Who wants to try a new map?

Discussions about UT99
hee
Experienced
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2019 2:11 am

Who wants to try a new map?

Post by hee » Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:46 am

As you may have noticed, I have been asking a lot of questions about ut99 map creation. I want to thank everyone here for all of the great advice and help.

I have finished my map and I would like for you to test it and tell me what you think. All suggestions are welcome. (Though don't be too harsh..it is my first map)

To get the map, go to http://www.ensle.org. There you will find some choices. At the bottom of the list is a UT link. There is a zip file which hopefully has all the components needed.

ExpEM
Skilled
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 1:48 am

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by ExpEM » Sat Mar 20, 2021 6:48 am

"Can't find file for package RainC".
Also, you don't need to distribute default packages (Ambmodern and DoorsMod).

Re-upload and I'll give it a go.

User avatar
EvilGrins
Godlike
Posts: 8007
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:12 pm
Personal rank: God of Fudge
Location: Palo Alto, CA

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by EvilGrins » Sat Mar 20, 2021 10:53 am

http://unreal-games.livejournal.com/
Image
medor wrote:Replace Skaarj with EvilGrins :mrgreen:
Smilies · viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13758

ExpEM
Skilled
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 1:48 am

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by ExpEM » Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:05 am

EvilGrins wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 10:53 am
The file "RainC" is on these maps:
https://unrealarchive.org/files/1e/1e32 ... d2c69.html
Thank you, however...
Spoiler
Show
Critical: appError called:
Critical: Bad export index 1568/41
Critical: Windows GetLastError: Not enough storage is available to process this command. (8)
Exit: Executing UObject::StaticShutdownAfterError
Exit: Executing UWindowsClient::ShutdownAfterError
Exit: ALAudio subsystem shut down.
Exit: UALAudioSubsystem::ShutdownAfterError
Log: DirectDraw End Mode
Exit: XOpenGL: ShutdownAfterError
Critical: IndexToObject
Critical: ULinkerLoad<<UObject
Critical: (LinkerLoad Transient.LinkerLoad64 4685))
Critical: SerializeExpr
Critical: (00)
Critical: SerializeExpr
Critical: (14)
Critical: UStruct::Serialize
Critical: (Function RainC.RainPuddle.PostBeginPlay)
Critical: UFunction::Serialize
Critical: LoadObject
Critical: (Function RainC.RainPuddle.PostBeginPlay 4685==4685/12240 4663 43)
Critical: ULinkerLoad::Preload
Critical: LinkProperties
Critical: UStruct::Link
Critical: UState::Link
Critical: UClass::Link
Critical: UStruct::Serialize
Critical: (Class RainC.RainPuddle)
Critical: UState::Serialize
Critical: UClass::Serialize
Critical: (Class RainC.RainPuddle)
Critical: LoadObject
Critical: (Class RainC.RainPuddle 4685==4685/12240 1436 114)
Critical: ULinkerLoad::Preload
Critical: ULinkerLoad::Preload
Critical: ULinkerLoad::CreateExport
Critical: (RainPuddle0 12151391)
Critical: IndexToObject
Critical: ULinkerLoad<<UObject
Critical: (LinkerLoad Transient.LinkerLoad52 12151391))
Critical: ULevelBase::Serialize
Critical: ULevel::Serialize
Critical: LoadObject
Critical: (Level CTF-Horizons.MyLevel 12151391==12151391/12327839 12058868 180908)
Critical: ULinkerLoad::Preload
Critical: PreLoadObjects
Critical: UObject::EndLoad
Critical: UObject::StaticLoadObject
Critical: (Engine.Level None.MyLevel CTF-Horizons.unr)
Critical: LoadLevel
Critical: UGameEngine::LoadMap
Critical: LocalMapURL
Critical: UGameEngine::Browse
Critical: ClientTravel
Critical: UGameEngine::Tick
Critical: UpdateWorld
Critical: MainLoop
Exit: Exiting.

