ONS-StarReach [here we go again!]

Anything about UT2004 mapping, Uscripting & more
Post Reply
User avatar
Crusha K. Rool
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon 29. Aug 2011, 00:14
Description: Coding Crocodile
Location: Germany
Contact:

ONS-StarReach [here we go again!]

Post by Crusha K. Rool »

Heinz just asked me in a PM for my latest version of StarReach, coincidentally right after I played the V2 on the server and was not really wowed by the new gameplay, but (recalling an old rant thread from Peg) I am not alone with that.
So I might as well make this thread about it, since I'd be ready to address some potential problems of my last version of the map when I shell out a new one.

Things I had in mind:
  • Replace Ion Painter in destroyed buildings with Super Shield (or possibly even Mega Shield).
  • I am not sure if I should keep the instant Teleporter to the top of the roof from down there. The propeller booster from V2 (regardless of Peg's ranting about it, for now) seems actually like a nice addition.
    Sure, it leaves you vulnerable, but imho that's the point of it. Using the Teleporter is an incredible shortcut that works around most of the enemy defences for the rooftop nodes. If more people actually knew about it and used it, it would probably be much stronger than it's perceived right now. But I am open for discussions on this point.
  • Including the Ion Painter on the central building, the map features currently 3 Painters and 4 Deemers in my last version. Removing the two Painters in the destroyed buildings without replacements would bring it down to a more or less reasonable number. Any objections? Does anyone want the garage Deemers relocated somewhere else, for instance on top of the propeller building as in V2? That would mean that someone using that route would get access to two super weapons in a row, though, which also lead him directly to the rooftop nodes. So maybe not such a good idea.
  • Currently I am uncertain about whether or not to include the Manual Turrets at the rooftop buildings as in V2. That node already has some pretty nifty defences, so it's not really needed. I want to keep the Hammerheads in the map, so this could act as protection against them. But given how they are already huge flying targets that attract half the Shock spam of the entire team once spotted and thus have a hard time manoeuvring and aiming properly, I feel like those turrets could be too much.
Other than that, these improvements over V2 are included already:
  • Better lighting.
  • Nicer music.
  • Indoor gravity of building areas is higher than outdoors, which gives a nice change in combat pace for infantry and vehicles.
  • Location names.
  • Material types.
  • Anti-Spam fences.
  • KarmaWakingVolume at lifts, causing vehicles to be properly propelled upwards even when not driven.
  • Shock Rifles and Lighting Guns in lockers.
  • Tau Hammerhead with reduced knockback from Shock Rifles and working secondary miniguns that can shred targets below it pretty quickly (more efficient against vehicles than infantry, since the latter is pretty dodgy).
User avatar
Pegasus
Posts: 1321
Joined: Wed 4. Nov 2009, 23:37
Description: ONSWordFactory
Location: Greece

Re: ONS-StarReach [here we go again!]

Post by Pegasus »

Heinz, please change the msg board's search engine's parameters, if you can, so that long, uncommon terms that happen to be comprised by a series of joined common words can be accepted as valid arguments. Words like "StarReach" are currently impossible to retrieve results for even though they would be ranked as characteristic, atypical and of low semantic noise by any sensible or half-competent algorithm (nothing like Google's caliber, that is). I know that a workable alternative here would be to do an external search via Google itself, but if we can improve user convenience while keeping ppl within the site itself, I'm sure they'd appreciate the gesture that much more. Thanks.
In this instance, for example, I'd be quite eager and curious to find the (old?) rant(s) by me Crusha is talking about (but decided not to link us to) so I can see what he's referring to myself, illuminate whatever objections I might've raised back then and on what basis I might've done so, explain what my positions on these issues are today and, thus, help further contribute to this discussion which has been long overdue for this map IMO. Equally, StarReach has been long overdue for a return to the CEONSS roster despite whatever few, fringe misgivings might've been expressed and catered to in the past by low-G opponents on the basis of that last attribute alone and nothing more; both this map's actual ONS nature as well as its gameplay quality, balance and variety are quite easy to defend and demonstrate, in case anyone would be interested in an actual debate about this rather than the usual method: whine, whine and whine some more 'till the admin's ear has had enough and he alters the roster to your tastes.

No more crap from now on. Ask for ONS, play ONS and promote ONS on an ONSlaught server or stop pretending you are an ONS player and try your luck elsewhere. And no, that doesn't mean vehicled maps only or NV maps only or whatever other preconceived notions you might've attached to the gametype; it means maps that offer meaningful strategic choices and promote a plurality of playstyles regardless of the nature of weaps/vecs content. I'd've loved to explain to you all exactly how those two principles and them alone are the only thing that matters to good ONS, but luck had other plans for my "NV Maps" thread response, so I'm only giving you the bottom line here now.
To anyone wondering why I'm saying all this or phrasing it like that now, it's because some of the "marginal priorities" (tank whoring, dueling or whatever) people's continuous lobbying about the server's roster over the past 12 months has brought about much worse and more systemic disruptions than you might've imagined possible on your own before Heinz decided to speak his mind out lately. Even within as small and isolated as our pastime's world is, if we insist on pulling outward out of stubbornness or personal preference instead of allowing for some room for compromise and consensus, we may soon end up so fractured that nobody will have a community anymore they'll be able to call their gaming home and we'll just have to battle bots on the fractured li'l island servers perfectly meeting our terms.
Anyway, I just hope I've startled enough the previously silent majority so that they too can realize what's been going on, add their voice to the conversation about what really matters and let the rest in the group understand why their views might be perfectly legitimate, but ultimately not the basis for a sustainable community on their own. The future of CEONSS might just depend upon it.

