CEONSS

hm, there actually might be... check out Battlefront Rilez and ONS Ravine...
suggested them a while ago but so far to no avail...

also, to throw in my two cent worth regarding map removal / adding - I honestly don't really get what all
the fuss is all about, I mean seriously, if a map is popular, put it on and leave it on ffs.

Popularity should be the ONE and ONLY criterion if a given map stays or goes.

Otherwise you'd just have ppl throwing mostly arguments regarding "taste" around
(as seen in previous replies) - and one can't argue about taste, right ?
Too big, too small, too laggy, too dark, too bright, no vehicles, too many vehicles, it has bugs,
it doesn't suit 32 plrs, it's substandard, it's a zombie map - la-di-effing-da ad nauseam...

Don't get me wrong - I also sincerely dislike MTMU - but do I want to have it therefore removed ? Hell no.
That would be tantamount to petty fascism, plain and simple - other players obviously like it and I don't mind
to go spectator once in a while and have a sandwich or a fag for a change if a less fancy map comes on.
Get rid of icarus instead for all I care.

I'd rather suggest to generally kick out the maps on the bottom of the "played" count and, as said
before - bring in POPULAR maps instead. And if they have some issues, so what ? Why have a PC map that
never gets played rather than have a popular one that makes every1 drool ?

I mean, the community isn't really getting any bigger, is it ?
So why not make things a bit more interesting
and attractive for the remaining faithful few by just adding maps asap if requested and let the numbers decide ?
Numberocracy if ya like...
Most of the remaining community these days are veterans anyway who after ten years know what they're doing and
probably won't suggest too much BS, if any at all...
As said before - the maps get played often, they stay, they're not - they get dumped, end of.
What would be the point of upholding some mysterious map standard and having an empty server eventually down the
road coz half of the maps fit some inflexible gubbernmint requirements but otherwise are full grown bore-fests ?

Like I was just starting to enjoy Rail again - whoops - gone with the wind after participating in just
three rounds - I mean - I don't get it, what's the point ? Play Magnanimous_Lucid instead ?

Soooooo, deep breath - rant over.

Again, if any1 cares, last but not least, here my updated perma wishlist

Rail
UP Opera (NV)
Halo Bloodgulch
Grendelkeep
Darkwood Forest (NV)
Battlefront Rilez
Ravine
V1 LandingZone
Mass Destruction
Tricky

greetz and gut ye later

Thanks for the map suggestions Snuff

Snuff wrote:hm, there actually might be... check out Battlefront Rilez and ONS Ravine...
suggested them a while ago but so far to no avail...

Well it does take time. We did put some work in and got Dreamus back on the server and we've just been given the go ahead from Crusha to begin editing Rail. Also on a side note, we try not to change the maps too quickly, on 16th Nov MTMU went on the server, 23rd Nov AirMars, 30th Nov FloodGate, 7th Dec Tabletop, 14th Dec Dreamus.

Popularity should be the ONE and ONLY criterion if a given map stays or goes.

The popularity of a map is very important, but it's not the be all and end all. Take Rail for example, it's very popular and people will vote for it as soon as it's available, but, as soon as that lag kicks in people will start to leave and join a different server. The same thing would happen night after night after night and Rail will be top of the map list, but CEONSS would be a dead server. Do you remember how we all use to play on TC?

One other thing is that there are a handful of maps on the server which are only on because certain people who contribute to the server considerably enjoy them. I don't think that's unreasonable on a 89 map roster.

I mean, the community isn't really getting any bigger, is it ?

Believe it or not the number of people playing on CEONSS has gone up over since our last server move at the start of the year.

So why not make things a bit more interesting
and attractive for the remaining faithful few by just adding maps asap if requested and let the numbers decide ?
Numberocracy if ya like...

That's what we do for the most part, but we look at the total number of people playing on the server instead.

Most of the remaining community these days are veterans anyway who after ten years know what they're doing and
probably won't suggest too much BS, if any at all...

I'm sorry, but most of the maps which are requested are utter shite People who do this (and I get it a lot via PM) normally qualify it with the words "it was very popular on server x" while never questioning why server x is now dead.

As said before - the maps get played often, they stay, they're not - they get dumped, end of.
What would be the point of upholding some mysterious map standard and having an empty server eventually down the
road coz half of the maps fit some inflexible gubbernmint requirements but otherwise are full grown bore-fests ?

