Author Topic: CT staff  (Read 2394 times)

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
CT staff
« Reply #30 on: December 07, 2001, 11:27:00 AM »
i thought as an arena setting icons ranges could be shortened not turned off.

Is this correct? If so icons off is a no go unless you trust people to turn umm off.

I used to fly a bit of h2h no icons and had a reticle site that was a half moon that would fit a p51 at 350 yards.

Was easy enough to get kills.

We would need a smaller map or more folks.....

better get started on that small map  :)

Offline Ramjet at Command HQ

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9
      • http://www
CT staff
« Reply #31 on: December 07, 2001, 01:19:00 PM »
Quote
Heya Ramjet! You'd be perfect for the Events CM team, why not apply yourself there? I believe the CT arena is not as much events oriented as it would be a 24/7 arena similiar to the main.
Anyway, I think your CM expertise would be highly regarded and welcome with a permanent position on the CM team.

<S>

Thank you for your kind words Ripsnort <S>, I may do in the future if the offer is still open but right now, I will concentrate here and see how it goes.

Regards

Ramjet

Offline NUTTZ

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1818
CT staff
« Reply #32 on: December 07, 2001, 03:28:00 PM »
Yup, it's alot of fun. Now the terrain has to be just right. If it's too cluttered it's hard to see the planes without the Icon. So A right balance has to be acheived.

NUTTZ

 
Quote
Originally posted by hblair:
We had 8 people flying in H2H last night with icons off. It was a blast. I could tell the planes apart easily before they were in firing range and I was in 800X600. The zeke's and georges meatball gave them away every time. I personally like NUTTZ's ideas. 64X64 map might be just what the doc ordered for icons off. Maybe a lil larger, but guys, icons off is doable. I would have the guy in my sights, he'd dive to the deck, I'd lose him, then he'd be on my 6 a few secs later. It was fun.   :)

Offline CRASH

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 186
CT staff
« Reply #33 on: December 10, 2001, 10:14:00 AM »
Nuttz, I'd like to see, to start, historical maps, using historical terrain and capturable cities and factories in their historical locations as well as genuine topography as gotten from the national geographic society site, if thats possible for you to do. I think it would best to start with historically based stuff and change as needed for game play.  Thats were I'd start.  
     3 countries is fine as long as kill shooter is on for axis and allies so same side cant kill each other. Large maps would obviously have to be reduced for gameplay.
     I wholeheartedly suppport your idea about more gv participation, your right on target there.  
     No matter what you produce, if its up to the quality I've seen from you it'll be wonderfull.

CRASH

 
Quote
Originally posted by NUTTZ:
Well, everyone has their own ideas. Theres so many different ideas for the CT.
What "I" CAN do is only make the maps designed around what you would like to see in the CT. What I can do is make any size map you "think" would be best suited for CT. "I" can add the roads, rivers, and strats where needed. "I" can make the custom tiles needed for the terrain. The map can be made from real life countries, or "fantasy" or made-up terrains with No historical accuracy but designed JUST to have fun. Your call. After that I can only submit it and Hope it will be acceptable to HTC. BUT many hours go into making a map, and to start one without knowing a direction is just a pure waste of time. So I would like to hear ( and have been taking notes and suggestions already from reading this thread) what would make the CT fun. Once compiled i'll start.

I looked at some ww2 battle maps last night. I have some ideas also. One of these ideas would be to make a fantasy map, in addition to historically accurate ones.
The CT map IMO should be axis vs. allied, but this doesn't mean it's limited to 2 sides.

 The MAIN reason the CT isn't working and this most will agree with, is the plane set.
we just don't have any good plane set match-ups to do a "perfect" CT. I've been here since the first day, been threw all the updates and know the planes will arrive in due time to balance out a great CT. But as we speak theres very few "historically " accurate battles we could make.

"I" would like to start with 2 maps heres my ideas for them. I willl dwell on strats another time.

A: a Pacific type map ( doesn't have to be historically accurate as long as we can get japanese planes against allied. Either USA vs Japan or we use australia and Spitties vs japanese.

B: a map where Italy and german planes vs allied steel, I'm thinking a north east africa map. this could be
rook=allied
knights=germans
bishops=italy
only problem is knights bishops shooting each other.


IMO, the map should be deigned around GV's.... I, know, I know this is a flight sym. But it all intertwines.

What it boils down to is FUN, I think i do have what it takes to build these maps, But I am not a historian, so i would need some help enabling what planes 'Should" face each other to balance gameplay.

I can only offer to build these maps designed around YOUR input, and submit them for review.

First off, PICK a size map!!!!!
It seams THAT can't even get past this point .

So lets hear them suggestions!!!!

NUTTZ

A: definately a pacific

Offline K West

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1445
CT staff
« Reply #34 on: January 16, 2002, 09:33:26 PM »
Refresher for anyone who may want to know why some players are on what is called the CT team.


 Westy