What makes a good Myth level?

[A-Red]

No one debates anything around here. There was that one pseudo-flame war, I suppose--and lots of general helpfulness, which is good! But people are only asking the kind of questions that have answers . Anyway...

Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one still making the kind of levels I like to play most. Back in the old days, everyone made solo reg--most of the great plugins from the first five years or more of this game were of that sort. I wonder where they all went. And that isn't to say that people aren't making good levels anymore. I understand that a lot goes into making a good coop--but when I play most of the contemporary ones, it feels to me like i'm just getting a bunch of random monsters haphazardly thrown in my general direction--it feels that way to me because I'm used to levels which treat storytelling as the central component, which have strong attention to detail, and which require a sort of personal level of innovation on the part of the player to beat. Coops, of course, have a different set of values than solos. Modern non-reg coops have an even more different set of values than old-school reg solos. And then there are multis, which I know little about...

So what makes a Myth level good? I'm just interested to hear what people think.

A-Red

[William Wallet]

When I think of Myth I think of Bagrada. It's hard for me to identify exactly why that is... most people wouldn't peg that for an outstanding mesh. There's no incredible model work, and the layout is comparitively open ended and non-linear. Hell it doesn't even have a thousand enemies - how many 3rd party maps can say that?

Why then do I consider that my favourite level of all time? HMMM... I really dunno. The open ended nature of it really does allow the player to pick their own battles, I guess, and stage them where they see fit.
I used to wonder why there was no dialogue on Bagrada, unlike most Bungie levels. Maybe it was to add tension?
And I mean.. when that Trow comes stomping out of the snow! Wow! They really created an atmosphere on that level.

I'd readily admit some of my admiration for Bagrada is nostalgia-based, but I feel that Bungie truly had the formula right when they made that one. Few 3rd party levels (Ephor of Myrgard was one) have stuck in my head like that.

[:) Da Cid (: McCl]

Stop kidding yourself, Will. We all know your favourite level is Through the Ermine.

I can safely say I like The Baron for the same reason Will listed. Namely, the non-linear open-endedness, that allows you to go wherever the hell you want but still keeps you on task.

The same reason I like some Halo campaign levels more than others. After you get out of the caves on the level Halo (these caves are not a natural formation, DUH CORTANA) it gives you three different locations you have to go, but lets you choose the order which you go to them. You do all the same things EVENTUALLY, but given the choice to do it the way you want is nice. Halo 2 failed in that aspect because it basically held your hand through every corridor.

Oh, we're talking about Myth.

While I don't really like Beyond the Cloudspine/whatever the TFL level was called anymore (due to the epic length of it on coop), I do still enjoy it because of its open-endedness.

And Mazz. It plops you in one spot, but you can go wherever the hell you want. Of course, you SHOULD go NE first, but that's of course up to the player.

So I like freedom, but not confusion. I want the guideline (go west) but different ways to go about it.

-TGP-

[Archer]

Our group is a big fan of Stair of Grief. I think the really attractive element of it is that it's entirely centered around demanding precision—there are a few surprises (like soulless ambushes) that lose their impact when you play the level for the umpteenth time, but mostly it's a matter of "can we do what we need to do in the way we need to do it at the time we need to do it". There's never a question of "can we do it", it's a question of "can we do it right now", and when we win it's (almost) always because we did it right, not because we got lucky.

It'd be boring if all maps were like that, but I think there's room for a fair number.

~J

[gugusm]

the non-linear open-endedness, that allows you to go wherever the hell you want but still keeps you on task.

Yea, that's what makes Myth levels awesome. And an atmosphere of course...

I really like Bagrada too, also Shadow Of The Mountain, Pools Of Iron, Forest Heart, well, most of TFL maps. M2 levels don't have so cool atmosphere I'd say, but I like them too. Or maybe it's just an impression, because Myth TFL was one of my first computer games and maybe that's why playing it brings me some touching memories

[A-Red]

When I think of Myth I think of Bagrada.

Why then do I consider that my favourite level of all time? HMMM... I really dunno. The open ended nature of it really does allow the player to pick their own battles, I guess, and stage them where they see fit.

It does sort of feel that way, but in reality the gameplay of Bagrada is quite linear--which is exactly why I like it. Bungie was able to create a polished start-to-finish level design because they could control where you went and in what order you fought things, almost completely--I mean, imagine how much less of an impact the level would have had if the first time if you could have just stumbled on that Trow at any time. At the same time, there is room to move around and take your own pace, so it's sort of a good balance between control and freedom.

