What makes a map good?

Discussion about the game and its default mods.
noobmapmaker
Posts: 1086
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:59 am

Post by noobmapmaker » Thu Mar 12, 2015 9:51 am

Good points and interesting read, Ripsn. Please post your other thoughts when you remember them. One thing does come to mind: at some point it is more about the AI that needs an upgrade in pathfinding, innstead of mapmakers taking into account the flaws of the AI.

Ive read somewhere that people are working on pathfinding, and I am not in the position to ask for anyting - Im happy OpenRA exists. I wish I could throw in some money, but at this time there is little left (though a boardgame I have created will get published in the Netherlands! Woohoo! If (IF!!) it's a great succes, I will place money on bounties)

But the not so fantastic pathfinding of the AI limits the creativity alot. Cant use to many scenery, cant use chokepoints, rather not use bridge or muddy transitions... ofcourse there are plenty of possibilities left, but huge branches of specific map types get cut off. Thats a shame.. a well.. we'll work with what we got. There are fun good maps already and hopefully people keep trying and adding them.

noobmapmaker
Posts: 1086
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:59 am

Post by noobmapmaker » Thu Mar 12, 2015 9:54 am

By the way, 2 questions:

1) Do units move faster on roads?

2) If units are on higher ground, does their range increase?

User avatar
kyrylo
Posts: 193
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2015 8:46 am

Post by kyrylo » Thu Mar 12, 2015 11:41 am

1) I'm not sure, but it's easy to test. It sounds like an awesome addition to the game, though.
2) Probably not. It would be awesome to have that (akin to SC1), but it might potentially ruin some maps.

Ripsn
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 4:20 am

Post by Ripsn » Fri Mar 13, 2015 4:36 am

1) yes
2)No

zinc
Posts: 657
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 3:46 pm

Post by zinc » Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:15 am

BaronOfStuff wrote: Asymmetry. That way the whole map can offer different advantages in different areas, instead of just being some poxy mirror-match.
I see your point.

But then you have to worry about whether you are giving an unfair advantage to one of the teams. Or I would worry anyway.

Sircrashalot
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 2:08 pm

Post by Sircrashalot » Sat Mar 21, 2015 2:28 pm

I personally prefer symetric maps (better point symetric then axial), they do not have to be exactly mirrored though. They still can look good if you put some effort into them. Examples:
http://www.tauniverse.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43725 (i know those maps are not from openra but can still be used as an example i think)

yellow (theRaffy)
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 7:24 pm

Post by yellow (theRaffy) » Wed Apr 08, 2015 12:43 am

Hey,
I lately thought about 1on1 and 2on2 maps, where's no ore in the middle. Often the players fight for the middle ore, and the player who can hold it gets stronger, because he has more ore. A rush to that ore patch normally pays out well. But wouldn't it be more interesting, if the player who is holding the middle is not getting stronger because he was strong in the first place? I mean maps with no ore in the middle are more self balancing. and will last longer, because of no body gets a boost for dominating the map, at the middle for example.

It's very interesting, one of my favorite maps (doubles) has ore in the middle, but another map from starcaft I called lost temple does not have ore in the middle.


And I like terrain, not these ugly rectangles.. divide is so boring, because you can't use the terrain as much as at other maps.

my best 3:
- vegetarian (not vegetation) http://resource.openra.net/maps/2373
- lost temple II http://resource.openra.net/maps/942
- huge haos ridges http://resource.openra.net/maps/262/


Btw. there is a nice adaptation beside my remapping of Lost Temple. It's called lost village.
http://resource.openra.net/maps/2001

yellow (theRaffy)
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 7:24 pm

Post by yellow (theRaffy) » Wed Apr 08, 2015 1:12 am

JOo wrote: that here is probably one of the best looking maps ive seen on OpenRA-Resource-Center :
(other then that , its too big for a 2v2 ... and bad access for armys in the middle)

http://resource.openra.net/maps/1261/

a shame nobody plays it

Image
I checked this map. Indeed a very nice map was not able to find a lot tiles misplacement, or missing rodes. I marked the spots of bother in the attachment file.
Attachments
4oKLSis_spot_of_bother.jpg
4oKLSis_spot_of_bother.jpg (174.45 KiB) Viewed 3301 times

User avatar
squirrel
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2015 4:54 am
Location: Tree

Post by squirrel » Sun Apr 12, 2015 3:57 am

I´m starting to hate Great Divide... I would like to see more "natural" terrain maps... you know, with cliffs, and landscapes. Maybe more FFA oriented maps...

A good map is subjective I think, a strategic map is another stuff :)

Nukem
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 6:26 pm

Post by Nukem » Thu Apr 30, 2015 6:27 am

These Great Divide maps that people are uploading just do not have enough oil derricks for me.

-10/10 design
-next 4v4 tourny map
Attachments
lol.png
lol.png (497.07 KiB) Viewed 3156 times

User avatar
squirrel
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2015 4:54 am
Location: Tree

Post by squirrel » Fri May 01, 2015 5:46 am

Very derricks. many cash, much strategy, such complexity, wow. #doge

PersianImmortal
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:04 am

Post by PersianImmortal » Sat May 02, 2015 10:51 pm

Solid map bro just add some diamonds behind everyone's spawns with 100 gem mines and you're set. Might even be the best map ever made at that point.

Nukem
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 6:26 pm

Post by Nukem » Sat May 02, 2015 11:55 pm

;) :D

Post Reply