User panel stuff on forum
  110 posts on 4 pages  First page1234Last page
European Quake League
2010-08-30, 11:55
Administrator
1843 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
HangTime wrote:
CMT1b was a tweaked version of CMT1, a map designed for 4on4
CMT4 was a tweaked version of androm9, a map designed for 5on5 (which was the preferred TP mode in those days in the UK)
CMT5b was a tweaked version of CMT5, a map designed for 4on4

What are you talking about? Most CMT maps were maps already made, Link picked out maps where he liked the design. He then contacted the designers and got them to make changes so they would better fit for 4on4. All maps was then re-released as CMT1-5, the 'b' versions was made later, the name CMT comes from Link's project.

Some might have had their first release as a CMT map, I don't remember... But I doubt any of them was created from scratch.
2010-08-30, 12:10
Member
2 posts

Registered:
Feb 2010
My opinion would be tb3 + cmt3, but i'm having a hard time thinking of a fifth map and I still get lost even in cmt3. cmt1b could be okay, at least most clans had to play it in EQL10
2010-08-30, 14:25
Member
63 posts

Registered:
Jan 2009
I would like to see e2m2tdm, a pretty fun map everybody should know.
2010-08-30, 16:03
Member
48 posts

Registered:
Aug 2008
Is it already decided to have kenya? I dont mind TB3 only again
Why not have a poll for each division if they want 3 or 5 maps? And each clan gets a vote.

I dont mind playing some other maps if the majority in my division wants that, but if 8 of 12 clans want TB3 it would feel kind of stupid

You could also seperate the voting for group games and playoffs.. group games are more fun while playoffs feels more competetive.

I dunno but personally I dont think it will be fun to watch or play an important decider on a kenya, it just wont be the same standard even if you spend like the entire season to practice the map.
2010-08-30, 16:21
Member
39 posts

Registered:
Feb 2009
FSrazor wrote:
I dunno but personally I dont think it will be fun to watch or play an important decider on a kenya, it just wont be the same standard even if you spend like the entire season to practice the map.

+++++++++++++++
2010-08-30, 16:54
Member
792 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
tb3 plus cmt3, bay12 and cmt1b.
shove it down their throats until everyone has to play them. only way to introduce new maps.
2010-08-30, 17:05
Administrator
1843 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
FSrazor wrote:
Is it already decided to have kenya? I dont mind TB3 only again

It was mentioned on the EQL site that the 'Spring Season' would be TB3 and the 'Fall Season' would be TB3+Kenya - So I'm guessing that it was decided then
2010-08-30, 17:13
Member
1433 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
2010-08-30, 17:26
Member
100 posts

Registered:
Mar 2008
Lets vote. Vote all, who participate in EQL12, with name ofc(or 1 clan 1 vote). That vote was the gayest thing ever (voting on a public forum wtf, what if someone register from different ip adresses and votes till he die? ) BTW check the results again:http://www.quakeworld.nu/forum/viewpoll.php?id=4122 tb3 won... SO lets fucking vote, in this time correctly. Bring some fairness into this game. Lets end this dumb fucking/boring topic once for all. Kenya maps can be really cool in lesser divisions, i would like to play cmt4, but its pretty clear, it just ruins div1. Give kenyas to that div who want it. Lets try this, maybe both side will be satisfied. EQL11 was a way much better than EQL10. Lets find out what ppl wanna play, even thoose who are not commenting here at all. Give me a good cmt1b demo from eql10.
2010-08-30, 19:05
Member
48 posts

Registered:
Aug 2008
I predict this thread will suddenly turn into a long one In fact I have already counted on this and prepared a text document with gathered material from this 7 year old discussion. All possible arguments is already in there! So you can just copy+paste whatever you like from there.
You can find it here: www.text.com
2010-08-30, 19:27
Member
382 posts

Registered:
Apr 2006
miku83 wrote:
words

Votes have established that there is a sizeable demographic that wants 5+ maps and a sizeable demographic that wants 3 maps (there are others, of course, but they are too small to worry about). The compromise is that the 2 yearly EQLs are split between 5 and 3 maps. Obviously we would all prefer that everyone only plays what we want all the time, but that cannot happen. Instead we all have to live with a compromise. Suck it up.

miku83 wrote:
what if someone register from different ip adresses and votes till he die?

