81
Off Topic / Can of whoop ass opened
« on: September 09, 2005, 02:18:08 AM »
Damn liberal media, always pointing out political incompetence.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
82
Off Topic / This is longcat
« on: September 09, 2005, 02:10:58 AM »
this flash is WAY too homoerotic.
83
General / SourceForts (building) guide.
« on: September 09, 2005, 02:03:26 AM »
Box Walls: Build box walls by aligning rectangle boxes up and down, not one ontop of the other. This allows for more precision against tight walls, makes the walls impossible to jump over when quickly slapped up, and is much easier to build tunnel entrances and what not around then your average plate wall. If built tightly enough it will be nearly impossible to knock out wall peices with anything but grenade fire even after they have been destroyed.
Plate Walls: Plate walls built with plates stacked lengthwize are deceptively easy to climb. Plates stacked with the top angled in towards your base can be ramplaunched up with a sprint jump and the player can then tightrope on the top of your walls, often allowing them to jump right into your flag enclosure if you haven't built a ceiling for it. If the plates are stacked with no angle they are still easy to boost over or scale using slamsteps. With a slightly outwards angle they can still be boosted over, but slamsteps will not work, however, players can probably hide under your plates more safe from your elevated tower fire more easily.
Stacking plates vertically makes them too high to be boosted over, and impossible to ramp launch at any but the most extream angles. On the downside you also will have to build high access ramps to get over your walls, and vertically stacked plates take alot more peices to finish a wall then horrizontally stacked ones do. Also shooting platforms that allow you to peak just over the wall have to be built higher then jump-up height, so you need ramps to access those as well, whereas for horrizontal walls a box layed down at the foot of a wall does the job perfectly. Other up sides is that grenades can't hit you from ground level on a shooting platform high enough to peak over a vertically stacked wall, in base tower coverage is several times more effective, and you have much more control over both in and out of base enemy movement, since every access has to be built, and ramplaunches won't allow for quick entrance or exit on either side of the wall. Finding an access spot to start tight roping the walls also becomes several times more difficult.
Plate Walls: Plate walls built with plates stacked lengthwize are deceptively easy to climb. Plates stacked with the top angled in towards your base can be ramplaunched up with a sprint jump and the player can then tightrope on the top of your walls, often allowing them to jump right into your flag enclosure if you haven't built a ceiling for it. If the plates are stacked with no angle they are still easy to boost over or scale using slamsteps. With a slightly outwards angle they can still be boosted over, but slamsteps will not work, however, players can probably hide under your plates more safe from your elevated tower fire more easily.
Stacking plates vertically makes them too high to be boosted over, and impossible to ramp launch at any but the most extream angles. On the downside you also will have to build high access ramps to get over your walls, and vertically stacked plates take alot more peices to finish a wall then horrizontally stacked ones do. Also shooting platforms that allow you to peak just over the wall have to be built higher then jump-up height, so you need ramps to access those as well, whereas for horrizontal walls a box layed down at the foot of a wall does the job perfectly. Other up sides is that grenades can't hit you from ground level on a shooting platform high enough to peak over a vertically stacked wall, in base tower coverage is several times more effective, and you have much more control over both in and out of base enemy movement, since every access has to be built, and ramplaunches won't allow for quick entrance or exit on either side of the wall. Finding an access spot to start tight roping the walls also becomes several times more difficult.
84
Off Topic / Suggested required training
« on: September 07, 2005, 12:03:48 AM »
It's also old as all hell.
86
General / Re-Institution of Reg/RS Night
« on: September 04, 2005, 06:07:07 PM »Quote
True. Then, if you find a marine in a good place, you have to run the damn gauntlet just to get to him. And by then, you've probably hit a mine, so all he has to do is swipe at you.Or swipe at the mine and use the friendly fire to kill you.[snapback]53358[/snapback]
87
General / Re-Institution of Reg/RS Night
« on: September 04, 2005, 02:18:10 AM »
Ugg, can we play traditional hide and seek and not "rines mine the crap out of aliens FTW" hide and seek? It's so lame how we always end up with less seekers alive then hiders just because mines are easy to hide behind.
I don't mind marines using mines to hide ontop of or in pits, but if that is the case I think the alien killed by the mine should get a respawn, because both the comm thing and the mine thing totally ruin the seeking experiance.
When I play hide and seek with my little brothers beating the crap out of people isn't in the rules.
I don't mind marines using mines to hide ontop of or in pits, but if that is the case I think the alien killed by the mine should get a respawn, because both the comm thing and the mine thing totally ruin the seeking experiance.
When I play hide and seek with my little brothers beating the crap out of people isn't in the rules.
