I know we've had this discussion before, and mostly agree, but I feel the need to repeat it for anyone who didn't see it before. My major disagreement with the stance you portray on the forums is that it's totally the wrong approach most forgers should be taking. I agree that it's good for advanced forgers to expand their boundaries. I think the number of forgers that fall into that category is extremely small though. A thorough understanding of level design is necessary for someone to have any hope of making a unique design that plays well. For the 95+% of forgers that don't have that, they're better off building maps that utilize proven design templates until they can consistently build maps that play extremely well. This generally takes years of experience. The people at that learning stage should be rewarded and praised for any progress they make. It's all relative. Preaching that something is worthless because it's already been done by other people is extremely counter productive considering that most of the people reading your messages are still in the early/mid learning stages. It's like telling a 4 year old that training wheels are for pussies and they need to drive a motorcycle instead. And this doesn't even take into account the fact that the vast majority of forgers are forging for enjoyment. They're building what they enjoy building or enjoy playing. For most, building something creative is less important than building something they enjoy. There's no reason for them to change what they're doing. Even a well seasoned and extremely knowledgeable forger should feel no shame in building something that's not creative. I personally like to think outside of the box and do something new sometimes, but not all of the time. I also get great enjoyment from working on proven designs, trying to find ways to make them play even better, or just experimenting to see how minor adjustments impact gameplay overall. I think it's absolutely good to challenge people to improve. For some, that means building something besides a 2b2t. For others it means building for a different gametype or player count. For a small minority it may mean building something that's totally off the wall, something far different than what we've typically seen in Halo. Making that as a generic recommendation seems inappropriate to me though. I cringe every time I see it, thinking of the number of inexperienced forgers that may adopt that approach when they're nowhere near ready to tackle something like that. I believe that everyone should learn the basics first, and progress over time; unless they don't want to progress, and that's fine too.
This is hilarious and it looks like you spent time really thinking this out too. lmao Who wants to do a quick blockout contest to see who can make a phallic shaped map that played well? lol
Of course I agree with all that. I'd have to be a massive prick not to, do what you gotta do to learn level design at whatever stage you're at. This is all just what I'm looking for when I look at maps.
Good. Now I can turn my focus to Chill Out! I totally agree with your assessment of the CE maps, for exactly the same reasons you listed. I subscribe to the fact that 'donut' describes the movement flow on a map more than the shape of a map, but even using that criteria Chill Out isn't a donut. As Multi said, the map supports multiple strategies. One of the big ones involves timely flanking, via tele's or through the middle rooms. It's actually really rare that gameplay flow ends up being circular. The timing of the pickups alone prevents this for most of the match.
I've started work on a swamp-like infection map as well, using a lot of elements inspired by shi no numa remastered. Might try experimenting with some elements.