That kind of balance is evident in a lot of Bungie levels. In Beyond the Cloudspine, you get a choice of two routes but each has a strong linear flow. In Shadow of the Mountain (my personal favorite) you have a random order of waves but each of those waves is organized and timed perfectly.

Keeping in mind that only a few people have responded so far, this raises another question in my mind--if everyone's favorite levels are from the original games, why is everyone only making Mazz clones?

[vinylrake]

What makes a solo good is some variability in what happens and in how one can complete the goal (or at least the appearance of variability), and the map has to convey some sense that the scenario/goal makes sense. Even though it's not really immersive in nature, the feeling that the scenario makes sense adds a lot to the fun of playing a solo level for me. There are exceptions - I like the Soldiers of Tyre campaign where one level you assault a castle and in the next one you defend it (both for no discernable reason), and Stair of Grief (this level makes no sense really. huh? There's a guy digging in the ice? Oh yeah) but the appeal of this one I think is that the flow is _so_ controlled and predictable that it really lets you polish your timing and strat. But generally I like ones that make some sense.

Bagrada definitely set a tone well. The sudden appearance of the never before seen Trow looming out of the snow - after hearing thundering footsteps really felt like being in a scary movie. (Run Away! Run Away!)

For M2 I like:
Into the Breach
The Baron
Gonen's Bridge
The Great Library
Landing at White Falls
Stair of Grief
Walls of Muirthemne
A Murder of Crows
The Wall
Shiver

For M1:
HomeComing
Siege of Madrigal
Force Ten from Stoneheim
Bagrada
The Five Champions
Shadow of the Mountain
Sons of Mygard
Across the Gjol


Some related reading:

http://mything.org/index.php?a=article- ... 0000002071
http://mything.org/index.php?a=article- ... 0000000095
http://mything.org/index.php?a=article- ... 0000002071

[Pyro]

...if everyone's favorite levels are from the original games, why is everyone only making Mazz clones?

Well first of all, not everyone is. Second, massive co-ops might be a trend now only because it wasn't possible back then. It's the new thing basically. A few years old yes but still new. Imagine how many more massive co-ops would be if it was possible back then?

The maps I like most from M2 in no specific order are:

Shiver
The Great Library
The Baron
Gonen's Bridge
The Wall
Landing at White Falls


There are of course different reasons to like a map. Some maps are the defend against many waves of enemies type. (The Great Library, The Wall) Others are the destroying a specific unit or thing in which you must be the offense rather than defend type. (The Baron, Gonen's Bridge, Landing at White Falls) While some include the necessity of micro-managing in which each unit is very important. (Shiver)



It makes sense that you, A-Red, like Shadow of a Mountain more than the rest. Your map, Grave Tidings, is a similar concept of staying in one spot and defend from many waves. (Similar to The Great Library and The Wall as well.)

We must keep in mind just because a mapmaker likes one type/map doesn't mean they should only make that kind of map. Maybe that is why you see "mazz clones". They are trying to make something different than what they like best.

[A-Red]

We must keep in mind just because a mapmaker likes one type/map doesn't mean they should only make that kind of map. Maybe that is why you see "mazz clones". They are trying to make something different than what they like best.

Certainly a mapmaker wants to try different things so that every level isn't the same--but there's a difference between variations in genre and variations within genre. The maps in the TFL campaign have a huge amount of variety, but they're still the same type of game. Uber-coops (a much fairer term than "mazz clones" i suppose) are a completely different kind of game. So while I try to do different things with every level i make, they're still going to be solo reg, or something pretty similar--that's just my style, or my voice, or however you'd want to put it. Even the uber-coop I made was as reg as an uber-coop can get, and was pretty story-driven in the way that usually only solos are.

So I still find it rather odd that I can ask anyone what their favorite maps are, and they give me solo reg, usually from TFL or SB--and yet the maps being made are mostly other genres.

[Pyro]

So I still find it rather odd that I can ask anyone what their favorite maps are, and they give me solo reg, usually from TFL or SB--and yet the maps being made are mostly other genres.

