ctf_Rotten2

[Sigglez]

ctf_Rotten2

By Biggles
__________________

The next Rotten, Flagthrowing is an option at this map.


(^Click To Enlarge^)

________________________________________

Download / Rate on TMS
________________________________________

This map is hosted by jrgp's Soldat Mapping Showcase

[RatBoy]

Why would no one comment this one. It's somewhat standard but looks good, I shall take a closer look later =D

[Poop]

First one is better for its simplicity. Heres my issues

1. The mid route (Best part of original rotten IMO) is gone
2. Top route is tighter, making it way easier to defend from base by spray
3. Without a mid route, defending in general becomes easier because you only need to hold 2 routes.
4. The 2 routes are way too tight (Its only suitable for 1v1's), meaning you encourage clans to defend with 1 player and send 1 up/1 low.
5. The flag throw is probably slower than simply going low route and running (Which removes its purpose).

As a standalone map it may be decent, relative to original rotten it is not good at all. Also the flag throwing maps are getting a bit overdone now  (Too many of em).

[Sigglez]

yeah we tried it at #soldat.mapping and its not really something special at all, I have to admit it was more about the looks this time, something that the first one are missing.

[Poop]

It always amuses me but from all my experience with maps whenever a map is made for looks (Or the mapmaker is constantly thinking about looks while making the polygon structure etc), it is not nearly as fun.

Besides, looks in the overview are EXTREMELY overrated. Who the hell is gonna look at the overview while playing the map. Even crappy looking maps in the overview (Like Laos) look good enough or even great in-game.

[zakath]

It always amuses me but from all my experience with maps whenever a map is made for looks (Or the mapmaker is constantly thinking about looks while making the polygon structure etc), it is not nearly as fun.

Besides, looks in the overview are EXTREMELY overrated. Who the hell is gonna look at the overview while playing the map. Even crappy looking maps in the overview (Like Laos) look good enough or even great in-game.

looks aren't overrated, looks is probably what holds soldat back from greatness because when new ppl test soldat and play a map like Laos which looks like crap tbh and also imho is a crap map playwise. do you really think that they will get hooked on soldat? especially nowadays with virtually every single game carrying fantastic graphical details.
Its of course more to soldat then graphics. I also find it quite funny that on soldat.pl there are a bunch of screenshots however none of them are from the default maps most of them are actually from VirtuallTT maps which are "famous" for it looks.

[Dusty]

I'd rather have five people playing Soldat because of the game itself than twenty because it looks so awsome. Also, Laos doesn't look crappy at all!

[Suowarrior]

Besides, looks in the overview are EXTREMELY overrated. Who the hell is gonna look at the overview while playing the map. Even crappy looking maps in the overview (Like Laos) look good enough or even great in-game.

Looks will be always overrated at forums, since it's the easiest thing to comment on. Also one thing why mappers might try make awesome looks is time. Time to do a lot of low quality looking maps or time to do a few high quality looking maps. When creating a lot of maps, soon you'll be out of good mapping ideas.

So is it better to try make awesome looks for layout, you believe the most or is it better to start making maps without good ideas and with worse looks?

Looks might be reason to make map. Sometimes mappers like to try to be artists, if that so they've usually failed in real arts (at least I did), but soldat polyworks makes it possible to make something pretty if you put there some effort.

Is there sense to put polygons together in 30mins and spending 10-20hours for looks? No, there is no sense. About 90-95% of map's potential lays on those 30mins polygons and the rest 10-5% on looks, that's on classic ctf.

And yeah, Laos looks awesome.

[zakath]

I'd rather have five people playing Soldat because of the game itself than twenty because it looks so awsome. Also, Laos doesn't look crappy at all!

Well thats part of the problem its hard to get in new players. Its like when you see a girl and she looks great(first impression) you might actually walk up to her and talk to her and try to learn to know her. But if you instead see a girl that looks awful you most likely never even will talk to her. And it might turn out so that great looking one is a awful as a person and the awful looking one is the one that is a great person.
Same thing here if a new player sees the bad looking maps like Laos they will never give soldat a chance.

[Blacksheepboy]

Same thing here if a new player sees the bad looking maps like Laos they will never give soldat a chance.

You've got a good point.

It always amuses me but from all my experience with maps whenever a map is made for looks (Or the mapmaker is constantly thinking about looks while making the polygon structure etc), it is not nearly as fun.

You sir, just stated a fallacy.  Although you may be correct in some instances, you have overlooked an infamous mapper.

Anyway, been there, done that with the 'pretty overview' ordeal.  I've noticed, maps that may be fun to play but don't look good don't get nearly as many downloads as very pretty (although potentially crappy) maps.  Initial attraction is what counts.  Whether or not the map has replay value will determine whether or not people remember it.  Same goes for any game.

@ZakathSigglez (sorry 'bout that...): I don't know if I'm too fond of the flag-throwing ordeal in this map, but it looks nice, lol.

[Sigglez]

Well I wasted like 15% at the layout and alot more at the looks. And It was meant this time. Don't we got enough of the nice layouts etc