Wow...Blixor, SuperEvil, Cybros and Scbroods2 would make a killer team for a map...you guys got everything covered!! 2,500 a piece for not an overwhelming amount of work...feelsgoodman
My coop mission idea is under testing and must be perfect before 24. january :D
If my idea will be ok and fun, challenging. I am foing to fully finish it with coop template and edit it with all coop rules.
I am sharing this image, because I don't think that someone can steal this idea + tileset. :D
My new character model is already made, custom voice acting will be added too. But now, i am not going to try to make the best terraining, because blizzard wont care about terrain, but about gameplay, mechanism etc. It must be very polished and playable.
Terrain is at last place. I hope you are going to play my coop guys and help me to improve it, find bugs and help me to get this coop mission on good place :D
Wow, I just noticed this thread. I really should take some better care in looking around :P
Only shame thing is that I suck at mapmaking other than just plain simple melee maps.
I'd like to help but I'm not very sure on what I could even do?
If anything, I'd like to aid in thinking up some story if desired?
And as for the rules.
It sounds very free of what one may want to make. and from where I stand, it seems that enjoyment of 'easy-going' style of play are important. Only true suggestion I could make at this point: please no map that has anything common with "The Vermillion Problem".
Wow...Blixor, SuperEvil, Cybros and Scbroods2 would make a killer team for a map...you guys got everything covered!! 2,500 a piece for not an overwhelming amount of work...feelsgoodman
I wish it would work haha! That'd be cool. But even there, I'd be ready to participate and help someone "for the community" and not for "the money". Idc about money, I care about the community positiveness, sharing, etc.
Only shame thing is that I suck at mapmaking other than just plain simple melee maps.
I feel ya there man. Reason being. i can do ~almost~ anything in the data and triggers but when it comes to SIMPLE terrain layout. DAM- i suck so hard. lol. I have seen on here the "terrain tests" and - well - no. i can't do that. lmao. Your not the only one like this. :D
Outsider u going to join in on the fun? U practically made co-op before blizzard did. I bet they had the idea from your campaign!
I am installing SC2 right now. I will have a look some maps of my campaign (the ones with base-building elements) to see if the would make good foundations for the type of map Blizzard wants. If they don't I might create a new one from scratch.
Funny thing is... I'Ve never played a single co-op map by Blizzard (until a few minutes ago). I'll need to spend some time figuring out how they work.
In preparation for my own entry (not confirmed I'll really do it - still too early) I've now played 5 of the 10 existing co-op maps. They feel stripped down compared to my own maps. Blizzard has to make each map usable for all 3 races (which includes 11 sub-factions), base-building has to be included, they can't last too long (around 25-30 minutes), there aren't any real cinematics and just minor story-telling, and many, many other minor things.
It's all about the objectives and the theme. And then they polish these to perfection. ...This is actually a good thing. Were these maps as complicated as campaign maps it might have been to much work for me.
I wonder how much data can be customized until Blizzard says it's too much, also how "random" the enemies can be. I'm looking forward to the sample map Blizzard promised.
So outsiderXE if u could what would you change on these co-op maps? I feel the story is the weakest element. Also there is the game-play mechanic that (by blizzard entertainment standards) isnt really extraordinary.
I think u would do a better job than them. Blizzard has become lazzy. Thats not even a exaggeration.
I didn't mean to criticise. Blizzard created these maps with certain design principles in mind:
- Replayability: Not only can you play with almost a dozen sub-factions, but as far as I know, the enemy's race and waves also change each time you play, and then there are the mutators
- Accessibility: Clear and simple objectives, with 1-2 bonus objectives at most, 1 enemy per map afaik
- Time limit: So no player can drag the map out endlessly and annoy the other player
- Very simple story (non-canon) and basically no cinematics, so players don't have to watch and listen to the same things over and over
Instead of changing these things I would make sure I would incorporate them into my own map.
I actually played the Oblivion Express mission at Gamescom before LotV was released, but I was dissapointed as it was only a rehashed campaign map. I am glad to see not all maps feel like that. After creating around 90 campaign maps and 10 co-op maps, I think Blizzard is mostly looking for new ideas. I mean, try to come up with something that follows the above principles but is also entirely new. It will be very, very hard.
