Duke After Dark Map Testing (4V4)

Discussion in 'Halo and Forge Discussion' started by Duke of Mearl, Mar 30, 2016.

  1. SecretSchnitzel

    SecretSchnitzel Donald Trump
    Forge Critic Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,433
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    1) WTF? That's new...
    2) #DealWithIt
    3) They're pretty clearly shown with the particle effect.... And I prefer having a teleporter rather than a wrap around staircase, as the latter can potentially slow down gameplay. Not to mention, I like teleporters. I'll work on making them more noticeable.
    4) #DealWithIt. Not a bad thing. At. All.
    5) Weird, I thought I fixed that.
    6) Also weird, because I've been in (and seen) plenty of games were caps were successfully pulled off easily. All it takes is a little team work and thought.

    Appreciate the games. Don't appreciate opinions.
     
  2. Duke of Mearl

    Forge Critic

    Messages:
    182
    Likes Received:
    273
    Frame rate looking across map (spawn starts, base to base)
    Not being able to clamber center structure annoyed players, also had an area around sharp staircase (bottom strongholds) that was hard to clamber
    Teleporter Receiver not clearly receiver. Are teleporters needed? Nobody used, make more obvious?
    Doorways easy to grenade since they are narrow.
    Middle stronghold can be capped from top bridge, may make top control TOO powerful
    Assault may be a little too hard to score because bases are easy to set up an defend, too easy to grenade score area (quick access to grenade from respawns).

    1. Maybe new update? I noticed it personally as did a bunch of others.
    2. I'll reword it then: The fact that it seems like a clamberable area and its not makes the pathing unclear and confused players. Also, does not utilize Halo 5 movement mechanics that people are used to. Makes pathing through the middle of the map choppy and lesser skilled players have a very hard time traversing areas of major importance to gameplay.
    3. Players still felt it wasn't clear, some tried to go through out node.
    4. Never said it was a bad thing. At. All. Just something people noticed and commented on.
    5. Obviously you can also capture it from above the bunker in the middle as well, not sure if thats intended or not. Personal opinion I think it shouldnt be... but thats just my take on it.
    6. Hmm, may be an isolated test here then.
     
  3. SecretSchnitzel

    SecretSchnitzel Donald Trump
    Forge Critic Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,433
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    1) It must have something to do with the update. I've noticed drops in forge, but in customs I have not. I highly doubt "a bunch" noticed it, as it's rather minuscule.
    2) As I said, deal with it. It's a simple crouch jump. I'm not going to hold players hands and make every single little ****ing area something they can clamber. If it were a clamberable ledge, it would allow too easily for players to move from bottom mid to upper mid. This was an intentional design choice, and exists for a good ****ing reason.
    3) Some players are retarded. Moving on.
    4) See number 3.
    5) Above the bunker is intended, as below is too small of a space. I thought you were meaning you could still capture from the bridge above it, which is not intended at all. I could alternatively set it as the entire bottom floor in the middle atrium, but I feel that would be too difficult to capture then.
    6) Again, see number 3.

    I had explicitly asked for feedback on map readability and spawning, not for the opinions of idiots regarding my design choices. Don't like the way it, or parts of it, plays; then too ****ing bad. These are intentional design choices I made because I intended the map to play a certain way, and I couldn't give two shits about what a bunch of newbie forgers have to say about it.

    If you're going to push your opinions on design choices, I highly suggest you at least try to make some effort in figuring out why they exist and weigh the pros and cons for them. Flatly stating X should be changed is an extremely narrow minded approach, and it comes off as disrespectful to the designer as it gives the impression that you think you know better.
     
  4. qrrby

    qrrby Waggly piece of flesh
    Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,970
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    There was no explicit instruction in this regard. That being said, there were a couple of areas where readability suffered. That pro jump in the middle doesnt even look like a ledge, as its the same dark color in the middle. Even whilst knowing what it is and why its there, it ****s with your depth perception. Maybe dont bring them out physically, but visually.

    The nubs at the bottom of the sharp stairs at either vat **** with h5s clamber system. Whether its a skill jump or a clamber, it needs consistency.

    There is a spawn in the large rooms connected to either vat that faces you at a wall. Personally made me look for a jump up or hallway nearby, but once i recognized this and spawned there in the future, it still felt intuitive to do so as well as annoyed the piss out of me.