PS: For the record, I do believe the fan jumppad method of propelling players to the middle roof in the Omni's StarReach-V2 is an elegant and gameplay beneficial manner of transport; if I've been against it in the past for reasons that I don't recall now, rest assured I've been convinced otherwise for quite a while now, Crusha. I also feel that, whatever improvements we may conclude this map needs should be done by taking your V7 as the starting template, not the Omni's V2, for the number of reasons you already listed. Add the jumppad fan to V7, don't try to start from scratch again and redo all those tweaks to their V2 again. Lastly, Hammerheads of whatever version are, to me anyway, about due for a reckoning thorough performance evaluation and re-examining of whether they've actually been benefiting or hampering the gameplay in StarReach.
Eyes in the skies.
Image
User avatar
laboRHEinz
Administrator
Posts: 1269
Joined: Fri 4. Sep 2009, 14:28
Description: Old Fart
Location: Hamburg

Re: ONS-StarReach [here we go again!]

Post by laboRHEinz »

Pegasus wrote:Heinz, please change the msg board's search engine's parameters, if you can, so that long, uncommon terms that happen to be comprised by a series of joined common words can be accepted as valid arguments. Words like "StarReach" are currently impossible to retrieve results for even though they would be ranked as characteristic, atypical and of low semantic noise by any sensible or half-competent algorithm (nothing like Google's caliber, that is). I know that a workable alternative here would be to do an external search via Google itself, but if we can improve user convenience while keeping ppl within the site itself, I'm sure they'd appreciate the gesture that much more. Thanks.
In this instance, for example, I'd be quite eager and curious to find the (old?) rant(s) by me Crusha is talking about (but decided not to link us to) so I can see what he's referring to myself, illuminate whatever objections I might've raised back then and on what basis I might've done so, explain what my positions on these issues are today and, thus, help further contribute to this discussion which has been long overdue for this map IMO. Equally, StarReach has been long overdue for a return to the CEONSS roster despite whatever few, fringe misgivings might've been expressed and catered to in the past by low-G opponents on the basis of that last attribute alone and nothing more; both this map's actual ONS nature as well as its gameplay quality, balance and variety are quite easy to defend and demonstrate, in case anyone would be interested in an actual debate about this rather than the usual method: whine, whine and whine some more 'till the admin's ear has had enough and he alters the roster to your tastes.
Can't recall any (public) StarReach debate over here. Try this please : http://www.gametracker.com/clan/freelan ... =starreach
User avatar
laboRHEinz
Administrator
Posts: 1269
Joined: Fri 4. Sep 2009, 14:28
Description: Old Fart
Location: Hamburg

Re: ONS-StarReach [here we go again!]

Post by laboRHEinz »

Crusha K. Rool wrote:Heinz just asked me in a PM for my latest version of StarReach, coincidentally right after I played the V2 on the server and was not really wowed by the new gameplay, but (recalling an old rant thread from Peg) I am not alone with that.
So I might as well make this thread about it, since I'd be ready to address some potential problems of my last version of the map when I shell out a new one.
Huh WTF? Your old link still works! ( http://www.mediafire.com/?nerc18mqza15q0i ) Is the ~Edit7 the latest edition?

BTW, I didn't PM you exactly coincidentally right while you played the current version ;)
User avatar
Pegasus
Posts: 1321
Joined: Wed 4. Nov 2009, 23:37
Description: ONSWordFactory
Location: Greece

Re: ONS-StarReach [here we go again!]

Post by Pegasus »

laboRHEinz wrote:Can't recall any (public) StarReach debate over here. Try this please : http://www.gametracker.com/clan/freelan ... =starreach
Well, that takes me back... Cheers, boss.
Eyes in the skies.
Image
User avatar
Crusha K. Rool
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon 29. Aug 2011, 00:14
Description: Coding Crocodile
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: ONS-StarReach [here we go again!]

Post by Crusha K. Rool »

This thread I was referring to: http://www.gametracker.com/clan/freelan ... read=22840

Originally I linked to it in the OP, but then I recognized it as the thread where I got overly bitchy towards Foibos (and retrospectively I am ashamed of my pretty childish behaviour back then that caused me to call this out in public) and didn't want to dig up that old vendetta.


I have an edit 8 on my HDD, which was never released. I don't recall exactly what I changed from edit 7, but there must have been at least something of significance if it caused me to work again on the map back then.
User avatar
laboRHEinz
Administrator
Posts: 1269
Joined: Fri 4. Sep 2009, 14:28
Description: Old Fart
Location: Hamburg

Re: ONS-StarReach [here we go again!]

Post by laboRHEinz »

I took Edit7 for now. Of course, any improvements are welcome.
Crusha K. Rool wrote:I have an edit 8 on my HDD, which was never released. I don't recall exactly what I changed from edit 7, but there must have been at least something of significance if it caused me to work again on the map back then.
Maybe you planned to include the newer OnslaughtSpecials version? Edit7 uses the old one.
Post Reply