88
General / Re-Institution of Reg/RS Night
« on: September 02, 2005, 12:29:00 AM »Quote
you know, this is really the.....Ya, but the re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-institution died because rad didn't have the time to run it any more, so it's only fitting that he's going to revive it again.
re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-institution of reg night.
have fun.[snapback]53299[/snapback]
89
Off Topic / Metropolis 2005
« on: August 30, 2005, 02:39:18 PM »Quote
The sorta music y'all listen to nowdays confuses me.The dude is named after a trance song nite, what do you expect?[snapback]53206[/snapback]
90
Mapping / Source forts: suggestions
« on: August 30, 2005, 02:37:30 PM »Quote
so, you guys actually seem to think i should do work on this map again?Hell yes, Sunny D has a stableish server running, SF 1.9 is getting closer to compleation every day, and good SF maps are still pretty hard to find.
give me some time to drink some breakfast and then ill look into it.
i also should really put some ammo crates etc in .
but yeah. guinness for breakfast here i come.[snapback]53215[/snapback]
91
Off Topic / Awesome Multiplayer Games
« on: August 30, 2005, 05:06:18 AM »
TA spring, all must download, all must install, all must play!
Game is fun beyond all fun, and the latest build is increadibly stable.
Game is fun beyond all fun, and the latest build is increadibly stable.
92
Mapping / Source forts: suggestions
« on: August 30, 2005, 05:04:09 AM »
nice fused, very nice... A few things to think about...
- every map does a no mans land, what makes your map different is what you do with your no man's land...
- architextural features to work off of and build around are fun, normal maps are not.
- if you make an area of the base easy to wall off, most likely players will find a way to wall it off. Spawns, ammo crates and the flag shouldn't be easily blockable, if a team intends to block them all in they should have to work hard at it.
- Spawns don't belong places where people are likely to build, building blocks don't belong on the flag, and unmarked func_nobuilds just don't belong.
personally I'd like to see some catwalking and trenching but that's just me.
- every map does a no mans land, what makes your map different is what you do with your no man's land...
- architextural features to work off of and build around are fun, normal maps are not.
- if you make an area of the base easy to wall off, most likely players will find a way to wall it off. Spawns, ammo crates and the flag shouldn't be easily blockable, if a team intends to block them all in they should have to work hard at it.
- Spawns don't belong places where people are likely to build, building blocks don't belong on the flag, and unmarked func_nobuilds just don't belong.
personally I'd like to see some catwalking and trenching but that's just me.
93
General / Why the SourceForts server quite honestly sucks
« on: August 30, 2005, 04:07:55 AM »
My ping will jump to 500 if I remain on the Sunny D server for some reason... I'm hoping that it's related to the SF build...
94
General / where is everyone?
« on: August 30, 2005, 04:04:17 AM »Quote
Acctually the SF client is also still unstable as hell. I can't even boot a listen without crashing in 1.4 and tonnes of players have complained on the SF forums ages ago. We're lucky we haven't had more major problems in this comunity with it. BTW 1.9 is in full fledged beta testing right now... VERY hot, and in my opinion it feels very close to a release assuming nothing goes horribly wrong. One of the other things I like about SF is the dev team is still very on the ball, and still full of ideas for the mod, something I haven't felt in NS for a long time... but then again what little hearsay I've heard about nexus makes me start to think that that may change in the future... It should open up alot of possibilities.QuoteThe timelimit thread wasn't about Co timelimits, it was about NS timelimits.There were two timelimit threads, one was about map timelimit the other was about CO roundlimit, I think I used a few of the wrong words to describe what I was speaking of there, so I'll reread what I post next time around(lololol).
and I have nothing better to do.
For the record, source forts is a damn fun game, and of all the games lunixmonster could have picked up, I'm glad you went for source forts. The version in BT right now is liquid awesome, can't wait till I'm allowed to say more about it.[snapback]53162[/snapback]
This is exactly why NS could be so great, there are no games to play. BF2 is well EA so people are still getting lots of graphical errors and the game hasn't changed much at all from previous forms except it has squads and a commander who can TK you with artillery.
I think the only reason we went with sourceforts is because of the constant badgering of "omg lets play sourceforts guys" by a few specific users, and then us all trying it and wanted a server up so dev was all "LOL NOBODY PLAYS ON LM LETS TRY THIS ^_^" or something. It's also nice that dev is trying to fix the broke-ass version we all have to play :p. I mean last night(early morning) I was trying to play SF on FSD with a friend and it repeatedly crashed client side and his sys specs are quite high and his windows is a near fresh install with no other game having this problem. I myself blame half the crashing on steam/hl2 though..[snapback]53179[/snapback]
95
General / where is everyone?
« on: August 28, 2005, 07:52:34 PM »
cal recently banned CC blocking, and thank God for that. I still think you should acctually make a rule about it if you intend to block it, like every other organization on the face of the earth.
The thing is, if I make a serious suggestion and the response it lock/tempban, well who is going to support that suggestion after that? if there is public support you need to give it time to prop up, that topic was locked instantly.