"bore-fests" is subjective. But anyway, why should we remove maps which some people like to play on occasion rather then every night?

Could go on in future:

Rail - I will personally spend 10's of hours over Christmas to try and fix the lag issues.
UP Opera (NV) - Need to fix it's weapon lockers and remove the mines, but it could go on in future.
Grendelkeep - Spam fest, but I suppose it could replace one of the less popular DM maps at some point.
Battlefront Rilez - A god awful chokepoint map, but it could be given a trial run with a new link setup.

Little to no chance:

Darkwood Forest (NV) - Too small. Would need someone to put some serious time in with the editor to give it a chance.
Ravine - Not good enough.
V1 LandingZone - Has serious design flaws. Would be a good 3v3 map.
Halo Bloodgulch - I don't know what it is, but it's not a map.
Mass Destruction - Have you got any idea how much ear ache I would get if this went on?
Tricky - Most unpopular of all the standard maps.

hey cat, I get your point(s) and I really appreciate you're taking the time to fix Rail...

some thoughts regarding the issues you raised,

I mean, the community isn't really getting any bigger, is it ?


Believe it or not the number of people playing on CEONSS has gone up over since our last server move at the start of the year.

Agreed but I didn't mean CEONS in particular, more the general tendency of ANY game - even good ol' counterstrike - to see it's playerbase eventually decline for various reasons - since you mentioned TC - I remember back in the days more often or not I had to wait sometimes up to half an hour to get a free slot even in the afternoon, refreshing the server browser every 5 seconds to see if anyone had dropped out and hitting the join button quick enough to snatch the slot away from some other waiting party...
and these days are unfortunately gone - on every server that remains...
which is why I think it might be not the worst idea to maybe lower some
CEO requirements for a map to be upped in order to keep whats left of us sufficiently entertained...

the other argument I'd like to throw in the ring addresses the "map too small" argument -
I mean the server is hardly ever full for an extended period of time and even in rush hour it
hardly goes beyond 20 - 24 for long... which means darkwood, halo, mass destrution, v1 would be fine most of the time - they were on TC anyhow - and even if the server gets full and ppl don't have the common sense NOT to vote in a small map with spamming tendencies - then I'm pretty sure that an admin would be present at full load who could pull the plug if things get out of hand - but realistically, what's the probability these days for this going to happen ?
besides - all the maps mentioned have been up on TC in tha olden days with no ill effect wse...
(admittedly darkwood got pulled eventually - but as I said - the server was fully loaded more often then not
and things got indeed too spammy with 32 ppl on it, but for up to 24 ? no issue, really... it just would need to be assured that spider mines are removed from every locker except the core... and that it's the 5 node (or was it seven ?) version...

I also remember darkwood being up on some other server before, they even had two versions running whereas the server decided automatically which one to load depending on player count... two nodes more if population exceeded 12 or 14 ppl... but always very popular...

you're right of course regarding the subjectivity about weather a map is good or not (or a borefest)
and I can only speak for myself when I say that a couple close combat maps, call them "spamfest" if ye like - once in a while are a welcome refreshment that allows for a bit of a fun catharsis after a couple of wide spaced tactical maps in a row... and also, an incentive to stay on the server a while longer...
I mean - forgive me for nagging - but what would be the damage ? maybe 10 to twenty minutes "lost" during rush hour every couple of days max...

everybody has of course different standards or preferences regarding maps but also quiet a bit of tolerance as well, I mean, even if I personally don't like a given map that much (mostly the more spacious ones don't do it for me) I'll still play it and others do the same for maps I dig more then they do... even the most popular maps aren''t totally perfect for every1 all the time...
like with rail recently I managed to get three shots at it with one occasion where the admin had to put it even on manually due to popular request, the other days it got used in the afternoon and was not available most of the time in rush hour...

also, regarding Rail (or any other potential newlyadds ) again - the concern it might be staying always on top is maybe true for a couple of days, maybe even weeks, but if the map would be always available my guess is that it would just sink in and get a normal usage like any other map that's not under threat of being dumped... I mean it used to be a perma on TC if that means something...
the issues with Rail (and a couple of otheres) there I believe were mainly due to the sub prime server location and that many plrs from eastern europe and even turkey with shitty connections gave the server (and themselves) the hiccups, eventually making one or the other hc player frustrated and switch servers...
but nowadays ? what are the alternatives, really ? not so many servers hanging around anymore, leave alone ones with a dedicated community...

