We have put Ludendorff on hold for some time, but now we are up in gear again, working nearly daily on it.

Here is the new stuff since the beta 3 version.
- Total remake of Allies spawn. Inspired by COD2 Rhine Crossing.
- Total remake of service tunnel, now with pillars, metal suport beams and walls.
- Alternate exit from spawn areas. Allies spawn inside houses and Axis in tunnel-towers.
- Performance tunning. Sheds under bridge now hide the hole down to the pier. Now only one entrance into towers from servicetunnel.

Have a look at dod_ludendorff_b418
http://files.langal.dk/extern/dod_ludendorff_b418_screens/

Outstanding pics. Every version of this map I have enjoyed immensley.

Great looking map and I enjoy playing it.
Look forward to the next release.

Coool. I have been a very big fan of this map.

I've enjoyed playing it too, but ... well, I'm not sure that you want to hear this, but I think it would be better (and more popular) if it was a bit smaller.

The problem is unless it's being played on a busy server, with a decent number of 'experienced' players who won't camp in the dark spots, is that it can take a long time to run to where the action is, and it's very easy to get shot by a sniper you never even see (cos he's up on the girders, for instance). Wait for respawn, rinse, repeat. Now this does reward the careful and patient player, but let's face it - that's not most people playing DOD:S. It's the one criticism I hear when playing this map - it's a bit too much 'run' and not enough 'gun'.

So my suggestion is to move the spawn areas a bit closer to the end of the bridge, and reduce the length of the bridge (by somewhere between a fifth and a third? Ooh, a quarter then ;)) That would compress and speed up the action enough, I think.

Now I quite understand that you may have the bridge the size it is to amke the haze effect work well to prevent the snipers and riflemen overly dominate the map. If that's truly the case, then 'fair enough'. And maybe you want the size as it is to encourage a more cautious approach. In which case, can I suggest making the compressed map a separate one, so it could be tested in parallel? See which one works best?

These comments are all 'imho'... I've tried mapping and it's bloody hard work I know - and I'm crap at it. So I'm not talking with any experience except as a player. I applaud your effors so far, and I'm fine if you want to reject 'em out of hand :p

I think it looks amazing!

Pretty nice indeed.

Originally posted by Brooker
I've enjoyed playing it too, but ... well, I'm not sure that you want to hear this, but I think it would be better (and more popular) if it was a bit smaller.

The problem is unless it's being played on a busy server, with a decent number of 'experienced' players who won't camp in the dark spots, is that it can take a long time to run to where the action is, and it's very easy to get shot by a sniper you never even see (cos he's up on the girders, for instance). Wait for respawn, rinse, repeat. Now this does reward the careful and patient player, but let's face it - that's not most people playing DOD:S. It's the one criticism I hear when playing this map - it's a bit too much 'run' and not enough 'gun'.

So my suggestion is to move the spawn areas a bit closer to the end of the bridge, and reduce the length of the bridge (by somewhere between a fifth and a third? Ooh, a quarter then ;)) That would compress and speed up the action enough, I think.

Now I quite understand that you may have the bridge the size it is to amke the haze effect work well to prevent the snipers and riflemen overly dominate the map. If that's truly the case, then 'fair enough'. And maybe you want the size as it is to encourage a more cautious approach. In which case, can I suggest making the compressed map a separate one, so it could be tested in parallel? See which one works best?

These comments are all 'imho'... I've tried mapping and it's bloody hard work I know - and I'm crap at it. So I'm not talking with any experience except as a player. I applaud your effors so far, and I'm fine if you want to reject 'em out of hand :p
To this regard, would advancing and retreating spawns help? I've noticed similar complaints on this map when servers are empty myself. Still, it's a damn good map. Keep up the good work.

We are happy to hear that so many like our map :-D

Brooker we like both positive and negative critics, so please keep them coming.

You are not the first one who thinks that this map is to much run and to little gun. I even heard some one, here in Denmark, calling it the Marathon Bridge ;-)

We do agree in the point about Run/Gun. But we do not think that cutting down the length of the bridge is the right solution. (Not yet any way) We have already cut it down by 1/3. Cutting it further will make only half the size of the original bridge.

We have collected some pictures of the bridge around the internet. So you can see its magnificent size.
http://files.langal.dk/extern/dod_ludendorff/pictures/


Cpl. Punishment that is not so bad an idea. If alternate spawn is the solution how could it be made?
- The team who owns the middle will spawn in the towers?
- The spawn areas in the towers, how should they be made?
- Some closed of rooms in the basement?
- Or spawn area on the first floor?
- And should there be more than one exit from the alternate spawn areas?