Possibly because they assume you meant a good Myth map by Bungie (the standard). Perhaps the reason no one has yet to mention any of the Mazz maps as one of the good maps is that it has a lot of "ifs". If you find a decent group of players you have a chance to enjoy it. But if you find too few or find other players that are new to those maps than it is possible you will not have a good time somewhere along the way. While some of the maps named in this thread will be fun and have a lower learning curve than a mazz game. Lower only because the units are standard Myth units of course.

[vinylrake]

If we are including non-Bungie maps in the good solo category, some of my favorites are Morte Della Luna, Ephor of Myrgard, Barbarian Valley, Sisters of the Blade, the Year of Burning Stone, and The Fall of Naugrim. There are lots more I like, but those are some of the ones I spent a lot of time on - e.g. I went back to play again and again to finish them instead of getting annoyed and moving onto something else.

As much as I like solos, the time commitment to complete some of them is high enough for a newbie player like me that there are actually a fair number of solos I've downloaded but haven't even tried yet. That's a large part of why I am not a huge fan of solos that require a large number of players and feature so many different units with different abilities that there's a steep learning curve and so many enemies that it takes hours to complete - but again that's mostly just due to the amount of time involved in both learning and playing and my lack of time to play Myth as much as I would like. It's great that mapmakers are still finding new and creative ways to push the Myth engine (and that Myth developers are increasing limits and adding features to make these new creations possible), but when I am in the mood for Mything I am more apt to to fire something up that I can dive right into and play - something that's at least mostly familiar rather than something that's entirely new and different.

[Death's Avatar]

Oooh Bagrada. One thing I loved a lot about TFL (a little in M2 but less for me, who knows why) was the desperation. Just that feeling of "oh crap" that you get some times when you are getting overrun and all your mans are dying and you just might squeak by with survival. I LOVE that. I definitely get it with Mazz, especially when I play paladin and have to keep everything alive.

[A-Red]

Oooh Bagrada. One thing I loved a lot about TFL (a little in M2 but less for me, who knows why) was the desperation. Just that feeling of "oh crap" that you get some times when you are getting overrun and all your mans are dying and you just might squeak by with survival. I LOVE that. I definitely get it with Mazz, especially when I play paladin and have to keep everything alive.

Yeah, definitely. In TFL it's usually not too hard to beat a level, but it's almost always impossible to beat it without lots of casualties. In M2, it's completely different--you either beat the level with few or no casualties, or one thing goes wrong and you get swarmed and lose. Or at least, there's much more of a tendency toward that happening. I tried to pinpoint why in my TFL gameplay analysis, but I don't think i ever did adequately. I think it has more to do with the way the melee units balance against everything else--particularly because krids and mauls are too tough to deal with any way except a constant formula of soften-up-with-missile-while-your-melee-hangs-back-and-then-bring-them-in-to-clean-up. So if they get through and cause a mess...chances are, you don't get to squeak by with survival.

I definitely didn't mean to confine the discussion to stock Bungie maps, or even to reg maps--that's just what I like, and therefore what I was defending. I'd love for someone who thinks Mazz or B&G or ADT or Myth III is the best thing ever to say why.

[Baron LeDant]

Despite quite a few tragedies, there were some really fun myth3 levels.

Gates of Myrgard wasn't neccessarily a 'good' level. But you could play it as an entertaining defence in 3 places level, or trigger the horde of enemies and mop them up in one mighty bloodbath.

Defence of Llancarfan (or whatever its name was) was another great level to play coop. True it was hampered by the need to lead the Iron Trow around, but it was still fun.

I'm not sure what you're really asking. Is it " What makes a fun myth level?", or "What makes a good myth level from a map-maker's perspective?". Sometimes they are the same, sometimes not. Example, the ibis crown is a very nice level from a mapmakers view, however its not as much fun to play as other solos.

One of the reasons I think people remember the TFL levels fondly, is because there was more variations in unitsets than SB. "A Traitors Grave" only gives you a lone jman for melee. "Ambush at..." gives you just dorfs", "Seven Gates" is set up to make you let the AI fight each other and finally "The Watcher" gives you zerks only.

The levels weren't really better or more enjoyable than SB's, they just came first.

So my favourite myth level is actually a tie between Seven Gates, The Watcher and Landing at White Falls. They all offer slightly different things, but all play like assassin.

[William Wallet]

I still think Ephor of Myrgard could've easily been a lost Bungie map. It's always been my favourite 3rd party stage, it had a real TFL feel to it.