I certainly never left TC too often back in the days, occasionally hopping over to CEONSS but genreally I found it more
important and enjoyable to be able to play with the usual suspects than with a bunch of strangers
for the sake of slightly better ping and frame rate... same today really, if I get bored - I'll exit the game and don't bother looking for a different server - more fun playing with the gang...

regarding the complaints and issues with MTMU - maybe it might help to up one of the other versions, I dimly remember quiet enjoyable times even though it never was one of my favorites...
ONS-MinusTankMeUp-)o(-Gorz-BigAl-Edit1.ut2
ONS-MinusTankMeUp-Nightwolf-Rc7-Edit1.ut2

some more field tested recommendations I enjoyed playing (pulled mostly from the old TC rooster)

ONS-CBP2-Valarna-BadWolf-IceEdit-b7.ut2
ONS-HomeSweetHome-)o(-V3-Danno.ut2
ONS-Dawn-T32-Beta4.ut2
ONS-Battlefront-Rilez-ECE-32p-V8-beta5.ut2
ONS-BE-Ravine-IceEdit-b24.ut2 (respectfully disagree with the "not good enough" assessment here)
tactical enough regarding nodes in the outer canyon, spacy enough for vehicle maneuverability, action hotspot with deemer at middle node rewarding team with levi - certainly desrves a "good" rating imho)

(same goes for halo - fun map, sniping, action hotspots, carnage, messy - good - imho)

ONS-CBP2-Argento
ONS-BiggerBeerBattle.ut2

non perma TC but certainly enjoyed them while they were up:
ONS- Eire
ONS-Naturaleza_Artificial

perhaps ONS-Cataldi Park as well although I wouldn't
call it the best thing since sliced bread...


well, thanks again for your time and effort and sorry for keeping on nagging for maps,
but what can I say ?
Nostalgia maybe... seen them, played them, enjoyed them, would appreciate it tremendously to
have the chance to play them once again before the lights go out for good on ut2k4...

greetz

Snuff wrote:[...]sorry for keeping on nagging for maps,

No need to apologise, it's great that you are coming up with maps, we all want the same thing after all

I remember back in the days more often or not I had to wait sometimes up to half an hour to get a free slot even in the afternoon, refreshing the server browser every 5 seconds to see if anyone had dropped out and hitting the join button quick enough to snatch the slot away from some other waiting party...

Yeah I remember the good old days. Even better back in 2004 when you would scroll for some time just to find a random server with a free spot Hopefully we can get back to that with the new UT4 which we will be hosting btw.

which is why I think it might be not the worst idea to maybe lower some
CEO requirements for a map to be upped in order to keep whats left of us sufficiently entertained...

I'm hoping that we can have the best of both worlds. If we add one new map a week (even that's pushing it) it should give us enough time to get maps up to standard and add old popular map onto the server. If we had more editors this would be easier to do.

the other argument I'd like to throw in the ring addresses the "map too small" argument -
I mean the server is hardly ever full for an extended period of time and even in rush hour it
hardly goes beyond 20 - 24 for long...

Well this is the quietest time of the year for us. Things tend to pickup in the first half of the year and by around June/July we're at our busiest, so I have to keep in mind with regards to the maps that we will move towards more 32p nights in the near future.

which means darkwood, halo, mass destrution, v1 would be fine most of the time - they were on TC anyhow - and even if the server gets full and ppl don't have the common sense NOT to vote in a small map with spamming tendencies - then I'm pretty sure that an admin would be present at full load who could pull the plug if things get out of hand - but realistically, what's the probability these days for this going to happen ?

I will have a look at Darkwood as soon as I get the chance to get it up to standard. I'm sorry but Halo can't go on. I'll give Mass Destruction (grudgingly) a one week trial run after FalloutCity, player feedback will determine if it goes on.

and I can only speak for myself when I say that a couple close combat maps, call them "spamfest" if ye like - once in a while are a welcome refreshment that allows for a bit of a fun catharsis after a couple of wide spaced tactical maps in a row... and also, an incentive to stay on the server a while longer...