I seriously doubt that the forum admins can't see the name of every single person who voted, and pretty much everyone knows every other qw player. If there were 999 votes from Stev, En_Stev, The_Stevinator, Stev01, MrStev and StevyStevyBoBevy they miiiiight have noticed it.

And, given the nature of the options presented in that poll, if you think that vote constitutes a "win" (even ignoring the fact that the tb3 option was stuffed after the vote ended) then you are very, very wrong.
2010-08-30, 20:03
Member
100 posts

Registered:
Mar 2008
Stev wrote:
I seriously doubt that the forum admins can't see the name of every single person who voted, and pretty much everyone knows every other qw player. If there were 999 votes from Stev, En_Stev, The_Stevinator, Stev01, MrStev and StevyStevyBoBevy they miiiiight have noticed it.

a few votes can change the result, so u dont have to do it 999 times, maybe 5-6 is enough, and im pretty sure there is noone who would fake registering with his own modified name . Second, every duel or ffa player could vote as well who visited the site. I was the 1 who voted after the voting ended btw . First of all eql members(or clans) should vote to tb3 or 5 map pool. Then if the 5 map pool wins, lets vote wich map would you like to play. Im sure there is a lot of eql players who didnt vote. Cmon what harm can come from this? Or try different map pools for different divisions. Lets try something new, maybe it will work
2010-08-30, 22:12
Member
367 posts

Registered:
Dec 2006
Zalon wrote:
HangTime wrote:
CMT1b was a tweaked version of CMT1, a map designed for 4on4
CMT4 was a tweaked version of androm9, a map designed for 5on5 (which was the preferred TP mode in those days in the UK)
CMT5b was a tweaked version of CMT5, a map designed for 4on4

What are you talking about? Most CMT maps were maps already made, Link picked out maps where he liked the design. He then contacted the designers and got them to make changes so they would better fit for 4on4. All maps was then re-released as CMT1-5, the 'b' versions was made later, the name CMT comes from Link's project.

Some might have had their first release as a CMT map, I don't remember... But I doubt any of them was created from scratch.

Just because they were maps already made doesn't mean to say that they were FFA maps. I recommended androm9 as a possibility for a potential custom map, we had a look at it and then Link asked Slayer (the mapper) to make some changes (creating androm9b). This was then renamed to CMT4 to fit in line with that naming convention.

I guarentee you that this was a TP map designed for UK leagues not 4on4. If you read the androm9.txt file this should be apparent:

Quote:
There is a Pentagram of protection on this map, but it's very difficult
to get it your self, Huh ! I here you say. Well there is a button
than needs pressing to open a door, only it's too far away to get
to the pent before the door closes again. So you need to have a team
mate open it for you, adds a new meaning to team play! (You can see
if your team mate is in position before pressing the button)

As for the rest of CMT maps I can't be 100% sure that they never started life as an FFA map, but 1b and 5b WERE tweaked for 4on4 based on feedback from players (hence given new name because they were different from cmt1 and cmt5, I demanded that they be renamed despite Link wanting to keep the name the same!)

I'll see if I can archive.orgerise some old chat about their history....
2010-08-31, 04:36
Member
401 posts

Registered:
Mar 2006
Whats wrong with cmt4? This map was really popular here in Australia. We played the androm9b version I think. You really have to fight hard for quad, ra and pent on this map. Its unique and different, you should give it a go .
2010-08-31, 16:09
Member
693 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
I think the feeling is that there are too many cells on the map and it makes it too unbalanced towards players who are strong with the LG, which in turns makes it feel a bit too "FFA-ish" and dependent on individual skills rather than team play (in particular the quad). Also, the RA is very difficult to defend and it's a bit of a crap shoot as to who gets it.
2010-08-31, 17:50
Member
382 posts

Registered:
Apr 2006
gaz wrote:
I think the feeling is that there are too many cells on the map and it makes it too unbalanced towards players who are strong with the LG, which in turns makes it feel a bit too "FFA-ish" and dependent on individual skills rather than team play (in particular the quad). Also, the RA is very difficult to defend and it's a bit of a crap shoot as to who gets it.

