Posts by 8bit

I know that Mapcore arranges internal tests every week or so. I was wondering if Mapcore or someone related to this community/site, could put up a server with only test maps for the public, a larger server with more that just 10 slots.

I assume that testers are handpicked but I also know that there are more than just the handpicked ones that are happy to help out with testing, I being one of them.

What do you say Mapcore? Could something like this be arranged? I know that people would highly appreciate it.

Quote from Guni

Just tested the layout and you saved me the time writing suggestions, I agree on all point, good logic never fails

@ OP, schedule a date for a layout testing, your map looks really promising, cheers.

If OP likes, I do own a CSGO server i could upload the map too for Testing and Scrimming. Its an Australian server but it runs at 128 tick.

I was about to suggest something similar.

I know that Mapcore arranges internal tests every week or so. I was wondering if Mapcore or someone related to this community/site, could put up a server with only test maps for the public, a larger server with more that just 10 slots.

I assume that testers are handpicked but I also know that there are more than just the handpicked ones that are happy to help out with testing, I being one of them.

What do you say Mapcore? Could something like this be arranged? I know that people would highly appreciate it.

Quote from Guni

The layout looks really interesting, i'll take a look at it and get back to you on my thoughts!

*EDIT*

Okay so i went through your map and got an understanding for how it played, the layout and the elements you added in. I thought overall the map was pretty cool, it felt small, so from a competitive standpoint it seems like a bit of a rush map. I play competitive a lot, i am currently at LEM rank, so although i am not the best and i don't know what the majority likes, i will try to give you my 2cents from a competitive play point.

A Site Windows

For me personally, i found these two door-ways really awkward and annoying. They over complicate the whole balcony and make it a strange situation in general. From a CT perspective it was awkward to move in an out of, it made it hard to use any cover near the door and just felt forced. From a T perspective it was just annoying to peak, one of the doors seemed plausible but the other felt un-needed. I would personally like to see maybe one door way but wider, or some other take on that balcony. Overall the site itself felt fine, but i think there may have been a few too many hidy-holes and angles to check, however you wont know until playtests.

Short Drop to B

I actually really liked the idea of this, and i thought it was rather unique and game changing. At the same time however i think it could be really over powered. This is something that you will have to decide on from play tests but the idea that you can punish mid if you are able to sneak that catwalk was good. The downside is that the rotate from site to site is a little to strong for T's.

B Site and its Entry's

This was probably my biggest iffy with the map. First i think B is fine the way the layout is and the connections to it. I like that mid can back it up and the two site players can hold. The quick connection from mid may lead to B only needing one player to hold, similar to Dust2. However i felt the entry points really pointless, specifically the squeeky. The window makes it hard for T's to use it sneaky beaky like, and its too close to the original entry point to make it of any point pushing. I understand you tried to also add a box in the main entry door way, to give some cover, but the whole door way seems a bit to large of an angle, it wont be hard for CT's to absolutely crush T's pushing it. Maybe shrink the doorway and look at either moving squeeky up a bit further, or remove the window to make it a safer push.

Otherwise the layout seems nice and it flows well, I think your best bet now is to get some playtests going and really decide what works and what doesnt. I like it and look forward to seeing more. I hope you dont take my opinions to much to heart, I merely am looking at it from my own competitive view, I may be wrong

Display More

Just tested the layout and you saved me the time writing suggestions, I agree on all point, good logic never fails

@ OP, schedule a date for a layout testing, your map looks really promising, cheers.

Everything is black for me except some strips of the orange dev texure

Btw. SamCom created a map called de_convention already...

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/fi…s/?id=146135089

Pm sent SamCom

Ah... looking promising

Gonna test it asap, looks good indeed... keep up the good work!

Edit: Just seen that the workshop link is not working, bummer

FM

Quote from FMPONE

I've posted the Santorini greybox to the workshop (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/fi…s/?id=396996750), if people would like to run around it in a convenient way. Then you can give feedback in this new Steam group

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/FMPmaptesters

Watching the stream Val posted, Mirage2/Havoc looking sick tbh, I agree with Anger the streamer.