Sorry for taking so long to reply.... I wanted to put as much thought into this as possible. Your best bet IMO is to have an advanced spawn in front of the first flag with spawn points on the lower causeway and possibly in the towers. When the middle flag is capped, the capturing team spawns forward. As long as there's enough access, it should be sufficient.

There is, however a problem with people sneaking past the middle and shooting people as they spawn. I don't know how you could address that (or if you even need to), but it's something to keep in mind.

Other that that, keep up the good work. :D

We have some news on our progress on Ludendorff.

The map now uses advanced spawn areas.
At the start of a round, both teams spawn at the basement of the towers, in some special spawn rooms, with team-walls, so the enemy can not get in.
The team who capture the center of the bridge, "pushes" the other team back. If Allies have been pushed, they will spawn in the town, and if it is Axis, they will spawn in the tunnel.
We hope this will give the map some more gun and less run.

We are also working on some open train-cars. It will then be possible to jump into a train-car and run a long way down the bridge in cover for sniper fire.

Here are the newest screenshots
http://files.langal.dk/extern/dod_ludendorff_b444_screens/

The new shots look fun and WW2y.:cool: I know there are such significant changes that you're making and the atmosphere is probably in the back of your mind, but I'd never really addressed my opinion on it before.

The environment light values do not accurately correspond with the skybox and fog. With so much fog, or any form of atmospheric particle for this matter, more light is diffused. In game, there are a few significant things that should be changed: ambient intensity higher than the brightness intensity, all lightglow entities more transparent (with a darker light color, because this too is additive) and a larger radius, softer shadow edges (really the whole map could be selected and lightmap scale could be increased, also helping filesize and performance a little). And since this is actually fog, light would be cooler... yours is currently pretty close to white light... like the world is being lit by flourescent lights. :D

Light is crazy:PARROT:

Lookin pretty good.

Originally posted by Hintzmann
We have some news on our progress on Ludendorff.

The map now uses advanced spawn areas.
At the start of a round, both teams spawn at the basement of the towers, in some special spawn rooms, with team-walls, so the enemy can not get in.
The team who capture the center of the bridge, "pushes" the other team back. If Allies have been pushed, they will spawn in the town, and if it is Axis, they will spawn in the tunnel.
We hope this will give the map some more gun and less run.

We are also working on some open train-cars. It will then be possible to jump into a train-car and run a long way down the bridge in cover for sniper fire.

Here are the newest screenshots
http://files.langal.dk/extern/dod_ludendorff_b444_screens/

Excellent! I look forward to playing the new version :)

The layout looks fun

Is this a det map? oh, that would be so sweet!
...if not, have you considered making it a det map?

Its a flag map. Detonation would be an interesting option on this map for sure.

yeah if my computer wasn't busted i would get the new beta....

too bad it is....

Hey Nave, thanks for your reply.

I have to confess that I do not know much about light. But I will try and follow your hints.

I have used the sky "sky_day02_04", with the "ideal" settings for brightness and ambience, recommended by valve. Which is Brightness 243 238 224 400 and Ambience 172 196 204 50.

http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Sky_List

But as you say, these setting does not work with the heavy fog on Ludendorff.

If I sum-up what you write and how I understod it.

For the Environment Light the ambient intensity must be higher than the brightness intensity. And the intensity is the last number in Brightness ( 400 ) and Ambience ( 50 )

But there does not seem to be any "ideal" settings with higher intensity in Ambience than Brightness.

The one that come closes is "office" with Brightness 255 249 225 325 and Ambience 121 152 185 400.

- Should I use the "office" sky? It seems to look fogy.

You also write that the fog should be cooler and not white light.

From what I can read from this.
http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Intermediate_Lighting#Color_Temperature
I should use an ultra violet "blue" color, but it also says that it is a common flourescent light, which you say I should avoid.

So I am a bit confused about what sky and Environment Light I should use.

- Can you recommend a good sky and some good settings for Environment Light ?

I have looked at your screenshots from dod_avant and they look realy good to me.
http://www.dayofdefeat.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68599

- Is the settings something I may "steal" ?

About the lightmap scale, we have allready increased it. I think the default for our map is 32, and for the open displacement areas 64, and some few places (the floor at the service tunnel) we go down to 16.

- Should it be even higher?

If you feel like and have the time, MadMilo and I will realy appreciate it, if you would look at our VMF-file, and see what you could do about the light on Ludendorff.

This map is one of our main admins at Sunlits favorite so we always are happy to see you guys are working on it!!

Hintzmann gave me the freedom to take a stab at the atmosphere. Here's a screenshot to compare old to new...

new:
http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/1194/dodludendorffb4450000te3.jpg
old:
http://files.langal.dk/extern/dod_ludendorff_b444_screens/dod_ludendorff_b444_12.jpg

Sorry it looks a bit more depressing. :p

I think it looks better, not more depressing. Your current settings help objects step into the light and be more "alive", because you have more contrast.

