Odamex "Team" wad help

Hi all,

I created a series of wads that are based on a premise that was used in a map called rt_team.wad back in the day.

- Co-op (players 1/3 against 2/4)
- Goal is to score points by throwing a switch in the enemy's base, which forces you to teleport back to your own base to defend)
- Throwing a switch X number of times raises a floor by 24 each time
- After X times, that team can exit the level

My question:

I've heard Odamex is the best to use. Is anyone willing to coach me with getting an Odamex server set up to host this pwad so I can invite friends to play and try it out or point me toward a "Odamex for dummies" resource?

Thank yaw.

Actually this sounds like a lot of scripts in which case Zandronum (easiest to work with for things like this) is probably your best bet, zdaemon second bet (limited but not as much as odamex) and odamex your worst bet (most limited port). Plus you'd need players for this, so you should probably lean further to zan/zd for a gimmicky game mode like this.

Good to know, thank you. When you say "scripts", the most I'm using as far as non-doom2.exe stuff is a few basic ZDoom features:

- Generalized linedefs (which I think could all be standard if needed)
- 3D floors on some of them (DoomLegacy-style, but work fine in (G)ZDoom)
- Wall textures used as floor/ceiling (could be changed if necessary)

I'm not tied to any multiplayer port, but I heard that Odamex was the best, which is why I was considering it. Does anything I said change your mind?

Odamex is the most technically limited port with next to no players except during special events (once in a blue moon) and wdl. While I think zdaemon is the worst port, it's more stable and actually has a consistent playerbase. Please see this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzOq9gTslU0

When you say you are using 3D floors, you are automatically requiring zandronum or better (zdoom, gzdoom) because the other 2 ports do not even support 3d floors. Using flats and textures interchangably, same thing, you need zan or higher. Generalized linedefs, well, some ports support more than others, but zandronum supports the most (other than zdoom/gzdoom).

Perfect. Thank you for the tips.

I assume you are talking about "dog tag" or "death tag", which is supported just fine by Odamex, ZDaemon, and Zandronum. Odamex, ZDaemon, and the Zandronum software renderer do not support gzdoom style 3d floors, but do support "thing bridges". Only the OpenGL renderer in Zandronum actually supports them as they were in the old Doom Legacy days. I also believe using wall textures as floor and ceiling textures only works in Zandronum as well (as it is a feature of the ZDoom renderer that it uses). Most boom generalized linedefs are supported across all three engines.

I will say, as I do in all threads that take this turn, that I believe that supporting all three engines is in a mapper's best interest. I will follow that up with the disclosure that I am a part of the Odamex development team and prefer it, while Decay's clear preference is Zandronum (he even has a cute little video).

As far as the benefits to each engine, Zandronum has the most players, but there are so many servers and players that you're going to have to actively push your wad and get players interested. Odamex has a very small community relative to Zandronum, but you're more likely to be able to get people together to play with a direct approach through an outlet like IRC. ZDaemon is somewhere in between with a much more centralized administration, but a built in irc client built into the launcher can help you get in touch with other players.

If you have an irc client of your own, a channel like #dmstuff on irc.quakenet.org is a good place to drop in and bounce around ideas and have people play your wad across all/any ports. Good luck with your wad!

I appreciate the follow-up, Ralphis. Is there a basic launcher for creating a server using Odamex?

The 3D floors I use in some of the maps are using linedef type 281 (Doom Legacy-style). They work in (G)ZDoom, but I've never tried doing ZDoom's 3D floors and could switch them over if it meant they'd work in a source port.

Here's ZDoom the map if you want to provide me any feedback.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bw4klCoOr2mgdUNRTDZZT1ZVSE0/view?usp=sharing

I don't really want to do thing-bridges because I think they look ugly and they wouldn't work on the maps I've made, really. I suppose I could rework these to not need 3D floors but that's kind of annoying.

I don't anticipate that people would really be interested in playing it since the odds of people getting a group together to play it are low and I don't see myself going on IRC to try and recruit people, so I was just thinking that I would set up a server and try to get some friends to play it sometimes.