User avatar
OjitroC
Godlike
Posts: 2427
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:46 pm

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by OjitroC » Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:52 am

ExpEM wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:05 am
Thank you, however...

Critical: Bad export index 1568/41
That's because that RainC is for Unreal (unsurprisingly as it is found with only Unreal maps) - I think the Bad export Index error indicates the file is not a UT99 file. The OP's map runs fine with this RainC (RainT.utx is also required and is included in the zip).
Rain.zip
________________________ UPDATE ______________________________________
hee wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:46 am
I have finished my map and I would like for you to test it and tell me what you think. All suggestions are welcome. (Though don't be too harsh..it is my first map)
Just a quick comment after a short game with bots - there are four flag bases and two of these are for Team 2 which is odd and results in a lot of spam in the log
Spoiler
Show
These lines repeat many times :
ScriptWarning: FlagBase CTF-Horizons.FlagBase2 (Function Botpack.FlagBase.SpawnFlag:0061) Accessed None 'myFlag'
ScriptWarning: FlagBase CTF-Horizons.FlagBase2 (Function Botpack.FlagBase.SpawnFlag:0069) Attempt to assign variable through None
ScriptWarning: FlagBase CTF-Horizons.FlagBase3 (Function Botpack.FlagBase.SpawnFlag:0051) Accessed None 'myFlag'
ScriptWarning: FlagBase CTF-Horizons.FlagBase3 (Function Botpack.FlagBase.SpawnFlag:0059) Attempt to assign variable through None

ScriptWarning: FlagBase CTF-Horizons.FlagBase2 (State Botpack.FlagBase.Checker:011F) Accessed None 'FlagList'
ScriptWarning: FlagBase CTF-Horizons.FlagBase3 (State Botpack.FlagBase.Checker:00E8) Accessed None 'FlagList'

Note also :
ScriptLog: Warning: CTF-Horizons.Mover6 is BumpOpenTimed. Bots don't understand this well - use StandOpenTimed instead!
ScriptLog: Warning: CTF-Horizons.Mover9 is BumpOpenTimed. Bots don't understand this well - use StandOpenTimed instead!
ScriptLog: Warning: CTF-Horizons.Mover8 is BumpOpenTimed. Bots don't understand this well - use StandOpenTimed instead!
ScriptLog: Warning: CTF-Horizons.Mover7 is BumpOpenTimed. Bots don't understand this well - use StandOpenTimed instead!
ScriptLog: Warning: CTF-Horizons.Mover11 is BumpOpenTimed. Bots don't understand this well - use StandOpenTimed instead!
ScriptLog: Warning: CTF-Horizons.Mover10 is BumpOpenTimed. Bots don't understand this well - use StandOpenTimed instead!
ScriptLog: Warning: CTF-Horizons.Mover13 is BumpOpenTimed. Bots don't understand this well - use StandOpenTimed instead!
ScriptLog: Warning: CTF-Horizons.Mover12 is BumpOpenTimed. Bots don't understand this well - use StandOpenTimed instead!
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
sektor2111
Godlike
Posts: 5340
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 6:15 pm
Location: On the roof.

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by sektor2111 » Sat Mar 20, 2021 4:40 pm

If game described in LevelInfo it's "Botpack.CTFGame", having more than TWO flags doesn't make any sense...

ExpEM
Skilled
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 1:48 am

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by ExpEM » Sat Mar 20, 2021 10:42 pm

Thanks OjitroC, this one works.

@hee, Impressive for a first map! Take a gold star!

The concept of the map is unique and enjoyable but it dose need some tweaking to get the gameplay to feel good too.
-The wait time for the lifts is too long causing gameplay to stall.
-Not enough pickups e.g. health, ammo, weapons.
-No base indicators, which way is my base? which way is the enemies?

Of lesser importance after working on the above, have a think about adding some details, particularly into the long tunnels, just to break them up and create recognisable sections.
-"Oh that detail, I know which tunnel I'm in now".

I haven't looked into the pathing yet but at a glance I didn't see Bots getting stuck except for at the lifts acting as a bottleneck.