Thanks for helping us out Nave :-D

You write "Here's a screenshot to compare old to new..." but you are actually comparing new to old. The last picture is the old one.

I like what you have done, but I need to "feel" it ingame, before I can say it for sure.

Yours seems more believable in a way.

ah, so I like the old one better ;) With that said, you could probably find the best of both worlds. In the old settings, your objects were more visible, yet felt maybe a bit more out of place seen as the lighting was off (fog is too white for this yellow sunlight). In the new settings, fog and objects blend together a lot better, but at the cost of contrast this time around.... Tone that down a bit so your fog and sun light have the same color, and the objects still stand out from the background.

I like the new fog better, the color looks more realistic. The old pic, the fog color looks unnatural (like toxic gas).

:)

I like the new one better. Its more realistic for sure. the old one is too bright for how foggy it is.

Hey JohnnyBeverage and Sword

We have considered making it a detonation map.

Back then on the 7th of March 1945, the Germans tried to blow the bridge up.
Before the Allies reached the bridge from the western side (Remagen), they had blown the stone bridge, to prevent vehicles crossing the bridge.

Next they waited until Allies soldiers tried to cross the bridge before blowing it.

I have a drawing here showing where the charges was placed.
http://files.langal.dk/extern/dod_ludendorff/pictures/ludendorff_charges.jpg
And here as a hand drawn sketch by Sergeant Eugene Dorland.
http://files.langal.dk/extern/dod_ludendorff/pictures/eugene_dorland_sketch.jpg

But because of different problem with the fusses/wires only the eastern charges detonated and because the Germans only have received civil TNT, the damage was not big enough to collapse the bridge.

You can see the damage here.
http://files.langal.dk/extern/dod_ludendorff/pictures/0019.jpg
The charges had sheared a number of girders supporting the upstream truss above the eastern pier.

After that the Allies ran quickly over the bridge and cleared out the towers.

As I said we have considered making it a detonation map. But exactly how, we do not know.
Perhaps some TNT crates past the center of the bridge on the western side in an open train car. Then the Axis first have to go get the TNT next they need to go to the two piers and detonate them twice on each. The Allies have to prevent Axis getting the TNT and reached the eastern towers and clear them out to capture the bridge.

I think there will be a good fight around the TNT at the center of the bridge, with snipers and MGs covering the center, Axis assault throwing smoke grenades to get cover.

When a pier is blown it narrow in the way across the bridge, so wisely the Axis must first blow the western pier. If they blow the eastern pier first they will cut of ( narrow in ) there own way to the TNT, making it hard for theme to blow the last pier.

And the allies must get one or more men into the eastern towers to win the map.
The Axis must first blow the western pier, which will cut of the Allies way to the center

I think the gameplay could be fun. But it had to be tried out.

- What do you think?
- Or do you have other ideas about how it could be a detonation map?

We are not saying that we will make it a detonation map... we are just considering it.

So it have been one whole year !!! Times go fast, when you become a dad and get a new job. But MadMilo and I have actually finished a playable beta version of Ludendorff.
But we would like to have a play test before we release it to the public.

-Anybody interested in setting up a play test?

The problem with the previous version, was that it was to much run and to less gun. One solution that we heard again and again was to cut down the length of the bridge. But then this would not be the Ludendorff bridge, the bridge at Remagen.

http://files.langal.dk/extern/dod_ludendorff/pictures/

RosietheRiveter and Jimmy Crack Corn held some play test, and it seems that the new spawn system and linear flag caps could be the saving of the Ludendorff.

I have measured some running time, all from the Allies point of view, but it is exactly the same for Axis.

This is time measured in seconds and the location on the previous version.
0 - Allies City (ALLIES SPAWN)
14 - Allies Towers (LAST DEFEND)
25 - Allies Bridge Pier
34 - Middle (FIRST ENCOUNTER)
45 - Axis Bridge Pier
54 - Axis Towers (LAST CAPTURE)
68 - Axis Tunnel

This shows that it took over half a minute from the first spawn round to the first encounter. And nearly one minute to make the last cap.
This is a lot compared to the stock maps. Where first encounter normally is 18-20 seconds and 30-35 seconds for the last cap.

On the new version of Ludendorff with the new spawn system. We have almost cut the running time in half.

As Allies you first spawn at the towers.
0 - Allies Towers
11 - Allies Bridge Pier
20 - Middle (CAPTURE)

That is 40% less running for the first encounter and flag.

Next, if the Allies capture the middle their spawn point are moved forward near the bridge pier.

