tbd_fuji

[B4.]

tbd_fuji
Beta 0.9
Updated: 3/25/12
(3300 x 1476)
Available on Official Map Test Server now
for your TBD pleasure

Beta 0.9 Changelog
- Top area is now slightly lower to make the intersection with mountaintop better, and at the edges.
- Changed the angle of rock cluster near key bomb route (looking for feedback or further ideas about this one)
- Fixed the turret that was hanging from a stalactite, now it sits better.
- Changed JPEG quality from 0.9 to 1.0
- Changed black border method to smooth it out

Beta 0.8 Changelog
- Height reduced to 1476, top route over the mountain is now closed.
- Top mid PU and neutral turret gone
- Removed two turrets from bottom area, added one
- Mild spacing changes to make middle route slightly harder
- Bomb spawn moved slightly up and forward.
- Turned compression back up to high quality so should be much sharper / cleaner

Beta 0.7 Changelog
- Size reduced from 3700 x 1800 to 3300 x 1650
- Scaled down some obstacles, changed obstacle spacing around the middle considerably to open it up
- Rearranged turrets, added new ones including a non-team turret at the top of the mountain which shoots slowly and does lots of damage (this is a contentious addition, I'm not sure about it)
- Moved spawn points up considerably to take advantage of open corners and make bottom bombing route much more viable.
- Moved PUs considerably, PUs close to bases have no health to avoid bomb run problems, lower mid PU is now at very bottom to encourage use of that route
- Added parallax sunset background and clouds.
- Modified borders to make them smoother

[Nikon]

Love the graphics on this map, kinda looks like some of Nitrome's games http://www.nitrome.com/main-games-1.html But yeah, super original graphic style, different from a lot of other graphics.

Anyway, didn't get to play it 5v5 so not sure about the layout. And I wouldn't really know that much cause I'm not an expert on tbd layouts. But anyway, would love to see this map get attention.

Good luck G4

[wolf'j'max]

Cool map, looks huge though. And 1 question, have you ever played tbd_pyramid? :3

[B4.]

Thanks for the comments guys. I checked out that nitrome link and he is quite a talented pixeler.

This map is definitely on the huge side, with the idea being to create a sense of the scale of mt. fuji -- maybe it's too large for practical play though?

I would love to try this out in 5 v 5 so if anyone wants to work with me to put it on a more popular server ... or organize a map test server group... i would love that.

I have never played tbd_pyramid. Is it on map test?

[wolf'j'max]

http://altitudegame.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1268

=]

[B4.]

Noice! I see that map's layout is sorta similar to Fuji and i'm really digging the art style and details. I might have to figure out a way to get my own server so I can just load up a selection of awesome community maps.

[classicallad]

i like this, nice job man. We could really use some maps with different strategy - 7v7 this map could be great fun, 5v5 though its too big, keep it up!

[tomato man]

awesome graphic and cool map but imo you need to make it a bit smaller or it gnna be locomotion3.0. GOOD WORK!

[elxir]

Originally Posted by B4.

Noice! I see that map's layout is sorta similar to Fuji and i'm really digging the art style and details. I might have to figure out a way to get my own server so I can just load up a selection of awesome community maps.

http://altitudegame.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6008

[silent skies]

I like it.

My layout concerns at the moment:
- turret placement ... if you go through the middle of the map there is basically no resistance from turrets at all until you're right up next to the enemy base, and by then it's too late.
- top route currently seems terrible for bomb pushes compared to the mid of the map. This is because (1) there are two turrets shooting at you if you go top (three if you go all the way to the back), while almost none shooting at you in the middle route; (2) all that open space at the top is unfavorable compared to the mid where there's stuff to take cover behind.
- The bottom looks like it will be completely unused, but I'm only basing that on first impressions. 1850 is already a considerably large height for a TBD map (the average height being 1500) so you may consider just lopping that part off entirely.

I like the graphics of the map, and yeah it reminds me of Nitrome's ice vikings game a lot. What'd you make it in?

The outside borders of the objects are all kinda jagged imo and could use a quick touch-up with a smoothing tool (there are a few tools that automatically do it for you, depending on the program you use)

Also, there's a floating icicle object in the middle of the map whose black outline border is at least 5x thicker than any other object in the map. I suggest making it as thin as the others so the art style stays consistent throughout the map.

Top corners could look better with some background/foreground clouds, maybe. Up to you.