I need to play the rest of the maps (6/10 now) before I start working on my own ideas.
If you want them to improve as a company, you should criticize them whenever criticism is due. The co-op maps lack a lot of depth and don't even have many randomized elements that would increase replayability.
If you want them to improve as a company, you should criticize them whenever criticism is due. The co-op maps lack a lot of depth and don't even have many randomized elements that would increase replayability.
Not like you can randomize terrain. What can you randomize besides enemy comps (and randomizing the units in comps).
Objectives are randomized in the newest co-op mission, but the difficulty doesn't come from clearing out the enemies like most missions, moreso from the waves it sends.
If you want them to improve as a company, you should criticize them whenever criticism is due. The co-op maps lack a lot of depth and don't even have many randomized elements that would increase replayability.
Not like you can randomize terrain
as futile as that seems, working on that on my map. HAHAHA. never know unless you try as they say. :D
It shouldn't be 'truly random', but having a number of different maps or variations on a singular map (i.e. sometimes your expansion is farther away, sometimes the enemy bases are closer) and attaching the likelihood of those variations to other variations (i.e. your expansion is farther away more often when you are playing against zerg because they harass more) is a good way to cultivate more varied experiences.
What can you randomize besides enemy comps (and randomizing the units in comps).
Anything. These are supposed to be servants of a fucking deity. Make them have powerful units. Make it so that something sets them apart from the melee gameplay. Make them attack intelligently instead of arbitrarily spawning attack forces. Design an actual AI for them so that if the players have to cut through an enemy base to complete an objective, the AI actually defends itself instead of sitting there with all its preplaced units to make it harder for the players to progress in an artificial manner.
Make it so that if I harass the computers' resource gathering, it slows their attacks while they replace the harvesters.
Make it so that if I destroy certain tech structures, the AI doesn't get to use those units until they replace those structures (goes hand in hand with not artificially spawning them).
All of these grievances can additionally be extended to the campaign, where there can be 200 battlecruisers and thors on the right side of the AI's base, but they won't defend the left side of their base with them because that function hasn't been programmed into their script. There are user-made scripts that function better than Blizzard's own when it comes to performance (i.e. 1 million actions that clog up the pathfinding aren't present), strength, and variety. That should very rarely happen, and when it does, the solutions discovered by the users should be worked into the game by the developer and the developer should give the users credit for creating them. Instead, we get nothing.
For everyone who enters into this contest, buck the trend. Make a map that has truly-engaging gameplay with AI that feels like alive; have it defend itself when attacked, lose map control when its harvesting is disrupted, attack with less-terrifying forces when its tech structures are sniped, but will tear you a new one if you leave it unchecked. Incorporate spawning by attaching unit spawns to structures, so that the player has a recourse when they feel overwhelmed by the spawned forces and can interact with the game by destroying those production structures to stop their foes from creating more units, as opposed to having to wait out some timer for when the enemy AI is magically granted reinforcements via drop-pods. There is so much untapped depth and fun to be had that nobody is bothering to unearth, and the longer we as a community take to show people that Blizzard's way is boring and uninteractive (and therefore completely unfair at higher difficulties), the longer they'll receive credit where credit simply isn't due.
It shouldn't be 'truly random', but having a number of different maps or variations on a singular map (i.e. sometimes your expansion is farther away, sometimes the enemy bases are closer) and attaching the likelihood of those variations to other variations (i.e. your expansion is farther away more often when you are playing against zerg because they harass more) is a good way to cultivate more varied experiences.
Why are you assuming all zerg builds are harass-heavy? There are ~4-7 builds for each race afaik and each build has a chance for a unit substitution.
What can you randomize besides enemy comps (and randomizing the units in comps).
Anything. These are supposed to be servants of a fucking deity. Make them have powerful units.
You mean like hybrid? I mean that's the entire concept of them.
Make it so that something sets them apart from the melee gameplay. Make them attack intelligently instead of arbitrarily spawning attack forces. Design an actual AI for them so that if the players have to cut through an enemy base to complete an objective, the AI actually defends itself instead of sitting there with all its preplaced units to make it harder for the players to progress in an artificial manner.
