de_alps

**Plude220** · 08-03-2008, 04:15 AM

It's been around for a while but I did a lot of play testing on it and its a solid map only thing that may hurt it is fps.

http://www.fpsbanana.com/maps/25392

**Plude220** · 08-04-2008, 08:51 PM

Can we please give this map a chance on the server its just as good as cs_alps_css both of these will make great additions to the server.

sam1610 · 08-04-2008, 10:44 PM

This map has been discussed multiple times. This is what Vulcan said about it:

"Alps is way to constricted. for the terrorists they have to either choose A or B. They don't have a viable option to turn back as that means taking a long path directly through ct's. CT's as well have to take the same path to get back to the other site, there is no quick route between the two sites and that just won't work on our server."

**Plude220** · 08-05-2008, 09:17 PM

In reality de_forest has a MUCH longer distance batween the two sites Ive done much testing on this map a ct at site A can make it to site B in time to defuse and vise versa But on de_forest the chances are slim to none.

So why is de_forest on the server?

**Vulcan** · 08-06-2008, 01:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plude220

In reality de_forest has a MUCH longer distance batween the two sites Ive done much testing on this map a ct at site A can make it to site B in time to defuse and vise versa But on de_forest the chances are slim to none.

So why is de_forest on the server?

This is a thread about alps not forest.

**Plude220** · 08-06-2008, 09:12 AM

I know I was using it as a example to get my point thru.

**Potshot** · 08-06-2008, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plude220

In reality de_forest has a MUCH longer distance batween the two sites Ive done much testing on this map a ct at site A can make it to site B in time to defuse and vise versa But on de_forest the chances are slim to none.

So why is de_forest on the server?

First of all, Forest has a gimmick. Not in a bad way, but all the foliage almost warants play on it by itself. Second, you should be sending men over to the other site as soon as the bomb is spotted. Everyone doesn't need to switch over, but you want the majority of the group facing the bomber whenever possible. Third, Forest has maneuverability. You don't have to take the same route back and forth if you want to switch bombsites. You can move from the back, from two spots in the mid, and from CT spawn. It's not about making it to the bombsite in time, it's ways you can take to make it there. Alps apparently doesn't have those ways.

**Vulcan** · 08-13-2008, 06:56 PM

I remember alps and you have to basically go all the way around the map to switch to another bombsite. In addition to that you only have single routes that are very constrained with a slight bit of off track up top. PCS needs to have lots of options for both sites or it just becomes deathmatch.

08-03-2008, 04:15 AM	#1 (permalink)
Plude220 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Alabama (T Town Baby) Age: 22 Posts: 515	de_alps It's been around for a while but I did a lot of play testing on it and its a solid map only thing that may hurt it is fps. http://www.fpsbanana.com/maps/25392 __________________ Plude220 \|TG-303rd\|

08-04-2008, 08:51 PM	#2 (permalink)
Plude220 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Alabama (T Town Baby) Age: 22 Posts: 515	Re: de_alps Can we please give this map a chance on the server its just as good as cs_alps_css both of these will make great additions to the server. __________________ Plude220 \|TG-303rd\|

08-04-2008, 10:44 PM	#3 (permalink)
sam1610 Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Posts: 122	Re: de_alps This map has been discussed multiple times. This is what Vulcan said about it: "Alps is way to constricted. for the terrorists they have to either choose A or B. They don't have a viable option to turn back as that means taking a long path directly through ct's. CT's as well have to take the same path to get back to the other site, there is no quick route between the two sites and that just won't work on our server." __________________

08-05-2008, 09:17 PM	#4 (permalink)
Plude220 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Alabama (T Town Baby) Age: 22 Posts: 515	Re: de_alps In reality de_forest has a MUCH longer distance batween the two sites Ive done much testing on this map a ct at site A can make it to site B in time to defuse and vise versa But on de_forest the chances are slim to none. So why is de_forest on the server? __________________ Plude220 \|TG-303rd\|

08-06-2008, 09:12 AM	#6 (permalink)
Plude220 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Alabama (T Town Baby) Age: 22 Posts: 515	Re: de_alps I know I was using it as a example to get my point thru. __________________ Plude220 \|TG-303rd\|

08-13-2008, 06:56 PM	#8 (permalink)
Vulcan Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Montreal Age: 30 Posts: 7,560	Re: de_alps I remember alps and you have to basically go all the way around the map to switch to another bombsite. In addition to that you only have single routes that are very constrained with a slight bit of off track up top. PCS needs to have lots of options for both sites or it just becomes deathmatch. __________________ TG Primer - CSS SOP's - INS SOP's

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links