Page 3 of 5

Re: ut4_oaks_b2

Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2011 6:05 pm
by xandaxs
Just made my run trough your map.
It's a good map, but i'm sorry to say i don't like it, but i don't dislike it either...

I just don't have any nice feeling while playing it...


Just some things i though i'd point out:
shot0020.jpg

shot0021.jpg

shot0022.jpg

Re: ut4_oaks_b2

Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2011 12:03 pm
by Aleyra
How many players can play on this map ?

Re: ut4_oaks_b2

Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2011 6:55 pm
by Delirium
16 spawns per team for every gametype, FFA supports 32 players

Re: ut4_oaks_b2

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:16 am
by bludshot
I finally got to play this map in a real scrim/match setting. First of all, I think you should listen more to the overall feedback of the community than to me (hopefully the community does give a decent amount of feedback). Sometimes I think my feedback is based on a narrow view, not even necessarily my own view but my idea of what I think the populist viewpoint is; like, "if you want all these players to like your map then I think blah blah". The average player probably approaches it with much fresher eyes or something.

Also, I'll be playing on this map again soon and my 2nd impression might be more accurate. (Also my team got beaten pretty badly so that's always going to make people feel bleh.)

Anyhow, my first impressions of Oaks ctf are:
- it feels quite big, maybe too big
- I sort of feel like you are trying to do too much in this map, it has everything, tunnels, roof play, elevation, etc.
- it might feature too much blue/grey-blue making it harder to see blue team than red by quite a bit
- I feel like, what if you blocked off the upstairs flag area and instead put the flag by the merry go round and opened up a new doorway to the tunnel of love from there? <- Or this could be a terrible idea, I need to test the map more.
- I think it succeeds in a lot of ways too though, and I'm really interested in other gamer's opinions.

I have not really "found the flow" of this map in CTF yet, so I'm not really qualified to give good feedback yet if I am honest.


Also, what is the story on the extra bumpy pk3 files? Do they need to be on the server or only the client? I got reports that the map was giving big fps drops and resulting black bars due to low fps, in bumpy mode.

Re: ut4_oaks_b2

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 8:36 am
by xandaxs
Needs to be on both sides, server and client..

Re: ut4_oaks_b2

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 8:40 pm
by bludshot
xandaxs wrote:Needs to be on both sides, server and client..


Del is that true?

If so that's kind of awkward since auto download won't download the extra file.

Re: ut4_oaks_b2

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 8:42 pm
by xandaxs
I believe it is true, unless the server has "sv_pure 0", allowing the client to load modified pk3s...

Re: ut4_oaks_b2

Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 2:08 am
by Delirium
Yep it is true, you do need to manually download it but there's nothing I can do, either there is 2 separate pk3s or oaks_b3 is 45mb :/

Re: ut4_oaks_b2

Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:17 am
by bludshot
As long as servers having it and clients not having it, or clients having it and servers not having it doesn't cause any problems then it's ok. I guess all that will happen is that non-bumpy players will never see it, and... they don't get kicked off the server for impure do they (when the server has it)?, and bumpy players will see it only when connected to a bumpy server, which is odd but Ok.

Ideally you'd want the map to have everything, but imo the file size is a large enough issue to do it the way you're doing it as long as it fails gracefully.

Re: ut4_oaks_b2

Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:35 am
by xandaxs
When HD is released, maybe he can put it all together...

And, no, clients won't be kicked because the server is running oaks_b2 and not the bumpy version...
As the textures and folders are named the same, and therefore will be read by the engine..
(Reason why you can't edit someone else's shader leaving the same path.. As it'll cause conflict)