I agree.

also, regarding Rail (or any other potential newlyadds ) again - the concern it might be staying always on top is maybe true for a couple of days, maybe even weeks, but if the map would be always available my guess is that it would just sink in and get a normal usage like any other map that's not under threat of being dumped... I mean it used to be a perma on TC if that means something...

It use to be on the server permanently as was one of, if not, the most popular map on CEONSS.

the issues with Rail (and a couple of otheres) there I believe were mainly due to the sub prime server location and that many plrs from eastern europe and even turkey with shitty connections gave the server (and themselves) the hiccups, eventually making one or the other hc player frustrated and switch servers...
but nowadays ? what are the alternatives, really ? not so many servers hanging around anymore, leave alone ones with a dedicated community...

We've worked very hard to find the best server location in Europe, we've maxed out the hardware and tweaked the settings. The last area that we can improve performance wise is the maps. UT2004 has always had a problem with 32p and it's doubly hard for us with DM maps. I'm not willing to abandon all that work and money just to put on a handful of maps. Sorry.

I certainly never left TC too often back in the days, occasionally hopping over to CEONSS but genreally I found it more
important and enjoyable to be able to play with the usual suspects than with a bunch of strangers
for the sake of slightly better ping and frame rate... same today really, if I get bored - I'll exit the game and don't bother looking for a different server - more fun playing with the gang...

I understand that, but we're trying to get the best of all thing. Good server performance, community spirit and fun maps. In time we can do this.

-------------

ONS-CBP2-Valarna-BadWolf-IceEdit-b7.ut2 - I'd like to get a version of this on at some point.
ONS-HomeSweetHome-)o(-V3-Danno.ut2 - Believe it or not HSH is due to go on tomorrow
ONS-Dawn-T32-Beta4.ut2 - Bete 3 plays well I think.
ONS-Battlefront-Rilez-ECE-32p-V8-beta5.ut2 - I have it open in the editor right now. Will go on at some point.
ONS-BE-Ravine-IceEdit-b24.ut2 (respectfully disagree with the "not good enough" assessment here)
tactical enough regarding nodes in the outer canyon, spacy enough for vehicle maneuverability, action hotspot with deemer at middle node rewarding team with levi - certainly desrves a "good" rating imho) - I'll take another look, but hold your breath.

(same goes for halo - fun map, sniping, action hotspots, carnage, messy - good - imho)

ONS-CBP2-Argento - Does that not hurt your eyes?
ONS-BiggerBeerBattle.ut2 - Ken and Peg edited this map for us a while ago and is due to go on the server at some point.

[...]I mean - forgive me for nagging - but what would be the damage ? maybe 10 to twenty minutes "lost" during rush hour every couple of days max...

Look at last night. When Sunrise was voted for the server went from 24p to 10p and it took about an hour for it to get back up to 24p, then TwinFangBeta was voted for and it was pretty much goodnight for the server. While those maps do have their place it does show the problem we would have having too many "server killers".

I took over the server from Heinz back in April not only to keep CEONSS going, but with the understanding that I would take good care of her. Even though it's very tempting to put some maps back on for nostalgia's sake, it wouldn't be in the best interest of CEONSS in the long run and i'm simply not will to put all our time, money and effort at risk just for a few gg's. Give us time to get some of these maps up to standard and they will go on, promise.

hey Cat, thx for the reply...

forget Argento, mixed that up with some other map...

wish I could offer some help regarding editing and such, but admittedly I've got absoeffinglutely no
clue whatsoever...

where only have VK, Crusha and the rest of the backup gone... sigh...

looking forward to see battlefront again, regarding the chokepoint problem at the bunker node - sfaicr the difficulty
was that one only managed to get hardly one player in successfully, even if two or three attacked most were eaten
by spider mines or the odd defender... and the one player who made it wasn't usually fast enough to handle four tasks at
once - take down node, build it up, defend and stay alive at same time...
I remember the only neat solution was to sneak up with raptor on the node in the building to the right behind enemy lines ,
wait for team to eventually successfully take down and secure bunker node at least for a couple of seconds and
simultaneously start destroying the node in the building and hereby prevent opp. team from teleporting in and
making use of the heavy vehicles ...
and hopefully get it up quicker then opposite team was able to destroy bunker node
again... building node was usually usually locked and therefore no one gave a darn to secure it properly so the
sneaking in bit wasn't a problem...
once node in building was up and bunker node locked, the game was pretty much over...

