Page 2 of 2
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:59 am
by axbaby
i am enjoying playing quake4 bot "sa8bot" .. i wonder how they handle and will handle teleporters in new/old maps .
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 1:55 am
by seremtan
Geit wrote:imho it's best to use as few teleporters in maps as possible, preferbly none.
Oeloe wrote:The main thing to base map layout on is still the items/powerups and the 'weight' they give to different areas.
So true! Although item placement can change in later design stages. It depends on which gametype what you design around. Usually around basic (gametype specific) design principles, of course taking item placement into account.
SonicClang wrote:If you're making a SP level and you feel like including DM in it, then it's ok to use teleporters in areas because it was designed for SP.
A SP map rarely ever makes a good MP map so converting a SP map to DM is madness, madness I tell you! Linearity in DM maps is bad.
not all SP maps are linear in layout terms. they are sometimes only linear in the sense you need to follow a preset path through them, rather than in the sense that you start at one end and end up at the other end
some of valves city17 maps are like this
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:25 am
by Foo
I think I now have to add a new rule, or at least the foundations of one:
Thou shalt not stay up all night finishing a map. For your work will be unsatisfactory come morning light.
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:12 am
by cha0s
StormShadow wrote:Some of my rules of tp placement include,
a) have the TP exit in the same general area as the tp, so its not just an easy escape route
b) dont allow the tp to take a player to a significantly advantageous position
i can't agree with this. a teleporter should travel the longest possible distance.
in a good tourney map you should be able to go to ANY point in no longer than like 10 seconds. therefore teleporter entrance and exit should be at opposite sites of the map, and at best, at different height levels.
and relating to b) a teleporter from the bottom level of a map, going to the top is not wrong in any way. a dominated player, spawning at the bottom, needs to get a fair chance to get to the top. jumppads are often no option, because you might be an easy target. and while stairs are relatively safe, they're to slow to travel 3 height levels. so placing a teleporter from the bottm to the top is a good (often the only) solution.
... my 2 cents
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:49 am
by Lukin
cha0s wrote:StormShadow wrote:Some of my rules of tp placement include,
a) have the TP exit in the same general area as the tp, so its not just an easy escape route
b) dont allow the tp to take a player to a significantly advantageous position
i can't agree with this. a teleporter should travel the longest possible distance.
in a good tourney map you should be able to go to ANY point in no longer than like 10 seconds. therefore teleporter entrance and exit should be at opposite sites of the map, and at best, at different height levels.
and relating to b) a teleporter from the bottom level of a map, going to the top is not wrong in any way.
Agree with you about the point b. However I think Storm has right about a
Yes, in a good duel map you should be able to get anywhere quickly - but even without the teleporters. Allowing player to move between opposite sides of the map in a one second is not always bad, but can be very dangerous for sure (easy control of the entire map and spawn raping).
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:56 am
by Oeloe
If you need long range teleporters for dominated players to have a chance to escape from being raped on your map, the layout probably isn't very good. I think players do need to be able to intercept eachother within a reasonable amount of time regardless of where they are. It's good to add some routes that are safer than others, but stealing major items should be a skill (of the dominated player) and denying minor itoms a skill of the dominating player.
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:06 pm
by roughrider
Very interesting points, and I have about a 50/50 agreement on all areas of what has been said. From a dm/ffa stand point, tele's are advantageous in relation to good fast get-aways. And it can help in bringing certain areas together in way and means of flow. But I tend to agree with Geit about having as very few to none, if possible.
Since I play CTF more then any other game type, I find that tele's in ctf are for the most part, null and void. Granted, I have played on, and do play on ctf maps that have tele's and they seem to work pretty good, but each map I am talking about only has one tele per base and none other. q3wcp18 for example, that tele behind flag should have never been placed because it gives no advantage except to the defenders as anyone going thru it is instant rail bait.
A well placed tele isn't a bad thing, but over-all it should be avoided if at all possible. Seriously, as mappers, we have the ability to (or should have ) create the alternate solution to a problem are and be able to bring sections/areas together without using tele's.
my .02 cents
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 4:10 pm
by Oeloe
I'd like to know what swelt has to say about this.
And a quote from the competitive design guide by wviperw:
# Vertical Transport
1. Teleporters
Teleporters are probably the best mode of vertical transport when going a somewhat good distance. In recent Q3 maps, it seems as if mappers have almost been afraid to use them, instead focusing more on jumppads. Teleporters are good however, because they keep the flow going better than jumppads. This is because jumppads create stop-and-go type play. Some of the best tourney levels have a number of teleporters, for example dm4 had 5, and aerowalk had 4.
Two problems you should be aware of appear when putting a bunch of teleporters in your map. First of all, players can get confused as to which teleporter takes them to which area, thus steepening the learning curve of the map. Not really all that big of a problem since you're not designing the maps for newbies, right?
The second problem that arises with the addition of teleporters is the possibility of telefrags. This problem occurs most frequently when the map has reciprocal teleporters. So does that mean you shouldn't include 2-way teleporters? That really depends on the map. CPM3 contains a good implementation of a 2-way teleporter set in that the teleport destination is off set from that actual teleporter by a strafe jump. Some players think telefragging completely ruins a map, while others think it adds strategy to the area. So if, in testing the map, the players complain about telefragging, you might want to reconsider your teleporter system.