Jump to content
flexsta

de_meso

Recommended Posts

DE_MESO

by flexsta

 

Preface

A while back I posted a greybox called de_dropout

It was my first map and I learned quite a bit from making it, however as I got better with the Source SDK I realized it was horribly designed, meaning, no func_details, good ol' "Make Hollow Skybox" and a lot of off-grid points. So even though it was actually playable it would be a true mess to try and clean it up and make it into a fully fledged map.

 

Therefor I abandoned the map...

 

Now I've taken up the challenge and made a new map based very much on de_dropout, called de_meso!
Credits to text_fish for suggesting the name on the old topic.
This time I feel like I've gotten enough experience to finish it, and thereby complete my first map!

 

Workshop:  http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=418379894

 

Info:

The map is still quite early in the development process, and I originally I just wanted to start out making a greybox again, but one thing led to another and now the map is textured and a few details have been added, that said, pretty much everything is still eligible to be changed and some parts of the map are still very much untouched when it comes to detailing. (like the area around T spawn) and many of the props are placeholders, there are quite a few crates around the map at the moment, and I'd like to change that in the final art pass.

Even though I'm clearly more experienced than I was when I made de_dropout, (see preface for more info)
I'm still quite the rookie, especially when it comes to lay-outs, I'm also having some trouble finding out where to put cover and I'm not very good at detecting any OP spots on the map or broken stuff in general. So I'd like to get some feedback before I start to finalize the map.

 

4wwHcHv.jpg

 

DoXdyN0.jpg

 

ABmlGEM.jpg

 

fgm7eyX.jpg

 

EZEvEJQ.jpg

 

AbdmvpN.jpg

Edited by flexsta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK I will try with a more specific question, to get some feedback.

As of now the timings on this map looks like this:

CT → A: 10sec.
CT → B: 11sec.

T → A: 10sec.
T → B: 13sec.

CT → T: 18sec.
A → B: 12sec.

So that's quite horrible, does someone have some ideas on how I could expand the map without breaking the design and flow of the map?

 

sorry, not sorry for bumping

Edited by Nestakyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Define expand?

 

I think you need to compress the height of the map. Your ramps look very steep and make for "shooting each others toes" gameplay which is annoying and ineffective. Generally you want something along the lines of a 2:1 height increase for stairs/ramps; 16 units along and 8 units up is a good place to start for steps.

 

The height difference for bombsite B is way over the top and is so high it renders any cover on the site obsolete.

 

Bombsite A is far too open and large, with barely any cover. I would halve the plantable area, and look about removing that staircase area at the back.

 

I think you've jumped the gun a bit of detailing your map seeing as no prior iterations were offered asking for feedback. You've made a much harder job for yourself to change anything.

 

You'd also fair better by requesting a map test and seeing how what you've designed plays out, and take every comment from it very seriously.

 

Good luck

Edited by jackophant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Define expand?
Wanted to enlarge the map to make the rush distances and rotation times longer without breaking the design because I actually like how the map is put together but I realized that its just too small.

 

I think you need to compress the height of the map. Your ramps look very steep and make for "shooting each others toes" gameplay which is annoying and ineffective. Generally you want something along the lines of a 2:1 height increase for stairs/ramps; 16 units along and 8 units up is a good place to start for steps.

There might be too much elevation although it was one of the things I wanted to incorporate, I probably overdid it a little for that reason.
that said, every ramp and every single staircase on this map is 2:1 increase like you described. (did you have a look around the map or did you just look at pictures?)

 

Bombsite A is far too open and large, with barely any cover. I would halve the plantable area, and look about removing that staircase area at the back.

As I mentioned in the OP, I'm having trouble figuring out where to put cover. Also only half of the plateau is plantable, i will make sure to indicate this in the final version of this, and I can't see how I would connect CT to A if i removed the entire area behind the staircases? help? :S

 

I think you've jumped the gun a bit of detailing your map seeing as no prior iterations were offered asking for feedback. You've made a much harder job for yourself to change anything.
Oh I know I've done goofed, but honestly this is still less detailed than most greyboxes, it's just the texturing that makes it seem otherwise I think.

I know it seems like I'm just shooting down all the feedback I just asked for, but I promise I'm still taking all of this into consideration, and I will definitely look to compress the elevation. So thank you so much for taking the time to give me some feedback, I thought all hope was lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make both bombsites more detailed, not asthetics wise, but try to brighten up the bombsites, make them more than just generic platforms with generic crates. For example, you could make bombsite A a temple, and make bombsite b larger, and maybe add a pit too it. Just overall make the map more strategic and not rooms and passages( Ive had the same problem )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 (did you have a look around the map or did you just look at pictures?)