The timelimit thread wasn't about Co timelimits, it was about NS timelimits. Your average game lasts about 13-16 minutes in NS, and no one wants to spend another round on that map after 13 minutes of ass raping, yet the alternitive is sitting on the server doing dick all for 2 minutes. If the time limit was pushed back then we would have a clean ten minute game and not be stuck on the same boring map after it's finished. This isn't cal, very few people want to/will facilite a match and then rematch with team switch.
[edit] for the record, I think NS on the HL engine is pretty much dead... Sure we'll see a revival with 3.1 and the eventual my games move if that ever happens, but as it stands most of the players who made this game what it is have moved on and don't really want a revival. They are done playing with this game. I don't think NS will ever be quite what it once was again, but I'll still be sticking around, because this is the comunity that made me, and I have nothing better to do.
For the record, source forts is a damn fun game, and of all the games lunixmonster could have picked up, I'm glad you went for source forts. The version in BT right now is liquid awesome, can't wait till I'm allowed to say more about it.
The thing is, if I make a serious suggestion and the response it lock/tempban, well who is going to support that suggestion after that? if there is public support you need to give it time to prop up, that topic was locked instantly.
The timelimit thread wasn't about Co timelimits, it was about NS timelimits. Your average game lasts about 13-16 minutes in NS, and no one wants to spend another round on that map after 13 minutes of ass raping, yet the alternitive is sitting on the server doing dick all for 2 minutes. If the time limit was pushed back then we would have a clean ten minute game and not be stuck on the same boring map after it's finished. This isn't cal, very few people want to/will facilite a match and then rematch with team switch.
[edit] for the record, I think NS on the HL engine is pretty much dead... Sure we'll see a revival with 3.1 and the eventual my games move if that ever happens, but as it stands most of the players who made this game what it is have moved on and don't really want a revival. They are done playing with this game. I don't think NS will ever be quite what it once was again, but I'll still be sticking around, because this is the comunity that made me, and I have nothing better to do.
For the record, source forts is a damn fun game, and of all the games lunixmonster could have picked up, I'm glad you went for source forts. The version in BT right now is liquid awesome, can't wait till I'm allowed to say more about it.
96
General / Whats up with LB?
« on: August 26, 2005, 04:53:50 AM »
just been knowticing a lack of LB's presence around recently... If he's just bored of hanging around that's cool, but there's a few things he should have probably delt with first, I know lowcrawler would think so. I like devnull running things, he's a great guy, just kindof made me wonder why I haven't seen LB around in a good forever...
98
Off Topic / ryu hayabusa
« on: August 18, 2005, 02:03:39 PM »Quote
OMG suicided!QuoteWould of been funny if rope snapepdKills dumbledore![snapback]52988[/snapback][snapback]52990[/snapback]
99
Off Topic / ryu hayabusa
« on: August 12, 2005, 02:25:30 AM »
they did have guns, but they didn't use them at all...
100
Mapping / Source forts: suggestions
« on: August 12, 2005, 02:21:26 AM »
1. Some of the more successful SF maps are huge, and basicly just have tonnes of space for people to snipe at eachother with SMGs from exobidant ranges. For some reason SF doesn't like player numbers, never has. Later versions plan on fixing it. At the moment I say size is most dependent on how far away from eachother you want players to be when they start shooting at eachother. They don't need to be big to be fun.
2. Everyone does a no mans land, I don't know if there is a way to not do one. If you make coradoors it becomes too easy to restrict movement with 1-2 well placed blocks, and non noman's land maps so far have all been gimickey as hell. Personally I'd like to see more inovation used and the no man's land attraction minimized, but I don't really know a good alternitive off the top of my head.
3. I always like these, because they force more complicated fort building. Up to you, but I'd try to be a little more creative then just puting rafters in.
4. Nope, if it looks good outside is fine. SF maps have a sick characteristic of not having any immersive value at all. I'd like that to change
5. Because they once exploded one and they don't want that to happen again really...
6. I don't think people understand how source vis works. They assume that since it's a new engine they can just cram exorbidant detail everywhere all visable at the same time and it won't kill people's PC's. I really don't know enough to comment much on it when people are doing bad vis stuff.
2. Everyone does a no mans land, I don't know if there is a way to not do one. If you make coradoors it becomes too easy to restrict movement with 1-2 well placed blocks, and non noman's land maps so far have all been gimickey as hell. Personally I'd like to see more inovation used and the no man's land attraction minimized, but I don't really know a good alternitive off the top of my head.
3. I always like these, because they force more complicated fort building. Up to you, but I'd try to be a little more creative then just puting rafters in.
4. Nope, if it looks good outside is fine. SF maps have a sick characteristic of not having any immersive value at all. I'd like that to change
5. Because they once exploded one and they don't want that to happen again really...
6. I don't think people understand how source vis works. They assume that since it's a new engine they can just cram exorbidant detail everywhere all visable at the same time and it won't kill people's PC's. I really don't know enough to comment much on it when people are doing bad vis stuff.