my time and energy by providing you with some. I have been giving my feeling and thoughts about your map based on what I see in this post and it's up to you what you are going to do with it. To be honest your defends (almost offence) against my feedback feels to be very unprofessional to me, but yeah that might be something for you to think about. From my 2 years / 1100+ hours SDK experience, which is not much yet but not nothing either, I hoped to help you out a litle... but yea I misunderstood what you were doing with the order you map in so my feedback was misplaced at first and I apologised about that, didn't I? And I do not have to walk arround the map to give atleast some thoughts when it's about basic obvious stuff. If you disagree on my feedback, on my thought then you should take it and suit it your self wether you gonna use it or ignore it.

    Next I might be a litle too direct about saying you should give us a impression of the full layout before asking about feedback.. but that's just something I think that's fair... First put in some work yourself and later ask others to put some of their energy in providing your work with feedback... But yeah let's not make a big thing of this and let's stay on topic right? I'd like to wish you best of luck on this contest anyhow and I hope you enjoy participating in it and learn more about mapping aswell.

    Quote from noobgames

    8 hours ago, noobgames said: Friendly advice: when using the 3klikphilip style of making a map, make mid first. Thats the way he recommends it. 2nd of all, don't rely on bots to determine sidedness of a map. They, as a general rule are terrible and are worse than silver 1s. I'll take a look around and give you some specific advice later on. Cheers!


    EDIT: After running around the map, it is most definitely CT sided. CTs have easy access to good spots, cover, and etc. Terrorists only have one entrance. The windows allow for CTs to reposition, hide, and hold angles easily, and with a good team that uses utility, it is very easy for CTs to dominate.

    I enioy the friendly advice but I'm building this style as I've never built this way before and have built entire maps from the get go or by creating a mid and so far I am enjoying this way the most.

    As for you running around my map, did you run around it with bots and play test or just run around with a singular friend and pick points you think are broken? Did you play with a full 10 people? That's what I did and through my extensive player testing it has shown it to be T sided with CT being very easily rushed. Much like a regular map if you know the layout you know where spots are and play to that, hence why my player testing has shown T siding. Thanks for the feedback however. (I don't know if you read the entirety of my response but I do state through player testing with only initial bot testing for layout.)

    Quote from Roald

    5 hours ago, Roald said: Well I am not about to get into a fight with you because that would be totally wrong. I saw a line in your post about feedback so I decided to spend my time and energy by providing you with some. I have been giving my feeling and thoughts about your map based on what I see in this post and it's up to you what you are going to do with it. To be honest your defends (almost offence) against my feedback feels to be very unprofessional to me, but yeah that might be something for you to think about. From my 2 years / 1100+ hours SDK experience, which is not much yet but not nothing either, I hoped to help you out a litle... but yea I misunderstood what you were doing with the order you map in so my feedback was misplaced at first and I apologised about that, didn't I? And I do not have to walk arround the map to give atleast some thoughts when it's about basic obvious stuff. If you disagree on my feedback, on my thought then you should take it and suit it your self wether you gonna use it or ignore it.

    Next I might be a litle too direct about saying you should give us a impression of the full layout before asking about feedback.. but that's just something I think that's fair... First put in some work yourself and later ask others to put some of their energy in providing your work with feedback... But yeah let's not make a big thing of this and let's stay on topic right? I'd like to wish you best of luck on this contest anyhow and I hope you enjoy participating in it and learn more about mapping aswell.

    Again I appreciate feedback, I don't have a line in my post about feedback other than the workshop link (that's why it's next to the workshop link and says "For feedback". I'm not attempting to start an argument with you and if you read my response with a grain of salt I cannot help that.

    My response was garnered at the point of replying to your feedback and not attacking you in anyway (or "offense almost" as you called it). I am not demanding feedback in anyway and feedback to the viewer is enitrely optional, this post in fact went 3 or 4 days without a single ounce of on forum feedback, so please do not think I'm forcing feedback and demanding it must be positive.

    I'm ignoring your points of saying I'm unprofessional and what not, because this is a mapping competition and stating your findings in a map you created is fine.

    Good luck to you in the competition and hope you succeed.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login