    The scripted doors magically come out of solid stone, ruins the immersion :p

    Also, dont fix bomb spawns, they worked EXACTLY how bomb spawns should work.

    Other than that, the map played well and i enjoyed the layout. 4/5
     
    SecretSchnitzel likes this.
  5. SecretSchnitzel

    SecretSchnitzel Donald Trump
    Forge Critic Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,433
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    Just noticed that running around. Weird. Lowering it now.

    I think one of my spawn points got turned around somehow. I'll look into it.
     
    qrrby likes this.
  6. N3gat1veZer0

    N3gat1veZer0 Legendary
    Forge Critic Senior Member

    Messages:
    149
    Likes Received:
    302
    GT: N3gat1veZer0
    4v4 Map Name: Resolute
    Map thread link: http://www.forgehub.com/maps/resolute.2061/
    Gametypes supported: Slayer, Strongholds
    Preferred gametypes to be tested: Slayer, Strongholds
    Any specific feedback you are focused on receiving: Spawns, weapons, and really anything any of the players can think, of be super nitpicky (regardless of preferences or actually something with the map)
    Would you prefer to be present when your map is tested, and if so best availability: I don't need to be there, but I can be if you need players.
    Thank you :)
     
    #66 N3gat1veZer0, Sep 15, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2016
  7. The Grim Dealer

    The Grim Dealer Forerunner
    Senior Member

    Messages:
    287
    Likes Received:
    369
    GT: The Grim Dealer
    4v4 Map Name: ODA-241
    Gametypes supported: Slayer, Strongholds
    Preferred gametypes to be tested: Slayer, Strongholds
    Any specific feedback you are focused on receiving: Feedback related to general map layout, spawn quality, map openness, weapon set etc.
     
    N3gat1veZer0 likes this.
  8. Dead Cassette

    Dead Cassette Legendary

    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    50
  9. Duke of Mearl

    Forge Critic

    Messages:
    182
    Likes Received:
    273
    Some Feedback from lobby:

    Map is too large for fours, seems a lot of extra spaces and repetitive pathing.
    Too easy to suicide (bridges not finished, holes in ground)
    Lifts not obvious to where they are leading
    Power weapons off centered (red gets incineration cannon)
    Frame rate due to trees
     
  10. DethMacoll

    DethMacoll Legendary
    Senior Member

    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    7
    GT: itsDethMacoll
    4v4 Map Name: High Sanctum CE
    Map thread link (if available): http://www.forgehub.com/threads/high-sanctum-wip.154177/
    Gametypes supported: Slayer, CTF
    Preferred gametypes to be tested: Slayer
    Any specific feedback you are focused on receiving: Scale, Layout, Sightlines, Pacing, Weapon Choice/Placement
    Would you prefer to be present when your map is tested, and if so best availability: Yes, just let me know and I can be present for testing as well.
    Would you like this map to be considered for UCC Pro Testing Lobby: Yes
     
    #71 DethMacoll, Sep 30, 2016
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2016
  11. Dead Cassette

    Dead Cassette Legendary

    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    50
    Thank you for testing my map.
    • After looking at your feedback i cut the map in half, re purposed main paths and deleted and modified extra spaces to fit in with the rest of the map
    • filled in all the holes in the map with nature and closing gaps between structures. now the only place to fall off the map is outside the perimeter.
    • took out the incin cannon and replaced the binary rifle and the over shield to where both teams have an equal fight over it.cutting the map in half also reduced the tree count and overall clutter of the map
    I would like to resubmit my map
    i hope i can be in the lobby this time.
     
  12. K27R

    K27R Legendary
    Forge Critic

    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    49
    Didn't know there was a map testing team on Forgehub. I got a new one but it's not 100 % finished until 343 release a higher object count.