to make it easier to mess up the bunker my suggestion would be to add a deemer to the map and additionally make the bunker node
a fast charger / fast destructable...
and put some boxes in the hole near the wall as well...
if conventional play doesn't get the job done due to the reduced time for destroying/charging,
alternative gameplay could look ike: secure deemer,
manage to get to bunker entrance, release deemer, take cover behind boxes, build up node quickly,
let team teleport in to defend and well, bob's your uncle...

perhaps the deemer could be placed in the middle of the map or only spawn as a reward for securing the center node,
thereby focusing the carnage and the tank fun at the open middle ground rather than onto the respective hard to get to
bunker entrance...

well, just my two cents worth of input...

should Ravine (TC edit) come under serious scrutiny, it definitely needs additional quick spawning mantas at every node in the
outer canyon - if there's action going at the important middle node I remember it being pretty frustrating spawning
at some canyon node and find only a tank or some other slow vehicle to get back to center...

Even though it's very tempting to put some maps back on for nostalgia's sake, it wouldn't be in the best interest of CEONSS in the long run and i'm simply not will to put all our time, money and effort at risk just for a few gg's.

well, what can I say ? they're suggestions after all, not demands... the mentioned nostalgia is more
of a personal thing, back on TC they were just that... normal maps with no issues and medium to good popularity...
also, I didn't pull them randomly from the 2000 something available maps or the odd server
out of sheer boredom - they're exclusively olden TC maps, meaning they were already thoroughly
tested and played on a somewhat similar server... it wouldn't hurt I guess imho... just saying...

sorry to hear the def no for Halo though...

maybe at least once for a week or so ? no ? ok ok I'll shut up...

I see HSH is up now... woohey... see you around then...
and please DO let me know when ye feel the need for further wiseacring on my part...

greetz

Getting back to the OP...

I think tank me up could be improved by:

1) Putting Avrils at all lockers.
2) Getting rid of all the overpowered vehicles, eg just have badgers and goliaths with a centaur here and there for anti air use.
3) Move the nodes out of the trenches and fill the trenches with water.
4) The nodes from the trenches could be put inside buildings to improve the poor hand to hand combat aspect of the map.
5) Add more cover for foot soldiers between buildings so they have a chance.

I don't like the trenches, the bridges interfere with the display when vehicles go under them. Also, once you are in one of the trenches, you are quite limited in how you can manoeuvre and where you can go, whether on foot or in a vehicle. I think the best option would be to have pinch points at bridges, so teams have to act cooperatively to take and hold bridges with tanks so their team can advance. Also, on foot, you could swim across the water, whereas the tanks would have to find a crossing point.

Xac wrote:Getting back to the OP...

I think tank me up could be improved by:

1) Putting Avrils at all lockers.
2) Getting rid of all the overpowered vehicles, eg just have badgers and goliaths with a centaur here and there for anti air use.
3) Move the nodes out of the trenches and fill the trenches with water.
4) The nodes from the trenches could be put inside buildings to improve the poor hand to hand combat aspect of the map.
5) Add more cover for foot soldiers between buildings so they have a chance.

I don't like the trenches, the bridges interfere with the display when vehicles go under them. Also, once you are in one of the trenches, you are quite limited in how you can manoeuvre and where you can go, whether on foot or in a vehicle. I think the best option would be to have pinch points at bridges, so teams have to act cooperatively to take and hold bridges with tanks so their team can advance. Also, on foot, you could swim across the water, whereas the tanks would have to find a crossing point.

Those are all good suggestions, I'm just afraid most people who like this map like it for the op vehicles and tank-only gameplay. I think if we changed the gameplay drastically like you have suggested, we would end up with a much better but way less popular map. It's the same crowd that likes Tanks-a-lot and OmahaBeach....

.
guess the manpower for large scale editing/redesigning is just not available anymore...

perhaps give this version a go instead...

ONS-MinusTankMeUp-)o(-Gorz-BigAl-Edit1.ut2
.
.
.

Cat1981England wrote:Does anyone know of a good tank map to replace Tanks-a-lot?

get rid of the ion. Its a pretty good map but the ion is horrendous on this map.