Ralphis said:

and the Zandronum software renderer do not support gzdoom style 3d floors, but do support "thing bridges". Only the OpenGL renderer in Zandronum actually supports them as they were in the old Doom Legacy days.

WRONG AGAIN

You are factually wrong. Zandronum supports software 3D floors in fact I even made a video to demonstrate how factually wrong you are. Unless you are asserting some discernible difference between GZdoom and Zandronum's 3D floors (last I checked, it's the same flag and tags baby) and then in which case you'd be doubly wrong. I can't even stress how wrong you are. I think you're a Doom port troll at this point. When was the last time you even made a map?

Ralphis said:

I also believe using wall textures as floor and ceiling textures only works in Zandronum as well (as it is a feature of the ZDoom renderer that it uses). Most boom generalized linedefs are supported across all three engines.

Correction: Any map beyond Boom compatibility supports that which is any port beyond 2002 such as Zandronum, Zdoom, and GZDoom. Odamex doesn't even fully support Boom.

Ralphis said:

I will say, as I do in all threads that take this turn, that I believe that supporting all three engines is in a mapper's best interest.

No. It isn't. It is absolutely the worst thing you can do. There is no inherent reason to limit yourself to Odamex. Mappers should, at most, cater to Zdaemon if they want multiplayer capabilities but most mods now can't be backported that far. It ends at Zandronum from Zdoom. There's no reason for anyone to make maps for ports that do not keep up with the current standard. Limiting your map to features that are archaic and inconvenience is what will hurt multiplayer Doom, but not that it matters because people mod for new stuff all the time.

Ralphis said:

As far as the benefits to each engine, Zandronum has the most players, but there are so many servers and players that you're going to have to actively push your wad and get players interested.

Ralphis said:

Odamex has a very small community relative to Zandronum, but you're more likely to be able to get people together to play with a direct approach through an outlet like IRC.

I quoted these two on purpose back to back to address the mental discrepancy and cognitive dishonesty behind your premise. Essentially you're saying that on Zandronum, which have users upload content on servers they can host off this server supported by a server cluster financed by one of the head admins, does not have mods with players in them because they'd have to push for people to play them but you don't mind if players push people on irc for Odamex? Zandronum's IRC is BIGGER than Odamex with a huge player base in channels like #Zandronum and #TSPG-Painkiller, the latter providing the server hosting service for free is somehow less viable to Odamex because the person will have to advertise their wad either way? Think about it. It isn't already bad enough wads and mods are made in Zandronum all the time which dwarfs Odamex's non-existent player base, but now you're saying no one plays these wads at all because there's more players? ROFL

You are telling the guy to come to OFTC or whatever odamex is on to bug people on irc about it, but it's bad if he did the same thing on Zandronum where there's hosting services he can use to literally get people interested in his product? SHILL

Ralphis said:

If you have an irc client of your own, a channel like #dmstuff on irc.quakenet.org is a good place to drop in and bounce around ideas and have people play your wad across all/any ports. Good luck with your wad!

Doomkid's channel who is in UD who is the sole sponsor and player base of Odamex. KevvyLava do yourself a favor and fact-check for yourself what is more likely to happen based on statistics and just save yourself the trouble. You are openly being lied to. NO ONE gives a shit about Odamex.

Ralphis said:

Odamex, ZDaemon, and the Zandronum software renderer do not support gzdoom style 3d floors, but do support "thing bridges". Only the OpenGL renderer in Zandronum actually supports them as they were in the old Doom Legacy days.

3d Floors in software have been supported since the birth of zandronum....

Ralphis said:

I will say, as I do in all threads that take this turn, that I believe that supporting all three engines is in a mapper's best interest. I will follow that up with the disclosure that I am a part of the Odamex development team and prefer it, while Decay's clear preference is Zandronum (he even has a cute little video).

