The Potato
The Potato by Castle
Comments
Add a comment
avatar
**Preview only**
Be sure to submit your comment
Formatting help
Submit
Preview
Cancel
Submitting comment...
avatar
HelterSkeleton Rep. 6751
#13   06 Dec 2019
oh cool! thanks. sorry for troubling you. I didn't even realise I could do that. next time I come across a level with missing attributes I'll update them for you.
Agree (1) or Disagree (0)
avatar
Tig Rep. 2422
#12   06 Dec 2019
@HelterSkeleton : Thanks! Tag has been added. Feel welcome to add the attributes yourself if they are missing.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
avatar
HelterSkeleton Rep. 6751
#11   06 Dec 2019
also: if team arena could be added to the overview under game type, that would be great. thx
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
avatar
HelterSkeleton Rep. 6751
#10   06 Dec 2019
great to have a small 2v2 ctf for team arena that is not basic. I don't really care that the other ctf game types aren't supported because it comes in tourney/ffa flavours. I was sceptical about the figure 8 idea at first, but there is enough variation and routing here to make it interesting and the rushes to and from a base can be really exciting given their proximity. the placement of the RL and MH was great I thought - very hard to get at the same time for people who like rocket jumping everywhere (out of the bottom, up to catwalk, up to the kamikaze). I deducted points for lack of adequate base marking (the symmetry can have you quickly returning to the same base you just left - which in a situation like this where the action comes hard and fast really helps ) and points off for the simplicity of the overall design. But the item layout really spiced things up.
Edited 30 seconds after the original posting.
Agree (1) or Disagree (0)
ajerara unregistered
#9   22 Oct 2001
I really like this map, I thought the botplay was fine and the layout was interesting. I'm keeping the potato, too. The only thing I don't like about it is seeing the big potato in my levelshots. Doesn't do it justice.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Octovus unregistered
#8   19 Oct 2001
Y'know if the reviewer is nameless its probably Tig & Mandog :-p They still exist!

Ok is definitely an interpretive word....taken in context with the rest of the review it could really mean good or just average. I agree that its big for 1 on 1 (containing almost all the weapons) but then I don't even like 1 on 1 so what right do I have to comment?

Finally, I don't think the review was really too harsh...I suspect Tig was just having a bad day, perhaps :-)

-Octovus

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Castle unregistered
#7   18 Oct 2001
Oh and thanks guys for the cool feedback. I dont mean to be all pouty about a bad review..

sorry about that ;)

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Castle unregistered
#6   18 Oct 2001
Ah Cool the potato finaly got a review..

Not a very good one though but I suspect the reviewer who is nameless (??) didnt give the level a chance at all...

Putting the rocket launcher on the lower level in place of the mega would mean that there would be a LG and a RL sitting right next to each other and then the RA would be in direct running of the mega in one run.

4 units as apposed to 8 units on a weapon pad?

Yes it is a cool side effect that I unintentionaly found that you dont take falling damage on those ledges. But I never thought it was a problem to have 8 or 4 units on a platform before.

And I dont think this map is to big.

And the bots play the level perfectly. I have had people even tell me that they needed to work to kill the nightmare Zeal the first few times they played the level. Whats this bots play the level OK shit?

Well I do believe I touted this level as a love or hate thing. Not often does a CTF map double as a One on one map. And it it was 2 week level aswell.

oh well lets see what happens with the next map review.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Octovus unregistered
#5   15 Oct 2001
Okidoke here we go (buckle up). Great stuff once again...I love the look of the level, and the best part is my system likes it too! Made me a bit proud of my POS that it could do this :-D I especially love the cool looking portals (is that architecture in back part of the model? or is it mostly brushwork?) and the cat-walk idea.

The catwalk to the Red Armor is a bit tricky to navigate because you have to side-step to get lined up. In theory not a problem, but it gets a bit annoying in a FFA when rockets are flying at you. Also the RL can be a bit of a drag to get, considering you can be bounced off by some other RL weilding fiend :-D

I disagree with the MH/RL comment. As it is, plenty of people just fall into the pit and get stuck there! This means there's action down there whether they want there to be or not. Some action is undeniably in upper hallways and catwalks, but it roams nicely through chases and offenses. After all its hard to stay on catwalks when a rocket duel is going on!

Very good looking, system friendly, fun to play level from Castle. As always his work is well worth checking out (though I've yet to try the CTF version). Phew...I dunno how you make so many so good, but keep doing whatever it is! :-)

-Octovus

P.S. 8 from me; I'd like to give it a 9 considering how well it runs but not quite there yet.

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
johnboy unregistered
#4   15 Oct 2001
nice detail and lighting. looks great.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Octovus unregistered
#3   15 Oct 2001
Maybe because Mandog tends to hide in the shadows? (Certainly no offense there I do the same thing myself). Comments once I play this beast...
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
pjw unregistered
#2   15 Oct 2001
Um, rather, that should be "Tig/Mandog, you said"

Why do I always do that?

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
pjw unregistered
#1   15 Oct 2001
Great map! It's a keeper for me.

Tig, you said: "The only other annoyance is the high respawn markers for a few items like the Yellow armour. A 4 unit high brush would have been just as effective and looked a lot better." I suspect the reason behind the sorta high marker is that it's just high enough that you can jump on it from above and not take falling damage. Not to say that there might not have been a more elegent-looking solution... I'm sure Castle will correct me if I'm wrong. :)

Agree (0) or Disagree (0)
Clear