That's a bad idea. Group up all units so they can be annihilated a single ability (like Artanis's/Karax's laser beams), or just splash damage, like (Raynor's) mines or vikings? Why would you do this?
Of course, there's always the idea of just luring the enemy away with a small group (perhaps some dropped Raynor marines) while the main force sneaks in.
Make it so that if I harass the computers' resource gathering, it slows their attacks while they replace the harvesters.
Who needs to harass? Just scan -> air strike or drop 10-20 supply of [insert any raynor unit here]. Raynor isn't good enough yet?
Make it so that if I destroy certain tech structures, the AI doesn't get to use those units until they replace those structures (goes hand in hand with not artificially spawning them).
Problem with that: raynor (he's becoming a recurring feature) players can drop into fog of war, or toss players can sneak around observers to get to the backline. Lotta broken combo's you can do with that.
Vision -> timestop -> pylon -> mass DT everything dies
Vision -> griffin
Vision -> Artanis murder strike
Vision -> Karax death laser
Poor zerg, who don't have those sorts of global abilities.
All of these grievances can additionally be extended to the campaign, where there can be 200 battlecruisers and thors on the right side of the AI's base, but they won't defend the left side of their base with them because that function hasn't been programmed into their script. There are user-made scripts that function better than Blizzard's own when it comes to performance (i.e. 1 million actions that clog up the pathfinding aren't present), strength, and variety. That should very rarely happen, and when it does, the solutions discovered by the users should be worked into the game by the developer and the developer should give the users credit for creating them. Instead, we get nothing.
Won't disagree with you there.
For everyone who enters into this contest, buck the trend. Make a map that has truly-engaging gameplay with AI that feels like alive; have it defend itself when attacked, lose map control when its harvesting is disrupted, attack with less-terrifying forces when its tech structures are sniped, but will tear you a new one if you leave it unchecked.
You are assuming that the majority of players playing co-op understand these sorts of playstyles. Please remember that Co-op has the most players, and thus has some of the more casual players. Not only do they have to worry about the objectives, but now they have to worry about the enemies macro/positioning/rebuild status.
Incorporate spawning by attaching unit spawns to structures, so that the player has a recourse when they feel overwhelmed by the spawned forces and can interact with the game by destroying those production structures to stop their foes from creating more units, as opposed to having to wait out some timer for when the enemy AI is magically granted reinforcements via drop-pods. There is so much untapped depth and fun to be had that nobody is bothering to unearth, and the longer we as a community take to show people that Blizzard's way is boring and uninteractive (and therefore completely unfair at higher difficulties),
As opposed to your way, which is about making zerg commanders literally unplayable, and having Raynor edge out Vorazun to be the #1 commander in power. :P
Seriously, the protoss and terran get all these cool, easily usable harass tools, but what can the zerg do on the map besides run from objective to objective. God forbid you get 2 zerg commanders on your map, because it's GG with such low harass potential.
the longer they'll receive credit where credit simply isn't due.
Wow...Blixor, SuperEvil, Cybros and Scbroods2 would make a killer team for a map...you guys got everything covered!! 2,500 a piece for not an overwhelming amount of work...feelsgoodman
Yea..but I already started working :DD
Loading screen without spoilers :D
My coop mission idea is under testing and must be perfect before 24. january :D
If my idea will be ok and fun, challenging. I am foing to fully finish it with coop template and edit it with all coop rules.
I am sharing this image, because I don't think that someone can steal this idea + tileset. :D
My new character model is already made, custom voice acting will be added too. But now, i am not going to try to make the best terraining, because blizzard wont care about terrain, but about gameplay, mechanism etc. It must be very polished and playable.
Terrain is at last place. I hope you are going to play my coop guys and help me to improve it, find bugs and help me to get this coop mission on good place :D
Wow, looks like this contest is setting the community on fire! I'm also working on a co-op map, and I feel just as excited to start working on it.
May the best map win!
Wow, I just noticed this thread. I really should take some better care in looking around :P
Only shame thing is that I suck at mapmaking other than just plain simple melee maps.
I'd like to help but I'm not very sure on what I could even do?
