Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   
Back to List

Akilon Wastelands ZK v1 Matchmaking pool

By original by Forboding Angel, edited for ZK by Sprung
Rating:

Size: 16 x 16

PLAY ON THIS MAP


Downloads: 6979
Manual downloads:
http://api.springfiles.com/files/maps/akilon_wastelands_zk_v1.sd7
http://zero-k.info/content/maps/akilon_wastelands_zk_v1.sd7
https://zero-k.info/content/maps/akilon_wastelands_zk_v1.sd7

Last battles

Multiplayer B658665 4 on Akilon Wastelands ZK v1
Multiplayer B658569 4 on Akilon Wastelands ZK v1
Multiplayer B658563 3 on Akilon Wastelands ZK v1
Bots B658030 2 on Akilon Wastelands ZK v1
Bots B657983 1 on Akilon Wastelands ZK v1
Bots B657954 2 on Akilon Wastelands ZK v1
Multiplayer B657946 6 on Akilon Wastelands ZK v1
Bots B657739 2 on Akilon Wastelands ZK v1
Bots B657541 3 on Akilon Wastelands ZK v1
Bots B657427 2 on Akilon Wastelands ZK v1


Preview
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 3 (49 records)
sort


PLrankAdminSprung
3 years ago
Changed naming to what Forb wanted, moved geospots [Spoiler]
+2 / -0



CArankTheMooseIsLoose
3 years ago
Would it be possible to fix issues with features rather then removing them?
+0 / -0


PLrankAdminSprung
3 years ago
In theory yes but then not really, see the previous thread.
+0 / -0


USrank[Evo]ForbodingAngel
3 years ago
(edited 3 years ago)
Yes it would be simple to fix all the "issues" zk has with the features.

First off you make all features non-blocking without a hitsphere, zero out all resources given, make them irreclaimable, then whenever a building or unit is built on a feature position, you instagib every feature within that radius.

That way they look pretty but have zero effect on gameplay.
+0 / -0



AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
3 years ago
Visuals should agree with gameplay. It is bad to have things on the map which look like game-affecting things from other maps. In general it is bad to have prominent things which don't affect the game (greebles are fine, they are basically part of the terrain). Featuring.
+1 / -0


USrank[Evo]ForbodingAngel
3 years ago
This when talking about a game that terraforms maps so that the visuals on the ground make quite literally no sense with the texture.

Bit of a rough argument to make.
+0 / -0



AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
3 years ago
I don't understand what that is supposed to mean. What does it looks like when "the visuals on the ground make quite literally no sense with the texture". Regardless, that would be irrelevant point scoring. Do you disagree with the design goal of making visuals reflect gameplay?
+0 / -0



EErankAdminAnarchid
3 years ago
(edited 3 years ago)
The energy spires could have their collision volumes modified to be non-broken and reinstated.

That would not make visuals disagree with gameplay, while it would also make them non-broken, and add a lot to aesthetics.
+5 / -0


PLrankAdminSprung
3 years ago
They would still need to be reduced in number not to allow a dense wall-off protecting a thing inside. But sure, it would be good to have them if they don't break anything.
+0 / -0



EErankAdminAnarchid
3 years ago
Alternatively, they could prevent things from happening inside. Large build-blocking footprints, for example.
+0 / -0


PLrankAdminSprung
3 years ago
Why the asymmetry tag?
+0 / -0


USrank[Evo]ForbodingAngel
3 years ago
Repeat after me... the energy spires do not have broken colvols
...

None of the features do.

http://springfiles.com/spring/spring-maps/akilon-wastelands

If you had ever bothered to look at the actual latest version of this map and not this hack, you would know that.
+0 / -0


PLrankAdminSprung
3 years ago
It's not about the colvol. It's about the testudo.
+0 / -0


USrank[Evo]ForbodingAngel
3 years ago
Testudo?

In the last version I spent a very long time redoing collision volumes for all of the features that were off. This is how I know that they aren't messed up.
+0 / -0


PLrankAdminSprung
3 years ago
The colvol of an energy spire vs the colvols of an energy spire forest:
[Spoiler]

Stuff inside can't be touched. Sometimes there is a small opening but you need to manually direct the units there because the pather won't do that and it will still only allow 1-2 units to shoot.

Also, not all colvols are proper:
[Spoiler]
+0 / -0



EErankAdminAnarchid
3 years ago
(edited 3 years ago)
Suggested solution approach:

+0 / -0


USrank[Evo]ForbodingAngel
3 years ago
Ok so you're having issues caused by terraform basically.

The large crystal spikes are not intended to have collisions. They are GIGANTIC and having collisions attached to them would cause no end of gameplay irritation. They are also never supposed to be part of the play area, this is an issue caused by terraform so that makes it a little special case scenario. As I said, I have a solution for that.

WRT energy spires, I would like to try using per piece collision volumes. That way, ideally, you would be able to shoot through them. Unfortunately, they cannot be used on features. Therefore the obvious solution is to just use custom colvols in the def (include with map) and put them below the map so that they can block terrain, but not block shots.

+0 / -0


PLrankAdminSprung
3 years ago
(edited 3 years ago)
quote:
Therefore the obvious solution is to just use custom colvols in the def (include with map) and put them below the map so that they can block terrain, but not block shots.

We don't want features that pass shots through. Visuals should agree with the gameplay.

In this version, there is also water instead of the abyss so the spires crystal spikes are now a part of the play area -- you don't even need to terraform.
+0 / -0


USrank[Evo]ForbodingAngel
3 years ago
(edited 3 years ago)
Sprung, you need to be much more clear.

Energy spires are part of the play area, in any version of the map.

Crystal Spikes/Shards are not intended to be part of the play area.

We are talking about energy spires passing shots. The crystal spikes have to pass shots and collisions anyway. We have no way to do hitboxes for those types of features in a remotely nice way (this is why per piece collisions would be awesome), so that's pretty much a non-starter.


I'm betting that there are probably maps in zk's pool where "visuals don't match gameplay".

http://zero-k.info/Maps/Detail/42158
Does voidwater prohibit terraform in the empty space or do you end up with hilarious floating invisible platforms?

http://zero-k.info/Maps/Detail/7375
Really? :-D

Look, the point is not to disparage these maps, or any others, but to point out that in order to not be annoyingly hypocritical, you sometimes need to loosen your butthole and exercise your ability to suspend disbelief.

+0 / -0


AUrankAdminAquanim
3 years ago
(edited 3 years ago)
Those two examples are reaching a bit. I don't actually know how Apophis' voids interact with terraform but I see no reason why I would ever find out in a serious game. (For context Forb probably doesn't have, some players make use of the water on the borders of Ravaged for sneak attacks with ship constructors, which does not involve terraform. I specifically made this impractical on Fairyland.)

Energy Spire Plain is hardly a ZK aesthetic benchmark - probably the only reason it continues to be featured is that mechanically it is one of the very few FFA maps that is not pure porc-war.

In particular, I see no reason why wanting new maps to be more reasonable or whatever than Energy Spire Plain is "hypocritical".
+0 / -0
Page of 3 (49 records)
Back to List