Again a flawed logic respone, you are ratting a 6 year old game on graphics. Something is wrong with that. . .
Firstly all car and streetlamp doodads are ugly, and will only make the map look worse as they are horriably out of place. Secondly this is meant to be after a god damn nuke has blown everything in the city appart so seing cars and streetlamps would be horriably out of place. Thirdly no one gives a shit how it looks as you are too busy having fun and playing.
Ever played RE Survivor, or Undead Assault?
Yes I played those unpopular maps, all were newer than SWAT as far as I know and certainly are nowhere near as fun and enjoyable. Also SWAT has far much more development and ballence it in that those ever had. Every class in SWAT AM is useful.
1.8 MB, and like 1mb I think it just that stupid hi-quality loading screen. Whats the point of uploading a 1mb blp file that people is going to look only for 10 seconds? He should import doodads instead.
Actually, I am sorry to say the loading screen is not 1 MB. The only 1 MB files were the actual terrain data themselves, all other huge files were object files and trigger files. The loadingscreen is atmost one or two hundred kilobytes. I advise actually thinking before saying stupid stuff as it is obvious he would not make the loadingscreen over half his map in size.
For "Triggering\Visual Effects" I rate the how well made the trigered spells are, if the map has epic things, etc. The 3/5 is for the lagness and ability to full customize heroes. But since there are no spetacular effects on spells, it can not earn a 5/5 from me.
Wrong section buddy, this is the maps section, not the spell section. Your logic is based on the fact that every map must have spells, which is not the case and also impresive looking spells does not make them actually good. Did you actually try mini-nuke? Ion satalite? MIRV? Hyper-thrash? All of those spells are pretty impresive to me, and unique as well. Thus showing the low level testing you performed proving it was not enough to reach a valid test conclusion.
Yes, I could, if I had an unprotected version of the map. Dude, making a terrain for this map is not hard:
Streets: Cars and Streetlights. They could use 2x2 pathing so it wont fuck with the creep movement.
Inside Buildings: Doodads on the corners, of course. That would be great, and again, it dont fuk the creep movement.
Something tells me doing that would allow for dozens of exploits with pathing and stuff in rooms would lead to some room spawners having objects to avoid so spider attacks would not stop snippers as well.
Godfall Chronicles and Balls are examples of maps I rated 5/5
A 5/5 ratting is not something you can go arround rating everything map you think cool as 5/5. To get a 5/5 it means the map is suposed to be perfect (or near it) and unique.
Well then why did you not rate this a 5/5? It is pretty much near perfect ballence and gameplay wise. Visually, it may not be the best, but atleast it does not have any out of place or clunky crap models like most zombie games have. All in all you rate on how well it plays. Thus why I gave it directors cut as it shows what WC3 is capable of. A map with random features, good ballence, multiple challenging difficulty levels and that seldomly gets boring.
So what does this boil down to? Not the fact that you do not obviously like this map which you are allowed to. But the fact your ratting system is flawed and rates maps obviously aimed at gameplay on stuff totally irrelevent and no one cares about. I would just scrap your whole rating system like every smart person has done and adopt a eassy form review like I do stating noticable points and ratting based on how much you enjoyed it.
Its obvious he does not want you to stair at the terrain in great detail, afterall you are meant to be moving nearly constantly. Thus ratting it on the terrain is poinltess unless it is an eyesour which makes you not want to play which it is not. However some campaigns which are slower do want you to stair at the terrain, and thus not ratting them on it would be stupid as the whole point was the terrain. Thus you should rate on what the emphisis was of the map, this map emphisises gameplay and ballenced over terrain, while other maps do the opposite.
I certainly can say that this terrain is not ugly, dawn of the dead and night of the dead and kin, now those were ugly maps, with the later ones being spam fests of poor low quality models.
Also the fact that you are ratting one of the orignal zombie maps on orignality with a 1/5 is a bit stupid, as it is still orignal even now and most of the modern zombie maps have been made long after this has been out. I was playing this map back when WC3search still existed and even then it was classed as an older map, and it still is being updated which is really amazing.
Approved
![[K40$]-Spectre](/data/avatars/m/138/138114.jpg?1465505366){kind=avatar}