0 - Allies Bridge Pier
11 - Middle (DEFEND)
22 - Axis Bridge Pier (CAPTURE)
31 - Axis Tower (FINAL CAPTURE)

Again 40% less running for a full cap.

It will take the Allies 11 seconds to defend the middle.
and only 22 seconds to the next capture area the Axis bridge pier.
When they capture that area, they will not move forward, but instead push the Axis backward, so they no longer spawn at the towers, but in the tunnel. Allies will then have 31 second to the final full cap. And Axis 14 seconds to prevent it.

But if the Axis capture the middle, the Allies will be pushed back and no longer spawn in the towers, but instead in the city ( of Remagen )
Now the Allies have 14 seconds to prevent a full cap. And they need to run 25 seconds to recapture the bridge pier, so they again will spawn in the towers.

0 - Allies City
14 - Allies Towers (DEFEND)
25 - Allies Bridge Pier (CAPTURE)

Great explanation! This is a similar type of thing I want to do with my map. I was wondering what players think about the advancing spawns, since it is a new feature for DOD maps.

Has anyone complained about it, or do people think it is a good addition? Has anyone said that they prefer the older versions of the map?

Looking forward to a release.

The map has been playtested with the new advanced spawn system on two occasions here in Denmark at some local lans. The concept of the system was explained before we played the it. And everyone seemed to like it. The said it created more action.

No one had said they prefered the old version rather than the new one.

But it has also been playtested on sunlitgames. without any explanation before hand. And it seemed that for some of the players it was a bit confusing.

http://www.sunlitgames.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=4580

Before we can release the map we need a very good explanation of how the map works for the maphtml-file.

We would be very grateful for any help on the maphtml-file, as english is not our native language.

We also thought about changing the flag icons ingame.
http://www.dayofdefeat.net/forums/showthread.php?t=75866
But we have not found a solution for that.

I think the most important thing will be the way the map provides direction, rather than the html file (though of course this will be useful).

I think that when a team has captured a flag, the new respawn areas should be set up so that when the player exits, they are facing the right way. So they are not exiting buildings sideways, and not leaving via windows and doors which face the original spawn. More or less, they just have to run forward, and are then heading towards the next flag.

How about adding some decals and signs? Like the German and American cross and star images, with arrows pointing in the right direction? I know it detracts from the realism element, but they could really help navigation.

Regarding the text file and active flags, I don't really know how that is done. In TF2, it might be something that is hard coded into the game, rather than an editor function. Maybe it will be easier to achieve once DOD is updated to the new engine.

We have tried hard to face the player in the right direction and setup signs showing the direction.

These 3 screenshots are from the Allies side but it is the exactly same for the Axis.

When the round start all Allies players spawn in the towers.
The spawn at the top of the tower, has the opportunity to jump onto the super structure.
The one at the middle can run just right ahead.
And the one in the basement can either go for the servicetunnel or going higher up in the tower.
http://files.langal.dk/maps/dod_ludendorff/screenshots/b499/dod_ludendorff_b4990041.jpg

If the Allies capture the middle of the bridge, they will spawn near the bridge pier.
There are many spawn points all facing in the right direction. The player can run straight ahead, go into one of the open traincars, climb down a ladder to the service tunnel.
http://files.langal.dk/maps/dod_ludendorff/screenshots/b499/dod_ludendorff_b4990039.jpg

If the Allies loses there own bridge pier, they will spawn at the city of Remagen. Here they have 3 spawn exits.
http://files.langal.dk/maps/dod_ludendorff/screenshots/b499/dod_ludendorff_b4990040.jpg

You can se more pictures of how we have tried in the towers to guide the player out of there with signs. An arrow pointing left/right is pointing toward the servicetunnel. An arrow pointing upward is to an exit on a higher level in the tower.
http://files.langal.dk/maps/dod_ludendorff/screenshots/b499/

Have you considered adding extra info to the overview map itself?

We have now, and we have decided to do so.
:)
Thanks Ultranew_b!

Great explanation! This is a similar type of thing I want to do with my map. I was wondering what players think about the advancing spawns, since it is a new feature for DOD maps.
Spawn advancing has been in use for quite a while now in DoD:S. Lots of maps have them. My own map's gameplay would be broken without advancing/retreating spawnage. Teleports, man. Teles and triggers.

To me, part of the fun of trying out new maps is exploring them. I think most people can get the hang of the spawn points of this map fairly quickly. I know when we playtested it we didn't have any trouble figuring out which way to go.

While arrows and helps are useful, nothing beats spending time playing and getting used to a new map. I think people will enjoy this version and will be able to quickly learn which way is out depending on where they spawn.

JCC

We have released the map as dod_ludendorff_rc1 (http://www.dayofdefeat.net/forums/showthread.php?t=76662)