Freaky_Banana

Since the last post, I've done some 1on1 testing and am glad to say, that I am confident to apply for a playtest! Hopefully happening on the 26th, will keep you informed. In the meantime enjoy some small updates to B site.

Oh ok, it caught me offguard that the two paths aren't on the same height level. I didn't look closely enough to tell apart the colours.

A Site timings look intense. Would you mind explaining how that works out exactly?

Update: I want to register this map for a playtest at the end of this month, but before I do that I wanted to draw on all of your guys' collective wisdom in picture form. Three questions I want asking are: 1. What do you think about the new T-side lowermid and the paths to which it is connected? 2. Should the doorway from B CT-side heaven to skywalk be closed up? 3. Is A a good size? This is important because it informs the design of A Main, A Long and the mid-to-A stair chokepoint. (for this one you will probably have to hop in-game at: https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=1693753275, there is unfortunately no way to really substitute that with pictures, but there are some included down here). These are hopefully easy to answer questions with a big knock-on effect for how the map will feel and play in a playtest. I hope to iron these uncertainties out now, so that when the time comes we can make the most of the playtest. And finally - pictures: Lowermid: A Site:

Why would we blame you for posting updates in your own thread? Also I agree with @spa .you should really playtest this before going ahead.

These two were definitely always my favorite maps! Makes a lot of sense too because both are hella imbalanced . Uptown ... and Orbital

Hey man, I love the work you're doing on this, the entire map is very clearly a labor of love! Maybe be careful though, with how many details you add. When I ran around the map I was a little overwhelmed by the amount of props everywhere, even in what seemed to be key gameplay areas. I found some parts to be visually confusing (many different patterns, shapes and colors in close proximity) and sometimes would even get stuck on props. Maybe focus your use of props more on individual hero props (like your awesome skybox balloons) to provide the atmosphere and focal points for entire areas. Because while your current approach might be more true to life, it is possibly not the best for gameplay. Congrats on the honorable mention and I hope you keep working on Cappadocia !

I actually liked the first one better. At least in the setting of a video game. These games we are mapping for are somewhat supposed to take you away from reality, so I liked seeing the different proprtions. In my opinion it's a lot to do with the lighting, but if you want to keep the celestial lighting from the first bunch of pictures, I suggest you could very slightly bring in the outer walls, leaving everything else the same.

Maybe I am judging this wrong, but the left site seems quite easy to take and then hold down. All CT side entrances are quite narrow, Ts are given the high ground and maybe an entrance too much I feel? But maybe the flank threat from CTs on the right side is higher than I think right now, since I don't know the exact timings and LoS. Anyway, liking the idea.

To anyone familiar with Warhammer 40k at all it is also kinda weird. but actually I don't mind :shrug: .

Looks interesting, but I am a bit confused where the connections are. I can spot some but probably not all. A workshop link would help to see it for ourselves and give better feedback on the layout.

I also really enjoyed walking around the map! Nailing the use of rocks and foliage all over. However found some weird things here or there: opinion: To me the temple looks a little visually confusing. It has many different very dark colors and is not particularly well lit. For this reason to me it wasn't very appealing as a path and also quite hard to know where encounters with the enemy might be in terms of depth (lack of shadows because dark) (probably relevant for retakes). A simple light in the temple should fix this. When running into this cratestack it bumps you up onto the lower of the two crates. Maybe just make nonsolid and use clip brushes? The window is really hard to see. Hard to imagine a CT's head will stand out very well against that background. Might also be frustrating to players who don't know the level that well, because it is in a sort of unexpected spot.

Hey man, I like the look! Did you take these pictures in a full-compile version of your map?

Really love it! But I believe those radomes are lacking bottoms

Still not dead. A new version is pending workshop verification, I will add the link once it's done on the workshop right now! Let's get to the screenshots and I will explain what changed: Workshop link! https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1693753275

The workshop link is an error for me. Maybe has to be fixed.

By god, I feel you. Good luck with finishing up the rest of the level!

I just crested 1000 hours in CSGO SDK. - you'd think that's enough time to finish a map? Apparently not ^^

I just figured out that my SDK actually works again, so I figure I should start updating again ^^ . Three evenings worth of progress on Oakwood. (fast compile, protect your eyes!)

Why the hostility ? I entirely agree with Vaya, this is an unusual approach, but if it is more comfortable for the mapper, let him do what he believes is best. That applies to the layout as well. A layout doesn't have to be a "normal" clover to play well. Follow the core gameplay rules of CS and anything can be fun. I am personally really excited about maps like these. It tells me here comes a mapper with a powerful vision of what he wants his level to be. And a map with a vision, those are the ones that will stick out and around even after the end of this contest. How about we stop shutting these people down with negativity or by forcing them into our conventions. I really want to celebrate their ideas instead. So you do you man, I am excited for this one. On a game play note, once you ported to Hammer, a new overview would really help to understand the layout we're looking at. It is a bit confusing right now.

Just to let you know... work is going on (all Fast compile and lowest graphics, because my laptop is a toaster).

I ... love them . Maybe a bit low poly though? Especially on the smaller ones the edges are very noticeable! So if they are meant to go inside the playable area, I feel like they might need a few more polys .

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't I already see this in FMPONE's custom map review? Not sure about how rule 4 applies here (whether your current blockout already counts as having "art" done seems debatable (no offense , it looks great!).

I really like the idea of different gravities (although to be fair my favorite shooter is one with walljumps, ledgegrabs and powerslides ) . What I am not sold on is the button sort of stuff. I think that is a bit too outlandish for CSGO players to have to interact with their environment. But then again, I would love to see a playable version to further comment on this!

Crypto Mining ... Hence the mountain