[trendy11one]

Yeah, for me open top = woods. And i dont like woods. Not sure how it turns out, but map also looks long. This may lead to long games, and we already have plenty. You may want to put some obstacles like clouds or something to make your map "similar" at each lane. Imagine, if you have 3 routes from bomb to base. Consider top route is preferred for pushing, middle for quick attacks, bottom is easier to fight, but harder to get up to base. Then place turrets and obstacles, so there wouldnt be an easiest way. My personal favorite map is tbd_heights, you can see my idea here. Check out how top route isnt turret-heavy, since you already have to fight spawned enemy team. Middle and bottom protected by turrets though.

Im also agree on bottom part. Either remove it, or put here PU. This will force players to go there. You can take out one of middle ones.

What about that blue border thingy? Im pretty sure you can do 1 pixel invisible border. Or you want it to be like that?

[silent skies]

Originally Posted by trendy11one

What about that blue border thingy? Im pretty sure you can do 1 pixel invisible border. Or you want it to be like that?

People would complain that it looks like it should be a wrap-around, but isn't. I think it best to have some kind of visual border.

[B4.]

Thanks for the nice comments and detailed feedback everyone! I will post changes soon.

re: classical lad Thanks! I didnt know 7v7 was possible, that sounds awesome.

re: Tomato Man Will do!

re: Elxir I'm aware of the map test server, I guess i was just hoping for one that gets frequented a bit more and has a more carefully scrutinized selection of maps. Map test is empty more often than not and there are some really poor maps in the rotation (no offense to those mapmakers, its just that coop maps with neon colors, etc.. is not really my thing. I'm more into TBD/Ball/1DM /FFA. ) Minor gripes at any rate.

re: Silent Skies I will absolutely make these modifications to the layout and I can clearly understand what you're talking about. This was made entirely in photoshop from a reference image of fuji. I got the various "snow" and "rocky" looks using different brushes with multiple layers. I also use a drawing tablet.

I will definitely add some more detail and parallax clouds to the sky. Also, the general jaggedness of the borders of things adds to the art effect, no? If the borders were extra smooth it wouldn't look as much like rocks / snow / etc. Or were you referring to the little icicle thingies all over? Maybe this is just a practical thing for the sake of ricochets, etc.. where art has to suffer a tiny bit.

re: trendy11one Clouds to provide cover on the top route i'm not sure about. I kinda like the idea of an open top as it feels more realistic not having clouds with collisions. I really like the feeling of flying down the edge of the mountain before diving back in. The in/out of mountain feel is enhance by the sky being clear too in my opinion.

I will definitely move that lower PU to the very bottom route to force people to go there. The blue border is there due to the concern silent skies mentioned -- it's just really easy to understand that you're gonna collide.



Upcoming Changes summary:
1.) Size : Height down to 1500, width down to 3000
2.) layout : almost unchanged, minor spacing and size of obstacles
3.) turrets : one less turret on the edge of the mountain, one or two more near the middle route.
4.) spawns: move them higher up, to the middle of the sky perhaps
5.) art: adding clouds to the sky, fixing black border around middle icicle

You guys are awesome! I got so wrapped up in it lately that my business partners actually got mad at me for not being more productive, so i'll have to slow down a bit but i'm not stopping.

[silent skies]

I will definitely add some more detail and parallax clouds to the sky. Also, the general jaggedness of the borders of things adds to the art effect, no? If the borders were extra smooth it wouldn't look as much like rocks / snow / etc. Or were you referring to the little icicle thingies all over? Maybe this is just a practical thing for the sake of ricochets, etc.. where art has to suffer a tiny bit.

I don't see how ricochets factor into anything unless you're planning for a ball conversion of the map.

I personally think there's enough information in the colors, shading and shape of the objects for people to mentally decode them as rocks/snow. In my opinion, having a smoother border won't detract from that effect.



Up to you, in the end.

[classicallad]

yeah, agree with silent skies that the smoother 'cleaning up' of edges is kinder on our eyes and works better for altitude's cuteness =) Having said that if you look at pig bombs maps, he has great detail in the artwork but the smoothing of edges is still present, so its completely feesable to have a great looking map but the smoothing gives players a better indication of what is collidable and what isn't.

[classicallad]

On another note, although i think that in the final 3rd of the map time anchor would pawn - the openess of both the centre and top routes, especially given TA's nerf > 7 secs would mean that the team supporting that ta would need to provide 'solid' protection as opposed to, oh im dead but never mind the map is short and he can just loop back and forth 5 or 6 times until i get back to him =P

I like the idea of bigger maps actually so i think its fine to leave the size as it is - we could use some new strategy.