    GT: K27R
    4v4 Map Name:Whispers of Containment
    Map thread link (if available): CLICK HERE
    Gametypes supported: FFA Slayer, Slayer, Strongholds. (Infection may be possible)
    Preferred gametypes to be tested: Slayer
    Any specific feedback you are focused on receiving: Hoping this map can be acknowledged as to having more play potential. Aesthetics hoping to be admired.
    Would you prefer to be present when your map is tested, and if so best availability: I won't be available
    Would you like this map to be considered for UCC Pro Testing Lobby: Unsure
     
  13. Chronmeister

    Chronmeister Blockhead
    Forge Critic Senior Member

    Messages:
    977
    Likes Received:
    2,155
  14. PharmaGangsta1

    PharmaGangsta1 Dr. Deathpit
    Senior Member

    Messages:
    670
    Likes Received:
    1,236
    GT: PharmaGangsta1
    4v4 Map Name: Calypso
    Map thread link (if available): https://www.forgehub.com/threads/calypso-wip.154049/
    Gametypes supported: Slayer, Strongholds, Oddball
    Preferred gametypes to be tested:
    Strongholds, Slayer
    Any specific feedback you are focused on receiving: Overlapping/confusing sightlines, ability to comprehend pathing/predictability, usefulness of scattershot, and thoughts on teleporter.
    Would you prefer to be present when your map is tested, and if so best availability: Not sure, maybe.
    Would you like this map to be considered for UCC Pro Testing Lobby:
    Not yet. Please let me know if you feel it's ready or still needs alterations.
     
  15. BodeyBode

    BodeyBode Ancient

    Messages:
    342
    Likes Received:
    557
    gt, bodeybode

    gametype:4v4 extinction

    map: Face to Face
     
  16. Esoterica

    Esoterica Mythic

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    13
    GT: Harmonic Bliss

    4v4 Map Name: Chernobyl (beta)

    Map thread link (if available): None available. Lights, colors, textures and other details have not been completed, so I haven't created a thread yet. Want to test gameplay before I spend hours on details that may end up deleted.

    Gametypes supported: Slayer, FFA, Capture the Flag, Strongholds

    Preferred gametypes to be tested: Team Slayer, Capture the Flag

    Any specific feedback you are focused on receiving: Pacing: is it slow due to the map size? Asides from scaling, what would you suggest to speed up gameplay, if necessary. Balance: are any spots too vulnerable or too powerful? Orientation: if necessary, how can I help new players intuitively decipher the map layout.

    Would you prefer to be present when your map is tested, and if so best availability: Yes, but I work the next three nights and I'd rather the map get tested without me than not at all. Shoot me a notice if there's any sporadic day testing and I'll catch it if I can.

    Would you like this map to be considered for UCC Pro Testing Lobby: Yes, though I'd like to save that for the final version.
     
  17. Stunt

    Stunt Legendary

    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    15
    You should totally test out Waist High when you get the chance.


    GT: STUNTARTIST
    Game Types: Strongholds, Slayer
    Link-https://www.forgehub.com/maps/waist-high.4210/
    Feedback: Anything, even things that may seem insignificant. Focus on spawning and potential changes to power weapons if ideas arise.
    UCC: Yes
     
    #78 Stunt, Nov 27, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2016
  18. Egggnog

    Egggnog Game Crashers

    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    331
    GT: ExpiredEGGGNOG
    4v4 Map Name: Blockout 2
    Map thread link (if available): Not available
    Waypoint link: Here
    Gametypes supported: Slayer
    Preferred gametypes to be tested: Slayer
    Any specific feedback you are focused on receiving: Scale, layout, sightlines
    Would you prefer to be present when your map is tested, and if so best availability: As long as I get the feedback it doesn't matter.
    Would you like this map to be considered for UCC Pro Testing Lobby: No.

    Additional Note: This map is a Blockout which I believe you don't test, but I need it tested for my blockout competition.
     
    #79 Egggnog, Nov 28, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2016
  19. Unfound

    Unfound Art Team
    Forge Critic

    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    127
    GT: unfound
    4v4 Map Name:Thelios
    Map thread link: (Link)
    Gametypes supported:Slayer, Strongholds, FFA, Multiteam
    Preferred gametypes to be tested: Strongholds
    Any specific feedback you are focused on receiving: In general the pacing, is it too slow, are there too many ways to escape encounters, at this very moment would you say it would be in a suitable state for matchmaking if not what are the most concerning parts that stick out to you and what would you suggest to fix that?
    Would you prefer to be present when your map is tested, and if so best availability: I'd like to be there if I can make it. Most likely I'll be able to attend just send me a message on xbl
    Would you like this map to be considered for UCC Pro Testing Lobby: Yes
     

Share This Page