 

*/me in high pitched voice* Guilty as charged!

 

I often browse mapcore at work so I can't run around maps, so I have to go from what I see and hope that what you show. Unless it's a lot further into development then I'll try and make the effort to have a look around because the finer detail needs a closer look.

 

You don't need to be in the map to see potential layout problems, especially when an overview is provided.

 

2:1 for stairs is a maximum, don't overuse it:

 

fgm7eyX.jpg

the exposed stairs at the back work, the tight corridor leading midway into the site is far too steep for how enclosed it is. You've created the chokepoint to end all chokepoints there. You're probably struggling to find where to put cover because you've got too much space. That level of flanking on an already exposed bombsite just doesn't sound fun.

 

It's good to define exactly where you plant the bomb, and not with a cross that you can see from space, use the overlay tool and texture locking to manipulate the size of the overlay, not decal which looks like what you've used.

 

I realise some of these lines are across different levels, but you need to always bear sight lines in mind when making anything because people will find them, and they will be OP:

8f07bb22aa2d2f544f156ae1356a7ce8.png

 

Timing-wise, I don't think it's too bad based on what you've said. CTs should always get there fractionally before Ts on at least one site to provide a rush option, and the other site CTs have a couple more seconds to setup. A 12sec rotation time isn't bad either considering worse case scenario bomb timer is 35sec.

 

I don't know if you've settled on the aztec theme, but one of the reasons the original was a horrible map was because it had very tight chokepoints into very large open spaces where you could be shot from pretty much anywhere. It's a nightmare to do anything and it also massively overused "verticality"

 

Nuke has a dash of it with the ladder/rafters/catwalk area which is nice (if OP most of the time...) to mix things up, but everything works in measure, just don't over do anything is really what it comes down to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(did you have a look around the map or did you just look at pictures?)

*/me in high pitched voice* Guilty as charged!

I often browse mapcore at work so I can't run around maps, so I have to go from what I see and hope that what you show. Unless it's a lot further into development then I'll try and make the effort to have a look around because the finer detail needs a closer look.

You don't need to be in the map to see potential layout problems, especially when an overview is provided.

2:1 for stairs is a maximum, don't overuse it:

fgm7eyX.jpg

the exposed stairs at the back work, the tight corridor leading midway into the site is far too steep for how enclosed it is. You've created the chokepoint to end all chokepoints there. You're probably struggling to find where to put cover because you've got too much space. That level of flanking on an already exposed bombsite just doesn't sound fun.

It's good to define exactly where you plant the bomb, and not with a cross that you can see from space, use the overlay tool and texture locking to manipulate the size of the overlay, not decal which looks like what you've used.

I realise some of these lines are across different levels, but you need to always bear sight lines in mind when making anything because people will find them, and they will be OP:

8f07bb22aa2d2f544f156ae1356a7ce8.png

Timing-wise, I don't think it's too bad based on what you've said. CTs should always get there fractionally before Ts on at least one site to provide a rush option, and the other site CTs have a couple more seconds to setup. A 12sec rotation time isn't bad either considering worse case scenario bomb timer is 35sec.

I don't know if you've settled on the aztec theme, but one of the reasons the original was a horrible map was because it had very tight chokepoints into very large open spaces where you could be shot from pretty much anywhere. It's a nightmare to do anything and it also massively overused "verticality"

Nuke has a dash of it with the ladder/rafters/catwalk area which is nice (if OP most of the time...) to mix things up, but everything works in measure, just don't over do anything is really what it comes down to.

I think the problem is, he's using the Aztec theme, and that mentally limits him to how he builds the map, which might be a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think the problem is, he's using the Aztec theme, and that mentally limits him to how he builds the map, which might be a problem.

 

 

Yeah, it's not the most varied, diverse theme. I also don't think it's overly practical as a concept. I don't know many terrorists striking fear into the hearts of a nation by bombing an old ruin with no people around, with no militaristic value. 

 

Btw, you don't need to quote a whole post, especially one as long as mine. Just clip it out as I have done for you ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem is, he's using the Aztec theme, and that mentally limits him to how he builds the map, which might be a problem.

Yeah, it's not the most varied, diverse theme. I also don't think it's overly practical as a concept. I don't know many terrorists striking fear into the hearts of a nation by bombing an old ruin with no people around, with no militaristic value.

Btw, you don't need to quote a whole post, especially one as long as mine. Just clip it out as I have done for you ;)

I'm on my phone and really lazy right now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...