I think the BFG might not be so bad, as it does take some time to charge up, and in the close quarter enviroments of D3 DM maps (the stock ones at least), there's always another room to run and hide in...

I could be wrong though, it's a long time since I played DM especially any DM with a BFG in.

Personally I want to see inspiring and more "traditionally" designed (i.e. atria and more open spaces) DM maps first, and worry about the weapons later....but I think you've got them pretty much summed up. 

I think that control of lighting, whether it be switched on/off or shot out, or both, could be very good if used correctly. Also the use of explosive moveable barrels/objects could also add to the mix. Perhaps with the ability to use the barrels to set traps etc.
I think I will always remember in D3SP when I came across the Revenants for the first time and took one out by rolling a barrel down the ramp and putting a couple of shots into it, kaboom, goodbye Rev, awesome.
Respawnable barrels would probably be required, not sure if they can respawn or not. 

A room full of barrels, where an important item or weapon is - and if even 1 shot is fired in this room, you risk blowing all the barrels up. Would have to be done just right though, instead of repetetive wall of barrels. 

When players aren't looking at them, if possible. It's pretty neat. 

...and as I have it right now the sole Rocket Launcher in my current map is up a short flight of stairs, at the bottom of these stairs (alongside the handrails actually) stand a few barrels. a smart player would be wise to remove this threat before approaching the item. However the second method of dropping down onto the rocket launcher does not provide the right angle to shoot the barrels out before putting themself in danger , they have to leave the area without them exploding, or back against the wall (which in turn makes them a vulnerable target) ....apparently even monsters can make DM appearances (I read that somewhere, if this is untrue please break my heart)...

some quick scripting could make them do respawn checks...or even be parts of traps... (Open laboratory cages anyone?)

Btw, for moveable items I find they fall through certain textures of mine that I'm using for floor... I suppose a clip layer 0.1 below would fix that... 

Monsters in DM: Haven't tried. Theoretically possible; not sure how the networking code will like it ('co-op' doom3 breaks horribly, at least the simple mod we tried).

DM weaponry: at a recent LAN, I played a bit of D3 DM. Random thoughts follow:

- Rocket launcher: Almost as good as Quake's. Serious hardware; has weaknesses (5-round clip), but a damn fine weapon.

- Grenades: We found these surprisingly useful. The bounciness that's so irritating in SP turns lethal in MP; letting you employ them at longer ranges and around corners, and keeping them in motion and dangerous for a lot longer than your average id grenade. Mixes up initial-spawn fights quite nicely. It's probably a good thing they do only 75 damage...

- Shotgun: A full SG spread is 165 damage. Nothing else barring a BFG can inflict that much. Multiply by two for a headshot (which, in close quarters, is a real possibility), and you're looking at an instakill unless your target is soulsphere'd and armoured right up.

- Plasma: In more open maps its slow projectiles would pose much less of a threat. In the stock maps, it's pretty nasty. Shoots down rockets and BFG bolts, too (not that you'd notice in the close quarters it's generally employed at).

- Machinegun: Needs a steady hand, but its surprising accuracy ensures good damage potential at any range.

- Armour: Takes 0.6 of inflicted damage; pretty much the same as Q3's 0.66.

- Soulsphere: Not just +100 health, it increases your health straight to 200. 

Doesn't the Doom 3 BFG work in the same way as the Q2 one? I remember the BFG in Q2 causing the odd argument, but as long as there was some cover in the map in which is appeared, it was entirely possible to avoid vapourisation quite easily. The fact you can shoot the bolt down in Doom 3 makes it even weaker. It's better than the Q3 version, which was like a cross between the pg and rl.

The problem is that in Doom 3 DM you only have 3 other players to fry with the BFG, and getting the chance to get them all at once doesn't come up all the time. Seems like it could be a bit of a waste, although could potentially be useful in 2 on 2 for flushing the enemy out of the areas of high importance in a map. 

...and answer I am trying to get out of this thread is how to lay these items out in a map for a balanced and fair enough method. Are there any weapons you would leave out entirely?
What weapons would be best to have at least 2 of in a map to prevent camping of the 'best' weapon... etc... 

It seems like the only reason to have a thread like this is to come up with a formula for a D3DM map. Just make your own style, test it, tweak it, and release it. If there is a particular set of items that makes for a better playing map, people will eventually catch on. But don't limit yourself based on what a bunch of people concluded in a thread where people haven't even tested anything. 

it's not about coming up with a tried/true formula although that would always be handy to keep in the back of your mind whilst mapping. It's more about opinions of how balanced the weapons are in accordance with eachother and should the maps reflect that to any degree. 