Thanks, although it's not my video, but conveys the point. I fail to see the point in advising mappers to map for ports where a) their maps will not be played or b) ports that are the most limiting or c) ports with virtually no players. It's a waste of time. Let's be real; new mappers aren't going to have their map played unless it ends up in the wdl (fwctf?) or gets a spot in a random duel tournament (if odamex even still does though) or the rarer dm where it's played once and probably never again. It's also nice to have a port that is actually updated(!) Now I understand why you take attacks on odamex so personally. Still a garbage port though.

You can argue "zan is often missing dm/ctf!" but the fact is, it's easy to get people to play things. Just like any port, either ask around on irc (hey there's actually a lot of people to ask!) or wait in the server. Zandronum even offers dedicated server hosts so you don't have to dick around waiting/hoping someone will host your wad. Most "odamex players" or "zdaemon players" will crop up in a zan dm server too. You aren't missing out on much of an audience, honestly. If your map is shit, it won't get played in any port (maybe odamex is more forgiving because a map can be great so long as people play it!!!!!!!!!).

Mobius said:

statistics

DAMN DUDE

My bad on the 3d floors. I was wrong. However, I stand by everything else I said. I'm also not going to respond to your ridiculously long posts line-by-line, but I didn't push him to OFTC at anytime. I recommended he go to a port neutral channel on quakenet to possibly find other players that could play his wad. Whether or not he does it is up to him - that channel has people that play on all three ports organizing games on a nearly daily basis.

The multiplayer forums on Doomworld are port neutral and, aside from one error that I made regarding a feature in Zandronum, I feel that I was pretty neutral in my own assessment. We all get it, your crew doesn't like Odamex. You've made that abundantly clear in almost every thread that even mentions it.

Mobius, keep making personal attacks on this forum and you won't have much more to say here.

Unfortunately, I got caught up in another ODAMEX SUX/ZANDRONUM RULZ debate above. I checked out the map and it looks cool, reminds me of old dog tag.

The lift leading to the blue switch is easy to get stuck on if you run too fast and is too high to jump up to (if jumping is enabled). I'd recommend maybe making it use activated instead of on the linedef coming around the corner.

Also, the map is obviously not symmetrical. A lot of old dog tag maps were either horizontally or vertically mirrored, so I'm not sure that the map would play very "balanced". The red switches might be harder to get to in a game since it's so easy to defend the switch room from above. Looks like it would be fun to try out though, I haven't played dog tag in a really long time.

KevvyLava said:

I appreciate the follow-up, Ralphis. Is there a basic launcher for creating a server using Odamex?

Bond's Doom Explorer launcher is pretty good for this sort of thing. It supports a huge amount of Doom ports for single player and multiplayer. It supports all three of the aforementioned multiplayer engines so you can launch a local server to test your wad.

I would like to point out that it is never a bad idea to support the most amount of ports possible; you never know if anybody will play your map at all in a month or year, so why limit the chances of it?

Select your desired port based on what you want to achieve; if real 3D floors are that important, then map for Zand. The textures/flats point is moot, btw, as you can simply edit them in paint to fit the correct dimensions and place in the wad file. One thing to note, though, is that the more advanced features you have at your disposal, the more advanced features players will expect to see. As an example, OS can get away with less detailing; that NS stuff better be beautiful and the 3D floors (once again as an example) need to be important to the layout of the map. There is such a thing as a "... should've been made for ..." feeling within the community. Like a Heretic map without items, or a zDoom map with only one non-essential 3d floor and poor detailing. Those maps get that type of feedback. With better tools, you must work to a better standard in order to compete for the time of players and with hundreds of maps to play, what's to keep people coming back? You said you could rework the map to not need the 3D floor(s), so ask yourself if they are essential to the design and layout of the map. Will they make a bit of difference during that really close match?

If so, map for Zand; if not, consider what else you can do to widen your player base.



That said, I'm on #dmstuff regularly and we always love to see new faces. Stop by some time. Hopefully I'll be around for some testing on this :)

Fonze said:

That said, I'm on #dmstuff regularly and we always love to see new faces. Stop by some time. Hopefully I'll be around for some testing on this :)

Don't say anything bad about odamex though or you get banned forever like me.