FMPone, would it be possible for you to upload the greybox of Mirage2?

Quote from SamCom

Thanks, good points. Going to try and uncrowd A, but a lot of that cover is blocking sightlines, at least that was the intention.

Too many crates? But what about my time to crate score? But seriously, there are too many. They make for such nice Insta-Cover, even though I have to manually clip props since the AI pathing likes to pretend they're not there. I'll be going back and converting crates into more interesting props or adding architectual features to buildings that offer the same cover.

Yeah, implementing cover into buildings is the way to go, it's 2015 for crying out loud! . I'd go as far as to say that only bombsites should have crates in them and the rest of the map should be detailed gloriousness

Tested your map just now and it seems ok, mid bit too crowded, I like B site (left of CT), A site bit too crowded, too much cover...

Keep building on it, looking forward to see what you can do.

Ah yeah, too many crates for my liking, like almost everywhere.

Workshop link still up? Reason I could give you good feedback last time is because I was able to test your layout.

Looking good but I gotta say that imo, a good artic station is the one covered with snow together with snow winds and icycles on roofs. Every crate/cover needs to have snow on them imo.

Some reference pictures:

http://trilliumarchitects.typepad.com/.a/6a0120a7b79…c7941f1b970c-pi
http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/AP_s…16_3x2_1600.jpg
http://assets.inhabitat.com/wp-content/blo…ter-537x387.jpg

Quote from NotBum

Yeah, I am trying to save texturing/models for last. I have jumped straight to textures on previous "projects" and I have never ended up doing well on those. I want to get the brushwork in place and then go form there. In terms of getting textures, I have an idea of what I want certain parts of the map to look like so its really a question of whether I can find a texture online or stick with valve's textures.

My Answer is basically I don't know

Proper choice imo although if experienced you can build parts of a map bit by bit, never worked for me either though.

A suggestion, if you may, use custom textures and dont use inferno/italy/cbble textures, those textures are sooooo overdone. Cached/Ted release de_fuel some time a go, he did a good job on the map as a whole, but the textures... Visuals could have look so much sweater with new custom textures, just saying.

Really liking your brushwork, simple and could come out great in the end with proper details added...

//8bit

Hmm... A feels empty, not sure about the circle in the middle. B upper entrance, I'd close the right exit seen from T point of view (where you have just a wall for line of sight blockage).

Keep it up

Coming together nicely, keep the good work up!

Nooooooo!!! Your first layout was awsome! Why did you change it? It only needed minor tweaks...

Workshop link is now working btw... http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/fi…s/?id=377601770

I see, thanks for the link, will test it and come back with feedback.

EDIT: I think you might have something going on here, keep building on it, keep adjusting angles and line of sight, I like the two walls decorative walls @ B

Hi Demolitions

I think it might be better if you could put up a workshop link, might be easier to see what needs to be done in order to provide with more proper suggestions. To the naked eye it seems that you have two entrances for each site (from T side) and all four of them are narrow doorways, those can easily become cluster-fucks since doorways are always too strong of a chokepoint, unless you can flash over.

My second thought is T spawn. I always try to merge spawn locations with gameplay, meaning it might feel better if you could move T spawn up from the "box" area into the path connecting the two sites, that way you wont have any "dead zones" in your layout and It also shortens the time it takes T's to reach their destinations. You could tweak CT spawn in the same way, less "dead zones".

One of strong concerns is...

What if CT's are stuck inside B (between a rock and a hard place), T's have planted A and killed all of the CT's there...
T's are now controlling CT spawn and the northern part of mid... (only so much time is left before the bomb goes off...)

Now, in order for the remaining CT's on B to defuse the bomb on A, they must run (almost) all the way to T spawn so they can come in the backway into the site. As the layout is presented now, that will never end good cause the bomb will go off before they get a chance or at the very least, they will have time to only start defusing it but a bomb is never left unattended as we all know.

I think you must open up a path from mid to A, the very one you wrote that you closed off in your lastest post (only more than just a doorway, imo)

These are my initial thoughts.

//8bit

Could we have a workshop link?