Vondur would win 

rj: this is true, and I think necros (?) did this in a speedmap or something. It's what inspired me to run the speedmap session themed "maps you play through twice" but of course, nobody else in that session got it so mine was the only one that actually followed the theme.

Anyway, I'm not sure we want to force everybody to have to have to do the multi-loading rune collection thing. On the other hand, maybe to follow the rules strictly, we should. 

did someone mention "use every entity once and only once"? i wonder how this would look like. imagine stuck monsters acting as doors, all kinds of items as triggers and very little ammo.
would it work at all? killing cthon for example.. 

I said "use every entity AT LEAST once" ... my goal was to get people to use entities they rarely consider using, such as monsterjump, wind tunnels, tarbabies, invisiblity, etc. 

i sneakily merged your and kell's idea. 

That vertical mapping thing sound best to me. Using all the entities would just annoy me. 

If all entities would have to be used someone would need to make a list of all ents... 

yeah, killing cthon might not work without two func_door electrodes, for example. And a quad damage with only 11 enemies to kill might be problematic too. So i think it's better to let people use entities more than once. Trying to avoid making the maps gimmicks. We want rules that allow people to make actual good maps that happen to have something special/unusual about them, not gimmick maps where you get the quad damage and then use it to do 10,000 damage to a shootable button or something. 

just thought i'd say i think a vertical map idea would be really cool too. :) 

...so maybe we should do that. Might be time to move this to its own discussion thread. 

I'm gonna be able to map after this weekend.. 

where's the thread? 

tower of babel with a 512x512 base. but what about the entities - using all monsters would include the bosses as well, right? i can't imagine fighting cthon in such a small horizontal area (then again this could maybe introduce some novelty gameplay twists depending on how the mappers cope with it) 

.. you can have choice between top-down and bottom-up player's progression... or even a mix of it...
As example Chton could be in a lava bath at the bottom of the babel tower... In anyway, a size of 512x512 sounds to be a good compromise.... maybe adding limitations on entities/item use is not so good, while brush number use (i.e less than 1024) is a must...

...my 2 cents...

Are lift allowed ??? :P 

how big is 512*512, an example from another map would be a good idea 

it's pretty small. my sm127 was 512�.
i don't know of an area of roughly that size in any of the id maps now, but you can get an idea by taking a look at the wall textures in e1m8: two of those solid metal plates make 512. 

anything is allowed, except for teleporters if we follow metl's suggestion closely. though i wouldn't mind a few here and there, unless they are used in excessive amounts or are the only means of moving vertically. 

Would 768x768 be too much? Maybe with a 2nd rule stating that it would have to be at least 2048 or 4096 units tall? 

with those 100b maps, was the brush limit an impact on gameplay as well as looks ?

just wondering because I remember some of czg's maps of those being very good gameplay wise and was thinking whether the limit posed an extra challenge in implementing the gameplay too? 

how about innovative gameplay for a change 

In some sense, yes. For example, every time the mapper adds a monster that teleports in, that uses one brush for the teleporter. And there are smaller things too, like now the mapper can't just make ledges wherever he wants for monsters to stand on, so adding a 3D component to battles can be tricky depending on how the map is designed. 

I'd rather see a non-technical limitation - brush / entity / texture / size limits are boring. I really like the tower of babel idea, but i don't want to map inside a 512 box no matter what - these limitations only annoy me :> 

That's why i suggested:

2 * (width at widest point of map) + 2 * (length of longest point of map) < (total height of map)

I think this cures the vast restrictions of having a 512x512 map, while still ensuring that the map is definetly a vertical oriented one. 

The vertical idea sounds excellent. I'd suggest that teleports (besides summoning in monsters) are allowed, but only for horizontal movement. 

Continue the discussion here please:
http://www.celephais.net/board/view_thread.php?id=60070