If anything, I'd like to aid in thinking up some story if desired?
And as for the rules.
It sounds very free of what one may want to make. and from where I stand, it seems that enjoyment of 'easy-going' style of play are important. Only true suggestion I could make at this point: please no map that has anything common with "The Vermillion Problem".
Custom Campaign Initiative
This coop mission is something, what will teach you some stuff and you can use these experiences in future development.
I have to add my coop objective to my campaign! :D
Working on projects:
Well, well...
Outsider u going to join in on the fun? U practically made co-op before blizzard did. I bet they had the idea from your campaign!
I feel ya there man. Reason being. i can do ~almost~ anything in the data and triggers but when it comes to SIMPLE terrain layout. DAM- i suck so hard. lol. I have seen on here the "terrain tests" and - well - no. i can't do that. lmao. Your not the only one like this. :D
I am installing SC2 right now. I will have a look some maps of my campaign (the ones with base-building elements) to see if the would make good foundations for the type of map Blizzard wants. If they don't I might create a new one from scratch.
Funny thing is... I'Ve never played a single co-op map by Blizzard (until a few minutes ago). I'll need to spend some time figuring out how they work.
WWWhhhhattt!!!!??? No coop...its awesome!!!! Outsider...make a coop map!!! It'll be awesome!!
Haha.
In preparation for my own entry (not confirmed I'll really do it - still too early) I've now played 5 of the 10 existing co-op maps. They feel stripped down compared to my own maps. Blizzard has to make each map usable for all 3 races (which includes 11 sub-factions), base-building has to be included, they can't last too long (around 25-30 minutes), there aren't any real cinematics and just minor story-telling, and many, many other minor things.
It's all about the objectives and the theme. And then they polish these to perfection. ...This is actually a good thing. Were these maps as complicated as campaign maps it might have been to much work for me.
I wonder how much data can be customized until Blizzard says it's too much, also how "random" the enemies can be. I'm looking forward to the sample map Blizzard promised.
So outsiderXE if u could what would you change on these co-op maps? I feel the story is the weakest element. Also there is the game-play mechanic that (by blizzard entertainment standards) isnt really extraordinary.
I think u would do a better job than them. Blizzard has become lazzy. Thats not even a exaggeration.
I didn't mean to criticise. Blizzard created these maps with certain design principles in mind:
- Replayability: Not only can you play with almost a dozen sub-factions, but as far as I know, the enemy's race and waves also change each time you play, and then there are the mutators
- Accessibility: Clear and simple objectives, with 1-2 bonus objectives at most, 1 enemy per map afaik
- Time limit: So no player can drag the map out endlessly and annoy the other player
- Very simple story (non-canon) and basically no cinematics, so players don't have to watch and listen to the same things over and over
Instead of changing these things I would make sure I would incorporate them into my own map.
I actually played the Oblivion Express mission at Gamescom before LotV was released, but I was dissapointed as it was only a rehashed campaign map. I am glad to see not all maps feel like that. After creating around 90 campaign maps and 10 co-op maps, I think Blizzard is mostly looking for new ideas. I mean, try to come up with something that follows the above principles but is also entirely new. It will be very, very hard.
I need to play the rest of the maps (6/10 now) before I start working on my own ideas.
If you want them to improve as a company, you should criticize them whenever criticism is due. The co-op maps lack a lot of depth and don't even have many randomized elements that would increase replayability.
My YouTube | My SoundCloud | My Twitter
The condensed Custom Campaign Initiative is on this Google Sheet!
List of my Custom campaign text reviews (warning: only the first half of each is serious)
Semi random retain is easy. Sequentially generating terrain is a level up in difficulty that the Diablo I remake map did quite well.
Contribute to the wiki (Wiki button at top of page) Considered easy altering of the unit textures?
https://www.sc2mapster.com/forums/resources/tutorials/179654-data-actor-events-message-texture-select-by-id
https://media.forgecdn.net/attachments/187/40/Screenshot2011-04-17_09_16_21.jpg
My YouTube | My SoundCloud | My Twitter
k.
The condensed Custom Campaign Initiative is on this Google Sheet!
List of my Custom campaign text reviews (warning: only the first half of each is serious)