Overall, well done for a first map!

User avatar
EvilGrins
Godlike
Posts: 8007
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:12 pm
Personal rank: God of Fudge
Location: Palo Alto, CA

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by EvilGrins » Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:19 pm

OjitroC wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:52 am
That's because that RainC is for Unreal
I figured since a lot of Unreal maps play fine in UT that might not be an issue.

Oh well...
sektor2111 wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 4:40 pm
If game described in LevelInfo it's "Botpack.CTFGame", having more than TWO flags doesn't make any sense...
Does allow for changing it to CTF4.CTF4Game or MultiCTF.MultiCTFGame if you have the .u files for those, though.
http://unreal-games.livejournal.com/
Image
medor wrote:Replace Skaarj with EvilGrins :mrgreen:
Smilies · viewtopic.php?f=8&t=13758

User avatar
OjitroC
Godlike
Posts: 2427
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:46 pm

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by OjitroC » Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:44 pm

Yes, it's certainly a novel and fun map - nice overall concept - each part is well designed and executed creating distinct 'spaces'. Agree that it is an impressive first map.

As already noted, more thought needs to be given to navigation of the map by humans - the bots are basically fine as they just follow their paths but it's trickier for humans. So basically, think how someone totally unfamiliar with the map would find their way around - questions like how do I know which 'lift' takes me up to which team's base? - does the tunnel to the outside need to be 'hidden' (I found it by looking in the editor)? - even how do I know there is an 'outside' or flag bases in the 'spacecraft'?

Nitpicking - the borders in the skybox are rather visible.

These are some things noted by sektor's MapGarbage tool
Spoiler
Show
NoIncomingPath: PathNode17 is not having incoming connections.
NoIncomingPath: PathNode417 is not having incoming connections.

UnReachableNodes: 107 Navigation Points which are too high (most of these are PathNodes, plus a few LiftCentres - there may be a good reason for them being "much over ground for normal Human Size" but they do need to be checked)

(check these actors in the void)
VoidCheck: Light79 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light81 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light83 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light85 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light87 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light92 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light95 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light101 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light104 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light111 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light115 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light119 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light120 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light124 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light129 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light133 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light135 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light136 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light143 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light144 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light435 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light674 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light728 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light290 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light297 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light300 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: Light301 looks placed into void.
VoidCheck: RainPuddle0 looks placed into void

Plus have a look at the BumpOpenTImed movers and the two unnecessary FlagBases.
EvilGrins wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:19 pm
Does allow for changing it to CTF4.CTF4Game or MultiCTF.MultiCTFGame if you have the .u files for those, though.
In the map the two redundant FlagBases are both for Team 2 and those FlagBases are much closer together than the ones for Red and Blue. The PlayerStarts are for Teams 0 and 1.

hee
Experienced
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2019 2:11 am

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by hee » Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:56 pm

ExpEM wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 6:48 am
"Can't find file for package RainC".
Also, you don't need to distribute default packages (Ambmodern and DoorsMod).

Re-upload and I'll give it a go.
It was actually not suppose to need rainC, but I tested it once and accidentally left an item on the map. There is now new zip where rainC should not be needed.

=MERGED=
sektor2111 wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 4:40 pm
If game described in LevelInfo it's "Botpack.CTFGame", having more than TWO flags doesn't make any sense...
It does if you are trying to confuse the player. (Hint: it is actually a two flag game, but in order to play you will need to expand your horizons.)
Last edited by papercoffee on Sun Mar 21, 2021 2:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: double post

User avatar
OjitroC
Godlike
Posts: 2427
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:46 pm

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by OjitroC » Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:04 am

hee wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:59 pm
sektor2111 wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 4:40 pm
If game described in LevelInfo it's "Botpack.CTFGame", having more than TWO flags doesn't make any sense...
It does if you are trying to confuse the player. (Hint: it is actually a two flag game, but in order to play you will need to expand your horizons.)
The problem with 2 FlagBases that aren't FlagBases is that it gives rise to 'Accessed Nones' which spam the log - not something one wants at all but especially in a lengthy game.

