View Full Version : Multiplayer Levels.
06-17-2001, 07:21 AM
OK... ATTN level designers for the project. Alright. I don't know about all of you, but the l33t players in JK and in MOTS only play a small handful of missions, most of which didn't even come with the game. All us gunners love levels like JI Oasis for JK, and Nicoasis or Rage's Hellhole for MoTs. The general idea is a small level that is relatively simple to navigate with lots of c-rifles. Now thats fun. Also, in MoTS, Cargo Ship and Spaceport are good levels, so something of that general nature would probably work in JK II. Also, I've grown quite fond of a Quake III level. Its creative title, Q3DM17 says it all. Or not. Its the level with the various platforms with several jumping pads on them. Again, the focus is on area effect weapons, the level is small, and there is that unique airborn aspect of it. I can't speak for lagstickists, er, saberists, but I think very small is the key for no force sabers. I mean, do you really need 200 000 square feet to have a close up saber duel? No. I always thought that a circular platform was just fine. I just like the emphasis on simple navigation, plenty of area effect weapons, and easy locations to camp.
06-17-2001, 12:39 PM
FYI, there is already a fairly large thread on multiplayer maps <a href="http://www.jediknightii.net/cgi-bin/forum/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=10&t=000173&p=1
">here</a>. You may want to include your thoughts there.
All better. Thanks Syndrix.
[ June 17, 2001: Message edited by: Vagabond ]
06-17-2001, 12:53 PM
Well, welcome Sabo. From your other post (where ever I was reading it, I forgot) I can clearly see that your a gunner. That cool, but I prefer the saber myself. Now having said that I must disagree with you on some things. Firstly, I would like to see large maps, not huge I'll never run into anyone maps, just nice reasonably sized maps. This is because if they are too small they dont offer different locations for battle.
If a map is small there is usually one area where everybody inevitable goes to engage each other, I dont know what you consider small but I liked the size of the JK levels, perhaps even a bit bigger. Sure saberists in a NF game can fight in a small area, but that wouldnt be putting the new engine to proper use.
What you have to remember that JK2 will probably support a hell of a lot more people in one game than the 4 of JK. I want big (or reasonable size) level simply because then they can put the maps to good use, you can have 4 people fighting in one location, 2 are fighting somewhere else and a couple running around scared to walk around the next corner in case they run into a saber.
If the maps are small, not only will there be very few places that offer advantages ie. everyone will head to that ledge or on top of that cliff because its the only vantage point, if the map is larger then people will have numerous options. This is purely my opinion. :)
06-17-2001, 12:54 PM
Hey Vagabond, as to your link above.
"No such topic number exists."
Whats with that? :)
06-17-2001, 01:43 PM
well actually I disagree with u sabo, having been an saberist at one time, that although saber combat limits it self to one area per duel(fight till somone gets killed), one nice aspect at BGJ is that it offered many areas + being in the whole thing was nice, the background was nice..
the key for any sabering level tho is 'organic'. when i'm sabering in the cave part(between the two cliffs) i like jumping to various points on the ramp, into main, etc. rolling hills, etc. offer for interesting maneurvers. that I thought RUNE mp levels lacked. not mentioning the ff aspect, of which the organic rolling look on BGJ allowed for SOOO many jump points, etc. There wasn't a single mots level I liked to saber on - they were all blocky and I found myself limited to strafing manuevers on a flat plain.
As for gun levels, I agree, flat surfaces, blocky levels works rather nicely. There are few levels that I like half as much as I do Oasis. I like DM17 as well.
06-17-2001, 01:47 PM
Try <A HREF="http://www.jediknightii.net/cgi-bin/forum/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=10&t=000173">here</A> for the other saber thread.
06-17-2001, 01:49 PM
the problem with some levels is you feel cramped. Small enclosed levels are bad. High ceilings = good. If you're going to do an enclosed level, make it huge and make it for a CTF level or other type objective level so that it creates interesting team-play strategy. Levels like Q3 CTF + the JK CTF levels that aren't like Nar Shaddaa are simply just grab the flag and run. JK CTF Nar Shaddaa entails so much strategy. UT CTF isn't as good as Nar Shaddaa, but it's allowance of large levels makes for team strategy to be implemented.
I hope RAVEN doesn't fail to adjust the Q3 engine to allow for large levels which makes CTF worth playing. in Q3, I don't even bother with CTF - I just play DM instead.
06-17-2001, 02:52 PM
I'm usually a saberist. I like big dark levels were you can hide or have to search for the other players. Once you find them you bust out your saber and a fight ensues. I just wish the fights would last longer, and be more realistic.
06-17-2001, 04:52 PM
if in JO lag is less of a problem I dont think levels like oasis will be as popular. people liked that map because is was the map with the lowest lag. I like maps that are intresting. and I hated oasis, far to simple and over played. one of the best maps that came with JK was bespin. well that's what I think. and I want more intresting saber maps too
06-17-2001, 08:10 PM
really if there is no Ji O shipped with jk2 heheh i will instantly be a level making master and make one.
i thin the best Q3 map for jk2 would be DM 11.
dont worry, after seeing the SOF multiplayer maps, im resting at ease. or soemthing.
vBulletin®, Copyright ©2000-2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.