57 cells in total, if I remember correctly, and add in the fact that the "crap shoot" RA is in a place which virtually guarantees the next LG and unfettered access to quad via the water and that narrow lip at the edge which is almost impossible to defend when you also have to watch the two teleporter exits and the main passage from ssg/cross. Also it features two of the largest open spaces in quakeworld, so it boggles the mind that people would suggest that and complain about too many high ceilings in the likes of cmt3.

CMT4 has some really nice touches like the pent button and YA in general, and it sure is fun to play in mix (aside from those inevitably frustrating "open pent" mm2 moments), but it's far too focused on the indidual for many people's taste.
2010-08-31, 18:11
Member
367 posts

Registered:
Dec 2006
One of the nice things about cmt4 is that it makes you feel like an uberdaddelgott when you are stood at the floor of the RA room and kill guys on the upper walkways with rockets

Good news Zalon: I found the Smackdown Maps project arcticle where Link explains that CMT1 and CMT5 were completely new maps specifically designed for CMT: http://web.archive.org/web/20021222215815/www.challenge-smackdown.com/hq/sdmaps/

To be fair CMT2 and CMT3 started life as other maps beforehand but for example CMT3 was designed and tweaked many times by Baby_Roo! (an established 4on4 player of the time) so even if it was loosely based on naked6 it was pretty heavily designed as a 4on4 map and went through multiple playtests even before the CMT-league playtest.

Likewise scrolling down you will see that CMT2 is a heavily tweaked version of GRDM1, again, a map built purely for 4on4 by the mapper and then developed based on playtesting and feedback.

So essentially with the possible exception of a very early iteration of cmt3, none of the cmt maps are, or ever were, designed as FFA maps.
2010-09-01, 07:55
Administrator
1843 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
I can see that you are right HangTime, but I still don't see it as "maps designed by div1 players" - imho a similar project to create 2 maps from scratch would be a great effort.
2010-09-01, 09:46
Member
48 posts

Registered:
Aug 2008
I think in general maps with "2 sides" are the funniest. All tb3 has it kind of.. and then like in dm3 in the center you got quad that you battle for. It makes for a good setup imo.
CMT3 for example has so fucking many and most of all BIG places.. every room is TOO huge.. it only ends up with a povdmm4 fight in all rooms and just people running around making solo-perfomances, it's too hard to control anything.
Also the best weapons need to be in a place where the controlling team would have a hard time to defend. Dm3 is good example with LG in water and the danger of discharge, e1m2 is also
good even though it happens that you can camp it but that is very hard to achieve and maintain the control if the 2 teams are even. Dm2 might be the exception where you can keep control
kind of easy in a full-lock.

I still vote for having a new "normal" voting though, each division and 1 clan=1 vote. Like it has been done couple of times before.. worked out well imo.
Feels weird to go after some old poll held on the forum(?), god knows who voted in that one. Doesnt feel very relevant to the opinions of the current clans that is gonna play now.
2010-09-01, 10:03
Administrator
1843 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
FSrazor wrote:
Like it has been done couple of times before..

When was this done? Because that idea get vetoed every time it gets discussed in regards to EQL
2010-09-01, 10:46
Member
48 posts

Registered:
Aug 2008
Cant remember exactly which seasons, maybe that was for NQR then.

