emp_tropicvendetta

With nicer hills I mean MORE ALPHA PAINTING and USE SUBTLE ALPHA PAINTING.

 

I played this, I do think that the novelty of jumping out of the blimp is somewhat lost when you don't have chutes, but aside from that, we played it 2 rounds straight and absolutely loved it. I'd be more than happy to add this to my map pack I'm creating.

I add custom maps to the mapcycle in groups of 4, so with this, snowbound, a possible new midbridge, it will be in cycle at emp4all in no time.

 

It looks very pretty and nice colors. OTOH, the grass areas look a little flat. Given that it's an island with lots of rocky areas, I think some displacements are needed to make the the rocky areas not protude so out of place. I think add some steeper slopes.

 

hey guys good new ivefinished the BE sam site animatations and model

 

The small islands in the top left and bottom right add an annoyance factor to the map. They don't encourage teamwork - usually one guy has to sit out there and baby sit. Or worse, one team gets a ninja rax at bottom right and the other team has to ninja it back.

Also, I'm not a fan of the bushes. I keep mistaking them for turrets. If you want variety on your map, do some more alpha blending and nix the bushes.

And by the way, nice job John and Keef.

 

I'm not sure how advantageous raxes in the SE will prove to be in the long run. I made sure that the SE island would be flat & large enough for a rax and possibly an armory, but I think it's a bit impractical of a deployment zone for ninjas because of the requirement of swimming back to the mainland, as no vehicles can make it to/from the SE island. Some decent defenses along the SE coast of the mainland should often suffice as at least an alert to the enemy's presence.

As for the bushes, they're placed to serve as additional infantry cover (when away from rocks/trees), and also provide not-so-obvious places to drop mines, cameras, and radars. I'm not so sure about removing them - they don't look like turrets to me. If they become problematic though, I'll probably look into it. Such bushes appear on emp_slaughtered as well - perhaps once you and other players have played the map a lot and gotten used to the locations of bushes, you'll be better able to distinguish them from turrets - after all, you probably don't have any trouble distinguishing them from turrets on emp_slaughtered.

Thanks for the feedback thus far everyone. It's helpful and much appreciated.

 

Blimps are pretty pimp.

 

Played two rounds on this map and absolutly loved it. The map was small enough that there were constant fights, the chokepoints were PERFECT, and it was so satisfying to see the missles streak to the blimp and hit it. Needs a better explosion imo, but, that's a small point.

I would be interested to see this map with a standard commander setup, because it's a very good layout for a standard commander map.

 

Yup, this map is great.

Needs to be an official map methinks.

 

Yeah I agree this map is great and should be offical down the road. but I think it needs a bit more optimization. It gets laggy for me when a lot of action is going on. Could just be my computer tho, But none of the offical maps get like that.

 

The Blimps & flags are what make this map unique, why would you want to take that away?

 

I'm happy to see all the great feedback, especially such great compliments as suggesting the map for official status later on. I'm aware that it's got a long way to go though.

With regards to the "flat area" that people suggest I should make more interesting, the map is full size, but the sea consumes a considerable amount of land, thus making the overall island provide a secluded feel & also making the map seem a bit small. To promote the "secluded" feeling & minimize the "small" feeling, I tried to keep most of the terrain as flat as possible to allow for an optimal range of choices of where to build bases and enjoy comfortable vehicle combat. Thus far, that has worked out. People are slowly but surely getting the hang of the fact that they need to establish a base within reasonable distance from the no-build zones around the SAM sites. However, elsewhere on the island, I've seen many different bases built on many different locations around the island. I like this - it makes the map not seem so tactically static. Instead, it's more dynamic.

I also love the fact that most rounds on this map end up being somewhat frantic with constant action - thus far I've not experienced a dull moment, and I've not seen anyone else mention a dull moment either - unless they're at the period where you're just waiting for one of the CVs to die under water.

So, I'm not leaning towards changing the flatter, more open regions of the map. However in the center canyons & other more enclosed regions, I can still do quite a bit to make those more interesting I suppose.

The SAM site effects (explosions, sounds, etc.) seemed to be the most important things that our alpha 1 testers wanted to see. Such effects were non-existent in alpha 1. We did put quite a bit of effects into alpha 2 and beta 1, but we were trying to be slightly conservative as we don't want to crash anyone or anything. You'll experience a more full effect if you're near either the firing SAM site or the targeted blimp at round end. If you're anywhere else, you kind of miss out on that - but, that's why you keep coming back for more, right?

Some likely changes for Beta 2 will be (just listing a few - this list isn't comprehensive):

• More optimization.
• Require 3 or 4 players to capture an enemy SAM site, as opposed to the current requirement of 2.
• Relocate far SW & NE resource nodes as they are often left alone, rendering them insignificant to the gameplay. (Possible, not probable.)
• Increase refinery output for slightly higher resource flow.
• Improvements to SAM site capture/round end effects.

 

Its A Fucking Awesome Map!!

Even Losing Is Funny!!

 

This is genius. I should play this map ASAP

 

a suggestion in case it's on a server without parachutes, add a trigger_push entity under the blimp to help people get to shore a little faster.

Also, if you want to make something more important if it's not currently important, More res to that area, less res to other areas.

Only if you want to draw action away from straight up the middle.

Otherwise, this will be the exact opposite of the refs on isles. sides ignored, middle fought over.

 

Is there any detectable team bias to the map?

 

don't do that, its perfect at 2, PERHAPS increase the time a touch but as it stands now, teams ACTUALLY have to protect it at all times (couple mg's at the minimum) or they can lose to 2-3 guys sneaking in. This is the closest thing we have to ninja'ing these days. imo, leave it as is.

 

I feel the map Is just to open. basicly I'd like to see more clifs and canyon like passes. create turns and dips to add to your "No Draw" options. I'd like this Style of play to be it's own catigory. I think we may actually have a need for official blimps.

 

Well, I wasn't ever too crazy about increasing the player capture requirement - especially so that the map isn't useless if you end up with 2v2, 3v3, or 4v4 etc. when few people are on. I'd prefer to leave it at what it is.

Thanks for the feedback everyone.

Currently, the feedback dilemma is that I hear two sides to the same stories:

-People think the map is too open, others think the map is too closed or small with not enough building area.
-People think the SAM sites are too difficult to capture, others think the SAM sites are too easy to capture.
-People think the SAM sites are not fortifiable enough, others think the SAM sites are too fortifiable.

 

Just comes down to taste, like how some people feel emp_duststorm is too open for their liking (read: "I am only good at turtling and spamming chokepoints with grenades")