PDA

View Full Version : Is a map 1on1 or not?


SkaarjMaster
11th Jul 2004, 01:12 PM
It was suggested we start a forum thread on this topic, so here it is. Everyone on the Team feel free to cut and paste from the pre-comments for DM-1on1-Mosaic2004.

It just defies all logic that's all. If a map IS truly a 1on1 map, the default bot load should be 1. You can make your 1on1 maps and big as you want, but if the default bot load is not 1 then the 1on1 should be left out of the title. I know a lot of mappers do it, but that doesn't mean it's right. I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but that's my personal opinion.:)

Let the server admins set the load to whatever they want online and obviously a map is not restricted to the default bot load online so this isn't a problem for playing online. As far as offline, maps with 1on1 in the name should have 1 as the default bot load (period).

SkaarjMaster
19th Jul 2004, 10:46 AM
I guess everyone agrees with me then! Cool! ;)

Corion
26th Jul 2004, 03:57 PM
I don't agree.

I think a 1on1 map could be called so for multiple reasons. First off, 1on1 maps should be optimized for 1on1 play AS WELL as having 2-4 more players in the level. I think it is most appropriate to make 1on1 maps suitable for more players and default the botload to the middle of it. If you put the suggested players to max 2 so only one bot joins in, servers may not choose to use them in their lineup. Of course, some 1on1 maps can only handle 2 players.

When you're playing through random deathmatch maps in instant action mode, chances are you won't have the bots set to the highest setting all the time (or at least whatever bot setting you use to 1on1). If you play a 1on1 map on a lower setting with only one bot, the map will be way too easy.

A map could also be called 1on1 for being small or open so you can track the other player fairly well and/or not get totally lost trying to find them and never see them the whole time. Also, a 1on1 map shouldn't contain too many top-level powerups like the super shield or keg of health. These items can make it way too easy for the winning player to maintain control. Also, a 1on1 map should have nice choke points or areas of contention that draws both players to it at the same time (while many larger deathmatch arenas don't have them so well defined).

Also, you suggested that server admins should set the load to whatever they want for online, so why don't you just specify the bot load to 1 and godlike while playing offline?That's probably the best way to 1on1.

At least most 1on1 maps don't have bot loads over 6.

SkaarjMaster
27th Jul 2004, 06:53 AM
"1on1 maps should be optimized for 1on1 play AS WELL as having 2-4 more players in the level. I think it is most appropriate to make 1on1 maps suitable for more players"

I agree with this part.

"If you put the suggested players to max 2 so only one bot joins in, servers may not choose to use them in their lineup."

I never said anything about suggested player load. Map authors can do anything they want there.

"If you play a 1on1 map on a lower setting with only one bot, the map will be way too easy."

I usually leave the bot setting to default for the map and not all 1on1 maps will be way too easy but YES some will.

"A map could also be called 1on1 for being small or open so you can track the other player fairly well and/or not get totally lost trying to find them and never see them the whole time. Also, a 1on1 map shouldn't contain too many top-level powerups like the super shield or keg of health. These items can make it way too easy for the winning player to maintain control. Also, a 1on1 map should have nice choke points or areas of contention that draws both players to it at the same time (while many larger deathmatch arenas don't have them so well defined)."

I agree, as long as the default bot load is still one.

"At least most 1on1 maps don't have bot loads over 6."

I agree.

"why don't you just specify the bot load to 1 and godlike while playing offline?That's probably the best way to 1on1."

Because when I play, I'm not playing a bunch of 1on1 maps in a row. I usually play a few DM, then CTF, a couple ONS, etc. I don't want to take the time to set every map to the best bot load as I go through them rather fast. The server admin should know the maps he wants to put on his server and know that some 1on1 maps may have a different bot load. The server is already set for a max. bot load, so it shouldn't matter with servers. It's just misleading to call a map 1on1 when the default bot load is not one. I think this whole 1on1 map thing has gotten out of hand. I'm not sure about UT ( I'd have to go in and check a few 1on1 maps to be sure), but it seems more 1on1 maps for UT2003/UT2004 don't have the default bot load as one compared to UT maps. I don't think I'm asking too much. Either make the default bot load 1on1 or change the title.