Just of curiousity how come you didnt like the idea of a poll like that?
To me it seems like the most natural and fair way of determine what the current and relevant clans actually want to play for that season.
2010-09-01, 10:59
Member
1433 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
If you want to make only signed-up teams vote, you first need to make the sign-ups and also wait until sign-ups are closed. So there are a couple of problems in this approach:
1) You get to know what you are going to play after there is no way out.
2) Some people might decide they actually don't want to play (because the poll didn't end as they wanted) and they will cancel their sign-up and complicate the whole structure of the tournament (division size changes after it has been announced as final, etc.)
3) You don't get any extra time to practice any non-tb3 map - because you never know which map will be played in your division until the very last moment before the tournament really starts. Knowing that, it's much better for you to practice tb3 only and then vote for tb3 only, competition-wise, that's the best investment of your time. Therefore this approach "discriminates" non-tb3 maps.
2010-09-01, 11:02
Administrator
1843 posts

Registered:
Feb 2006
I have no problem with 1 clan=1 vote, the EQL site even supports it
2010-09-01, 11:16
Member
48 posts

Registered:
Aug 2008
Hm that's all valid points I must say.
oh well..
2010-09-01, 14:00
Administrator
326 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
I don't understand the urge to get all theese maps forced into the leagues.
TB3 stood the test of time, CMT maps did not. It's obvious to me that if you run EQL tb3 only and some CMT tournament along side each other, CMT wouldn't get much attention. ESP from div1.

But if you MUST have kenya maps, why aren't the exmxTDM taken into consideration? Feels like ONLY CMT maps are an option here. And I have to agree with razor, I'm not very fond of those. They are all very big, big rooms, super fast.

The diversity in the past came from clans having episode maps as home maps. I guess they got phased out because they weren't actually that good for 4on4. Well duh, they are designed as singleplayer maps.
But some smart people did some great work with the exmxTDM project and some cool things came from that.
It feels like the consensus is that CMT3+CMT1B has already been decided... just like the consensus among 99% of world climate scientests is that global warming is upon us, and man made. BULLSHIT =)

If the EQL is suppose to be the backbone of team deathmatch in quakeworld I think it should stick to traditions.. do what it does best. The extras, should come in other forms. Special custom tournaments, ladders or whatever.

But the problem will always remain, it seems impossible to find another pack of 3 maps like tb3 that work so good, amon the houndreds of custom maps outthere.. with so many maps, and even more people to vote on them it looks like an impossible task to come to some agreement.

At least we can agree on this. dm2 dm3 e1m2 as a package deal works GREAT. Both for players and spectators.
ready!
2010-09-01, 14:56
Member
119 posts

Registered:
Sep 2007
no one disputed tb3 works. and what we were asked was to give our opinions. i kinda just want you to threaten to take your ball home so we can forcibly come to the consensus that tb3 is the way to go because your qw ideology is the correct one.
enough already ;p
2010-09-01, 16:59
Member
459 posts

Registered:
Mar 2008
If the non-tb3 that are gonna be forced upon us as you say are that unpopular in div1, I'm sure most of us could come to an agreement to not play them anyway.
2010-09-01, 17:25
Member
119 posts

Registered:
Sep 2007
the different mappools for different divs doesnt make sense to me. even though theres a tb3 eql and tb3+kenya eql, if one div 100% refuses to play nontb3, there is nothing to gain from playing the extra maps in the first place. since the highest tier doesn't want to put effort into improving on those maps, you will never see the best competition on it, which is what you want to get out of the introduction of different maps.
when it comes down to it i prefer a tb3 standard over a flakey and selectively played mappool.

bummer
2010-09-01, 19:53
Member
226 posts

Registered:
Mar 2007
This is not a matter of voting.

Different tournaments have different maps, ie. NHL vs Olympics.

If you want to win you adapt, and if you can't you'll lose, that's it.

I started to play QW when bunny hopping was not around yet, but i'm not against it just because I don't have upper hand (ie. 10 years of experience).
2010-09-01, 21:03
Administrator
2046 posts

Registered:
Jan 2006
Would the map decision in regular eql 12 also be used in eql:pro?
www.facebook.com/QuakeWorld
  110 posts on 4 pages  First page1234Last page