Remember it will confuse Players only once and the bots not at all. Interesting idea but is it worth the log spam?

ExpEM
Skilled
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 1:48 am

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by ExpEM » Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:09 am

hee wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:59 pm
sektor2111 wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 4:40 pm
If game described in LevelInfo it's "Botpack.CTFGame", having more than TWO flags doesn't make any sense...
It does if you are trying to confuse the player. (Hint: it is actually a two flag game, but in order to play you will need to expand your horizons.)
Why not replace the dummy flags with decorations?

hee
Experienced
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2019 2:11 am

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by hee » Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:55 am

ExpEM wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 10:42 pm
Thanks OjitroC, this one works.

@hee, Impressive for a first map! Take a gold star!

The concept of the map is unique and enjoyable but it dose need some tweaking to get the gameplay to feel good too.
-The wait time for the lifts is too long causing gameplay to stall.
-Not enough pickups e.g. health, ammo, weapons.
-No base indicators, which way is my base? which way is the enemies?

Of lesser importance after working on the above, have a think about adding some details, particularly into the long tunnels, just to break them up and create recognisable sections.
-"Oh that detail, I know which tunnel I'm in now".

I haven't looked into the pathing yet but at a glance I didn't see Bots getting stuck except for at the lifts acting as a bottleneck.

Overall, well done for a first map!
Thanks.

-The wait time for the lifts is too long causing gameplay to stall.

The problem with the lifts is that they have a long way to go. But there are some advantages. If you are taking a flag, the wait makes it possible for the defenders to catch up. So you have to maintain your guard. It changes the strategy a bit. When the bots cluster about a lift, it gives you some big kill opportunities. In any case I am not sure how I could fix it, unfortunately it is intrinsic to the map design.

-Not enough pickups e.g. health, ammo, weapons.

Weapons are only on the ships or in the caverns. This was by design. Outside weapons can only be obtained from defeated enemies. There is actually quite a bit of health outside, but its presence is not always obvious. (I also didn't want a bunch of weapons laying around messing up the scenic view.)

-No base indicators, which way is my base? which way is the enemies?

Yes, this is a problem, but I have played on many maps that were more confusing than this one. I would get totally lost and end up carrying the flag back to the original base. There are indicators. The red craft has red lights outside and the blue craft blue lights. The floors of the red craft are reddish and the blue blueish. The lifts have no indication, but are located on the opposite sides of the island which correlates to the teams craft. In fact I set their positions so that they correlate to which side of the craft you arrive at. So I think that playing it a few times would make it clear.

I will think about at least maybe improving the situation to some extent as it is feasible.

Thanks again for the input.

User avatar
OjitroC
Godlike
Posts: 2427
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 8:46 pm

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by OjitroC » Sun Mar 21, 2021 1:20 am

hee wrote:
Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:55 am
The lifts have no indication, but are located on the opposite sides of the island which correlates to the teams craft. In fact I set their positions so that they correlate to which side of the craft you arrive at. So I think that playing it a few times would make it clear.
Yes playing the map several times does make it somewhat clearer - but it's not always clear which side of the island one has emerged from the tunnel(s) on. Obviously the 'look and feel' of the outside space is very important and one certainly doesn't want to detract from that - you could though have a few stones around the landing circles with some subtle colour (red and blue) on them to indicate where the 'lifts' go - you wouldn't need a lot of colour, just enough, and given the rocky nature of the island, some stones would not be out of place. Just an idea to think about?

User avatar
papercoffee
Godlike
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:36 am
Personal rank: coffee addicted !!!
Location: Cologne, the city with the big cathedral.

Re: Who wants to try a new map?

Post by papercoffee » Sun Mar 21, 2021 2:14 am

hee wrote:
Sat Mar 20, 2021 11:56 pm
...
Please refrain from double posting within a 24 hours limit ...you can edit your post to add new stuff.