CEONSS

g]

An idea of BridgeOfFate node layout (inspired by joeblow).
The points are:
- to make it easier to hold 8/11 when defending
- to remove constant slaughter from 9/10

What do you think of this?

Bridge is a popular map, players are used to it as it is, im not sure editing it would be a good idea. just saying

"...remove constant slaughter..."

I disapprove.

Never touch a running map

SPAMBOX was a running map too, as were the Minus & Nevermore TMU-Nightwolf versions. More to the point, populism-based doctrines like that have only ever made exactly one contribution: hinder progress.

CEONSS has a demonstrably better n' more well-rounded entry in the dueling-oriented ONS niche, and that is VK's Playground. It's high time Bridge were removed from the roster as redundant to allow for growth towards other directions, as well as to act as a disruption the chaining of DM-heavy maps that goes on every damn night, something Heinz had been weary of for the greater part of the last 2 years. Just this retiree's opinion, of course.

Regarding Bridge: Its only flaw is the weird node linking, which only allows two paths to the enemy nodes. The edit which Maniac showed would make the map better, because it offers multiple paths and it would make make the entire game less node 9 and 10 centered.

Pfeww im flattered!

Well first off sorry this took so long to reply. I do remember our conversation about Grendal Keep and Minus tank me up and node layouts. I think part of that equation is terrain ,vertical more important than ever. I think we will leave that out for the time being.

I must point out that I LIKE comebacks! I like that a team has a chance to comeback from loosing its prime nodes and a chance to win the match. This to me is more important to FAIR PLAY then the teamswitching/stacking that seems to go on on occasion.

You mentioned time to nodes and I got to say I never thought much about it but its true DISTANCE to nodes is just as important. Maybe thats why I feel Minus works so well as an ONS style map. I think this is what hurts Rail C as a map. The loosing team task of building and holding the middle node until someone can destroy the prime is nearly impossible. Mani you and I have tried it with TS communication and still it didnt work.


Personally I like Bridge of Fate as it is BUT there is little if any chance of a comeback once the middle nodes are captured and held by the other team. I cant recall 1 maybe 2 comebacks in all my playing it. I think this was just because of a team, that the majority were spawn camping and not even playing ONS really and lost track of the map, that there was a comeback of some sort.

I'm thinking try this layout in a SEPARATE map voteable and see how it plays. Or put it on the test server.

I have an idea for Rail btw if your interested.

Pegasus wrote:CEONSS has a demonstrably better n' more well-rounded entry in the dueling-oriented ONS niche, and that is VK's Playground. It's high time Bridge were removed from the roster as redundant to allow for growth towards other directions, as well as to act as a disruption the chaining of DM-heavy maps that goes on every damn night, something Heinz had been weary of for the greater part of the last 2 years. Just this retiree's opinion, of course.

I really don't care about scientific investigations about maps. I like this map, it is fun, and many others also do. And it's also your personal taste that you prefer playground. Nothing more. Period.

If popularity was the aim, we would shut down the server and start a Cod or Battlefield one.

Over the last year we have increased the number of DM maps on the roster by two (SpaceCargo, Rail), and replaced the least popular ones Katharos-NV and Maelstrom-NV with Pandemonium and Grendelkeep. To make progress with the roster we should be creating better maps to replace the 3rd tier ones and letting the overplayed shite gradually lose their appeal with better alternatives.

We have always tried to cater to all the ONS minorities with a balanced roster and cannot become too DM orientated. When Mani's Ziggurat is ready, it may be time to give Bridge a rest for a bit. Possibly rotating it every now and then with Stone and SpaceCargo.

Throughout my years of active participation in the UT community, as well as during my tenure as a CEONSS staffer, my roster management recommendations have always revolved around two axes/priorities:
- The first is my understanding of principles of game design in general, a subset of which is map editing, and a field which these days has attained academic recognition and is being offered and taught in universities. More specifically though, I focus on compliance with standards developed and evolving based on those principles in order to better assess the quality of gameplay that different map offerings can (potentially) deliver across the entire spectrum of UT/ONS' skill-based disciplines, i.e. not just dueling. I don't know whether that would merit such pursuits being characterized as scientific, but if so, I'd welcome that as an honourary distinction.
- Secondly, the adherence of [prospective] content to the server's mission statement of delivering ONS not just in name, but in essence, and good ONS at that too, through the application of the aforementioned criteria.

Fun by itself is an entirely mercurial concept. For varying amounts of people, hitscan fights are fun, DM is fun, BR is fun, drinking with friends is fun, griefing others is fun, playing different games is fun, and so on. Hell, search long enough and you can find a fan of anything somewhere having fun with it, no matter its quality. CEONSS exists to serve a specific purpose and, judging by the size of the community created around it, that purpose seems to resonate with a lot of people. Progressing with that in mind, thus affirming the community's trust in the project, would therefore make the most sense.
As such, pending any official revision regarding CEONSS' purpose, and notwithstanding the sizable amount of member feedback formulated along a more analytical/critical direction, I can assure you that arguments pertaining to raw & unqualified, personal tastes - yours, mine or anybody else's - and populism in general as a component of content evaluation, for that matter, remain as irrelevant an influence to my evaluations as they've ever been.


Beyond this disclaimer, I think there's little point in discussing anything further on the matter, as it seems our fundamentally different perspectives would only doom us to keep talking past each other. Enjoy your stay, and may all your matches be ggs .