**Preview only**
Be sure to submit your comment
I completely understand where vicarious is coming from with respect to the item balance for such an open and rail heavy map but I also understand why this rates so poorly, given that the item balance doesn't excuse its construction. I would also have like to have seen the rocket launchers easier to grab and the rail guns placed more out of the way. But in terms of flag captures it shows a lot of potential. As has been noted though, what lets this all down is the scaling of the corridors and walkways.
Agree (1) or Disagree (0)
I'll never understand why this map is rated so low, fantastic game play, excellent weapon placement (invisibility suits the map perfectly), and bots play really really well.
This one's staying on my computer.
Agree (1) or Disagree (0)
What I like about this map the most was the section below the bunkers where there was an underwater tunnel. The reason is this is the only map I was able to find that had structures that were underwater in actual water, and not static water textures. Were there any other maps that had this; a map that had underwater buildings/ structures with windows, but the map wasn't entirely based underwater usually resulting in the "water" to be fake?
Agree (1) or Disagree (0)
Tetzlaff
unregistered
#3 17 May 2001
What you also did wrong is that the whole architecture is totally cramped.
Agree (1) or Disagree (0)
amethyst7
unregistered
#2 15 May 2001
Hey this is Chris Matz, this was my second map. What I did wrong is no vis blocking, something I hadn't learned about yet. :) I am working on a new version of this map which should be playable when done. Check out amethyst7.doofed.com for updates.
Agree (1) or Disagree (0)
lightnigstrike
unregistered
#1 15 May 2001
Not a bad level over all, nice and roomy, but VERY sparse on detail. also very square in design.
I don't know what he did, but above ground, my P3 866, 32Mb DDr GeForce 2 GTS bogged down to 15-20 fps in places. A lesser system would find this map UNPLAYABLE.
Agree (0) or Disagree (0)