Corion
28th Jul 2004, 04:56 PM
"If you put the suggested players to max 2 so only one bot joins in, servers may not choose to use them in their lineup."

I never said anything about suggested player load. Map authors can do anything they want there.


See, that's where you're wrong. Have you ever made a map? The default bot load for a level is DETERMINED BY THE SUGGESTED PLAYER LOAD. If you put a suggested player load of 6-12, you'll wind up with around 9 total players. If you do 1-12 you'll have a total of 6 players. Put the suggested player load to 2 and 2 and you wind up with only one bot every time. So you're essentially saying that a 1on1 map should never have a suggested player mode of more than about 3 (if the minimum is one, which barely makes sense save for Invasion mode). Most map authors test their maps on various player loads. The highest the map can work well with is usually the top number, and often times a 1on1 map can work well with up to or even more than 6 players, so the author suggests it.

I understand that you want to play some onevone maps with only one bot, so maybe they should instead make it another gametype split from DM like they did Instagib CTF (kind of like a duel match, around-the-world kind of a setup) that uses maps prefixed with DM-1on1- instead of DM-.

SkaarjMaster
28th Jul 2004, 08:45 PM
I've never made a map and if that is indeed the case that the editor chooses or the game chooses the default bot load based on the suggested player load, then all that does is strengthen my case even further. Why hasn't anyone mentioned this until now. A suggested player load should be exactly what it sounds like "suggested". Sounds like the editor or game needs to be changed to allow authors to pinpoint the default player load instead of leaving it up to chance. That's more fuel to the fire to quit calling maps 1on1 unless the default bot load (or suggested player load as the case may be) is 1.

I don't mean to get carried away here, it's just something I feel strongly about. Who the heck started all this 1on1 map naming/making business anyway?

Corion
29th Jul 2004, 12:31 AM
So you're saying that even if a map originally designed for 1on1 use still plays awesome with more players, a map maker should not dare to suggest it as a maximum player load and in fact limit the map to a min and max of 1-3?

SkaarjMaster
29th Jul 2004, 03:15 PM
No, I'm saying there needs to be a patch or something for UT2004 that allows the map author to state the exact bot load they want, but also keep the suggested player load range appearing in the level info. screen. This might also explain why a maps suggested play load differs with some maps in-game and in the text file (at least with some old UT maps that I remember). I never knew the game actually used that suggested player load. Maybe go so far as the engine automatically setting the bot load to one when it sees the title in the map of -1on1-. Whatever else the game does with the suggested player load is fine with me.

Corion
30th Jul 2004, 10:19 AM
Sounds good. Just be careful next time you want to place blame on a mapmaker for having a suggested player count :0)

SkaarjMaster
30th Jul 2004, 10:24 PM
It's still strange that after all these years, I never heard of that before. :eek:

I guess we learn something every day. ;)

EDIT: just thought I'd throw in a correction from the DM-1on1-StoltyFactory (UT2004) review by T2A`. Here's the quote and it seems I was misunderstood:
"Around here at Insite, the team often find ourselves arguing over what the real definition of a good one-on-one map is, and ideas are pretty much spread out. All this arguing has gotten us nowhere because we all feel differently as to what makes the perfect one-on-one map. SkaarjMaster has made it clear that he feels no matter how big a map is, if it spawns only two players by default, it is one-on-one. On the other hand, no matter how small a map is, if it spawns more than two, it’s not."
>> Actually, no, what I meant was if it if a map is called 1on1, then it should spawn only two players by default. It's a matter of naming convention, but as stated above there is a flaw in the game that makes this impossible unless a suggest load is 2, which is silly but whatever.;)