Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   
Back to List

Skullduggery 1.4 WIP

By Sprang & _Shaman
Rating:

3v3+ sea map by _Shaman. Texture map by Sprang.
Size: 16 x 10

PLAY ON THIS MAP


Downloads: 97
Manual downloads:
http://api.springfiles.com/files/maps/skullduggery_1.4_wip.sd7

Last battles

Multiplayer B431379 4 on Skullduggery 1.4 WIP
Bots B399316 1 on Skullduggery 1.4 WIP
Bots B398179 1 on Skullduggery 1.4 WIP
Bots B396258 1 on Skullduggery 1.4 WIP
Bots B396254 1 on Skullduggery 1.4 WIP
Bots B396253 1 on Skullduggery 1.4 WIP
Multiplayer B396178 6 on Skullduggery 1.4 WIP


Preview
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 2 (32 records)
sort


FIranksprang
8 years ago
Here's a graphical update for less overwhelming purpleness.

Todo: Featureplacer doesn't rotate features, needs fixing.


+11 / -0

CHrankConnetable
8 years ago
great job you both!! looking forward to test it
+2 / -0


CArankTheMooseIsLoose
8 years ago
FIranksprang smoth did a fixed version of feature placer for me that randomly rotates features if you set them -1. You can grab it from Zed.
+1 / -0


FIranksprang
8 years ago
Thanks Connetable! The map sure brings something new and intriguing to the table.

And thanks for the hint Moose, will check it out.
+0 / -0


EErankAdminAnarchid
8 years ago
(edited 8 years ago)
quote:
Todo: Featureplacer doesn't rotate features, needs fixing.

Scened does, see masterfully hand-rotated trees on Coag for demo.
+1 / -0


FIranksprang
8 years ago
I was talking about the gadget included with the map, which doesnt rotate the features even though they have a rotation value in the config.

Sounds like Zed and Coag are good working examples to learn from.
+0 / -0


USrankShaman
8 years ago
Oh.. so it does exist! Cool!
+0 / -1
USrankAdminJasper
8 years ago
(edited 8 years ago)
Seems fine good map
+0 / -0
USrankAdminJasper
8 years ago
This seems like a fine map any progress?
+0 / -0

PLrankAdminSprung
8 years ago
Note: startbox format changed so for 1.5 you'll need to port it (see here for how it now looks).
+1 / -0


USrankShaman
8 years ago
Ok. Thanks. Ill update it with a new height map.
+0 / -1
USrankAdminJasper
8 years ago
Any news?
+0 / -0


USrankShaman
8 years ago
(edited 8 years ago)
I was working on a revised heightmap/feature placement, however, due to some unfortunate circumstances (me not having a gpu), I can no longer work on this for the time being.

Height map is, for the most part, done. However, I can't work on it any more :(
+0 / -1

CHrankAdminDeinFreund
8 years ago
(edited 8 years ago)
If only you could use a land only fac on such maps for their superiority over mixed terrain facs(on the land parts).
+1 / -0
USrankAdminJasper
8 years ago
Featured

I want to see how this map plays more.
+1 / -0

AUrankAdminAquanim
8 years ago
(edited 8 years ago)
I disagree with that decision.

I like that the concept of this map was tried and is supported, but it's essentially an exercise in blind countering start positions, IIRC frequently gets decided in the first minute of combat on the centre island yet takes a while to finish, and being a sea map only makes those problems worse. Many unfun games will be played here.

My real problem is that I really do not want to be obliged to play on this map in a tourney or similar setting - having it occasionally come up when somebody !maps isn't too bad.
+2 / -0
USrankAdminJasper
8 years ago
(edited 8 years ago)
Hardly, only one game was ever played here.

Which I was in. It was not bad.
+0 / -0

AUrankAdminAquanim
8 years ago
I watched at least one game on a previous and functionally identical version of this map, and it was not good.
+1 / -0


USrankShaman
8 years ago
(edited 8 years ago)
So how could one prevent the bad parts of this map while keeping the idea alive? What worked, what didn't work? Asym balance by start positioning is an interesting idea, but I'm not sure how to improve on the execution. Generally speaking I'd love to try to get a situation where you could 'win' one initial battle but not totally decide the game. Perhaps the problem is that the center island has too much metal income?

Benefits to that kind of change would be that:
- Losing center does not matter much.
- More empathisis on expansion rather than cheese.
- Less commitment to winning 'the big cheesy middle push'

I'm assuming though that the amount of metal income from the middle island + reclaim is what 'decides' the game (EG: there are too many mexes). Perhaps what would be cool is to just eliminate all but 2-4 mexes total on the middle island.

Would that help game-play wise as to prevent the first minute decided gameplay?
+1 / -1

PLrankAdminSprung
8 years ago
(edited 8 years ago)
The startpos on the enemy side didn't work. That always results in the dude there getting rushed. If that was the main idea then I don't think it can be salvaged with standard play rules. This is regardless of how valuable the position actually is because now somebody is dead and can't play the game.

The layout didn't work either because it was sea (it's alright for a sea map but sea currently sucks by definition).

The visuals worked, the map feels fairly cozy.
+0 / -0
Page of 2 (32 records)
Back to List