[B4.]

Hey everyone, I have just updated the map and the latest version is available on official Map test. Check the OP for the new details and screenshot.

Any further feedback and improvement suggestions are highly welcome.

Cheers

[Ribilla]

Haven't played it yet, but the graphics (particularly for the sky) look fantastic.

[Nikon]

Never seen a neutral turret before, pretty cool idea.

[silent skies]

Dunno how the idea of a neutral turret will fly, but I like it.

[Mt.Vesuvius]

needs moar tbd_vesuvius

[Flexio]

Got to test it this morning, here are my comments:

• The bomb is positioned awkwardly. I'd suggest putting it in front of the spawns or above the base but outside the mountain.
• I don't like the concept of the neutral turret; I think it should be removed.
• This map is turret-heavy. Some of them are encroaching a lot on the open territory (esp. the neutral one) and it doesn't feel like the map has that much 'neutral' space. I think the ones circled in red should be removed, and one added where the green indicates.

Other than the many turrets this map plays smoothly and looks nice. Good job

[silent skies]

General opinions of myself and other testers after a quick 5v5 / 6v6 in the test server:

- neutral turret doesn't work. In a 5v5 test it got obliterated in the first 10 seconds of play.
- all turrets should be the same, standard size.
- the graphics got blurred, somehow. This is either due to resizing them (some image editors will 'smooth' the graphics when you resize sth) or bad jpeg compression, or both.
- bomb was generally considered to be 'in a bad place' by testers.
- top route still feels pointless to me. I would be in favor of making it inaccessible and just having all the action take place in the mountain, where it does anyway

I am liking how the bottom and middle routes feel atm.

[B4.]

Awesome. Thanks for the testing and feedback Flexio and Silent. I have made the suggested changes and updated. Beta 0.8 now playable on official map test. This map is starting to feel pretty mature to me, but any further feedback or suggestions are heartily encouraged.

[silent skies]

The visuals still look kind of ... fuzzy when compared to the first version of the map. I have both versions stored in my downloads, and the difference is obvious when switching from one to the other.

I don't know about photoshop, but in my image editor (paint.net) there is an option to have graphics re-render as 'smooth' or 'pixelated' when you resize something. Photoshop, I would imagine, is much better than paint.net (PS costs o-ma-gawd-monies and paint.net is free, after all), so it should have a similar option.

Note: when you are shrinking images proportionally, i.e., shrinking the horizontal and vertical aspects evenly with regards to the original image, there isn't usually much of a noticeable difference, if any. However, this doesn't hold true if you're resizing just vertically or just horizontally.

Example:


I grabbed the rock on the left from an in-game screenshot of the first version of your map. On the right, the top rock has been vertically shortened using 'smooth' re-rendering, and the bottom rock has been likewise resized but with the option set to 'pixelated'

It might not be immediately obvious, but the 'smooth' rock on the top looks kind of fuzzy in comparison to the 'pixelated' one. In the case of literally the entire map getting the same treatment, the difference becomes much more obvious.

(Note: if you were actually doing the resizing in the altitude map editor, well, I have no idea, but I imagine the effect would not be satisfactory)

Is it possible that there were instances when you decreased the height of the map disproportionately to the width?



As for layout: I haven't played it with other people yet, just flew around it myself. It's looking better, and now actually the area above the mountain feels like it's much more interesting of an option, since you now must go through the mountain to the get to the opponents' "air space".

[B4.]

The map was scaled down but it was done proportionally. I'm not sure if you actually saw the squashed vertical look in game, but I can't really explain that. I have made two changes that would effect the visual style since your last comment: changed border method and smoothed ( i think its better than the previous), and changed jpeg quality level of the .altx from 0.9 to 1.0. I have not changed the scaling since then.

Here is a comparison of the old old original scale a. ( same as your left rock in the above) and the current scale as I see it, b.
a.
b.

I think it looks fine, but let me know if you have any further thoughts. I've also made some minor layout changes reflected in the updated OP.

[silent skies]

The graphics look fine to me now, not blurry/fuzzy anymore, gj.

[CmdrNoval]

I was sceptical at first... But this map proved to be very playable. Have enjoyed this one!

My .02...

The lower bomb route was easily used while teammates distracted high.

Definitely needs a pinch on that route as walls are easily avoided.

Additional turret below base on back wall would be nice for defense.