<RPG|h0t> pope: so you liked my inflammatory remarks?
<pope_atwork> ?
<pope_atwork> in my thread?
<RPG|h0t> Yes.
<pope_atwork> i suspected you were trying to pull my strings
<pope_atwork> usually your not so... blunt
<RPG|h0t> Not really, TBH.
<RPG|h0t> Oh really? I'll have to work on being more blunt, then.
<RPG|h0t> Also, I just feel strongly that mapping in a formula is plain silly.
<pope_atwork> well im not talking about a strict formula
<RPG|h0t> But my point is that don't even start with a loose formula.
<pope_atwork> but its difficult since the d3dm community is well... nonexistant yet so there are no favourite strateies
<RPG|h0t> Make up your own mind and have something unique.
<pope_atwork> well since there ARE no formulas thats a given
<RPG|h0t> "favourite strateies" = no. MAKE UP THE STRATEGIES YOURSELF.
<pope_atwork> but I'd like to hear from other people what they think of the balance and weapons and layouts...
<pope_atwork> because as we all know, making a map entirely for yourself... just doesn't work
<pushplay> 2pg +13cg * 7rl - pi = dm
<RPG|h0t> That's why you have testers, pope.
<pope_atwork> so are you saying my thread is redundant and shouldn't be discussed at all?
<RPG|h0t> Redundant? What does this have to do with anything? Wrong word I think.
<RPG|h0t> pope: when I read the introductory paragraph in the thread, it sounds like you're trying to artificially create set ideas of how DM maps should be.
<RPG|h0t> I do not believe that should be discussed.
<RPG|h0t> I believe that should be decided by PLAYING.
<RPG|h0t> Make maps, test them, tweak them.
<RPG|h0t> Then let others map other maps in other styles, and have those tested and tweaked.
<RPG|h0t> See which worked better.
<RPG|h0t> Create diversity.
<RPG|h0t> Don't just say "let's all decide on what weapon distribution would be best."
<RPG|h0t> Okay now I'm just repeating myself.
<RPG|h0t> Now part of the thread is discussing non-standard DM stuff (barrels, PDA, machines, etc.). I think discussing that could lead to interesting ideas (and merely ideas, and thus only inspiration instead of reference).
<pushplay> good soliloquy
* pushplay eagerly awaits the second act of RPG's one man show
<RPG|h0t> It would be better if pope would actually argue with me.
<RPG|h0t> �_�
<Zwiffle> i'll argue with you rpg
<pushplay> I sure hope the protagonist dies at the end
<pushplay> -_-
<Zwiffle> ^_^

To clarify: When I said "other styles", I didn't mean visual styles; I meant gameplay styles. 

I think this thread serves a worth-while purpose. Weapon distribution is very important to multiplayer games, especially deathmatch-based ones. Item/ammo/weapon layout can, in many cases, make or break the balance of a multiplayer map.

Having said that, for the creation of quality-map production to expediate, a general guideline for item placement is definitely useful. I don't think Pope is trying to necessarily create a definitive formula for item layout - after all, that would almost defeat the purpose of creating NEW maps.

Instead, I think Pope is trying to get a better idea of how items handle; That is, this is a new game with a different balance from Quake or Q3A, and the 'feel' of the game isn't the same. As with all aspects of game design, discussion offers insightful views one person alone couldn't possibly see.

Grasping a better feel of the game later on, designers can experiment more with their own unique styles, once they understand the basics - in this case, items. Without suitable discussion, MP design can fall behind as the level designers struggle to understand how the items best interact with each other.

A strict formula? No, of course not. It's more of a guideline to help protect from unbalanced design that can delay and lower the quality of level releases. Single player has the same principles in most cases, but is generally easier to balance because of an overall simpler focus. When a map's purpose is to support interconnectivity and openness, the item placement is much more crucial than would be in a singleplayer endeavor.

After the potential power of items/combinations is substantially discovered, and the designer has a solid feel for what the items do, then the experimentation of item layout can really shine - with the final product being a more thoughtful, creative, and balanced level.

But then, maybe I'm wrong, I don't design multiplayer levels so I can't say I've learned this from experience, it's merely just how I understand the thread. 

As can be seen in Z13D3DM1...There's an imp in one of the corners, inside a test-tube. He's alive, and shrieks at you and turns to face you if you hug the glass. You can't kill him, and he can't hurt you, but he's there.

I wonder if he can respawn tho. Would make for an interesting gimmick for the RL: Drop a pinky down in the hole where you hide the RL :) 

What RPG said. 

I should add on: If you're going to map for Doom3, you might as well make it a single player map. That's what it was intended for, and that's what I would want to play anyway. But, I'm getting way off topic. 

But I like DM...


(Yes, I'm going to make SP stuff after rewired3. But I don't think your personal preference should dictate what type of map I should make. Or allow you to tell people what to make) 

RPG is full of shit.

1) The existence of a formula does not prevent people from inventing other formula's (formulae, whatever).

2) This is not a binary choice - formula or invent-it-all-from-scratch. There is a huge space of rules (don't have quad in 1v1), guidelines (avoid placing all powerful items in one part of map) and concepts (the dead end, the atrium, the crossroads) that can be used without forcing every map through a cookie cutter. 

Zwiffle is at least 20% poo. Did you forget q2? 

thank christ. 

Maj rocks for having something interesting to say on the subject.

1) Humans are lazy. I agree that the existence of one formula does not directly prevent the creation of another; however, no one will bother to make a new one because the old one works.

2) Yes, there is a huge amount of rules, guidelines and concepts. But people still made hordes of DaPak style maps, didn't they? People still make DaPak style maps, don't they? 

RPG, the creative limitations of the majority of people making levels should not prevent people striving to find a 'formula' that works, or indeed the discussion of what works well.

And even above and beyond that, I think this thread was designed more to discuss the realitive 'power' of the different items in weapons in Doom3, which then allows a more experienced designer to greater understand the gameflow in D3DM and therefore make better maps.

It's not so much the creation of a formula as the creation of an understanding of the game mechanics. 

..this thread was created a little to early in the lifespan of the d3 dm community. As of yet there isn't a whole variety of maps released to either learn from or discuss gameplay mechanics. And the stockmaps really don't offer alot of variety between them. 

You are being wayyy too reasonable Blackpope. It is never too early to start an argument, even if the parameters of that argument only exist in our imagination. 

How often are we going to see innovative/different maps apart from more id base maps, like with the Quake series?? This has probably been discussed before but I haven't kept up. 

Probably see just as many innovative maps even once the formula is 'found'. Most of the maps are gonna be made by talentless hacks, so you might as well provide them a useful formula so that the derivative maps all have decent gameplay, at least.