Given that ZDaemon has a steady playerbase and Odamex has a good chunk of faithful users I'd recommend cross port mapping as well. For me personally, doing so has gotten my wads loads of play time. With that said, if you feel your map needs 3D floors to fulfil your vision, have at it - there are a ton of Zand players, but you'll really need to "wow" your audience to get much play time there. With the exception of a handful of old duel maps and greenwar.wad, "simple/oldschool" stuff gets almost no air time on Zand but usually does well with the ZDaemon/Odamex crowd, so it all comes down to what you want and what demographic you're aiming for.

Don't be afraid to show off/get feedback about your WIP on the Zand, ZD and Oda forums as well - although there are separate groups of players, the MP community is quite large in total and all kinds of players have all kinds of opinions on what constitutes a fun map. Exposing your work to many different players can help you notice things you wouldn't have previously and can help you hone your map's gameplay even further. I hope this helps and good luck, I always sucked ass at dogtag-like gamemodes but it's still nostalgic as hell for me!

The downside to recommending people map for ports with limited support is that mapping for the old standard of basically "boom maps with thing bridges" is an area that has been thoroughly explored. The vast majority of maps intended for Doom PvP are in said format, several megawads for the better part of a decade have had their maps rotated in and out of compilations for competitive use and even though there are a ton of maps considered suitable for that alone there are plenty more maps JUST not good enough to have made the cut while still remaining quite playable. There's no shortage for sure.

It's a saturated market so to speak. So many people releasing variations of the same product. Eventually it stifles growth because people don't want to challenge the standard and new dimensions of play go unexplored. Barring issues of complexity, this is a problem in the Singleplayer community with their releases as well being mostly Boom maps and neglecting more advanced port features although It's not quite as overdone as MP is yet.

I don't see this big influx of OS deathmatch maps that you guys seem to be seeing. There's a ton knocking about from the old days, but new releases seem to go either way these days honestly, which is good for variety's sake. Stuff like BTSX and Ancient Aliens prove there's still a lot of room for innovation and creativity in the older, more universal formats - I understand they are SP but the concept still applies, you can still wow your players and have universal compatibility which is a one-two punch of reasons to map for Boom or even vanilla.

As I said though, if you're gonna go Zand only, you'll still have a big crowd you can potentially reach, but the standards are definitely
more rigid. The 'oversaturated' market of OS maps is only so in ZD and Odamex if we're being realistic. You're gonna need to make something that at least competes with Cybercrime, DBAB, Onsl3, etc if you want it to stick with the Zan crowd, and there's nothing at all wrong with that - different strokes as they say. I just want to give a realistic view of what's what in the world of MP releases.

Appreciate the info, everybody. I have a map or two that should work fine in all ports, as well as a few that would probably be best-suited to Zandronum.

Is it safe to assume that if it loads up fine in single player, that it run the same on a server? Or do any of the ports have online-only limitations?

Also: Mobius seems like someone who would be annoying to hang out with in real life. He's like that guy that has to correct you on every little thing. "Well...TECHnically, it was a waning gibbous, not a waxing gibbous! I can't believe how wrong you are about moon phases!!!%@#^!@#$"

Never assume what works offline works online.

KevvyLava said:

Is it safe to assume that if it loads up fine in single player, that it run the same on a server? Or do any of the ports have online-only limitations?

Definitely not. Effects, scripts and all that jazz have to be tested online before you release anything. Just run a local server and that should be enough.

Also: Mobius seems like someone who would be annoying to hang out with in real life. He's like that guy that has to correct you on every little thing. "Well...TECHnically, it was a waning gibbous, not a waxing gibbous! I can't believe how wrong you are about moon phases!!!%@#^!@#$"

Be careful, your time might be short here. . .

keep making personal attacks on this forum and you won't have much more to say here.

KevvyLava said:

Also: Mobius seems like someone who would be annoying to hang out with in real life. He's like that guy that has to correct you on every little thing. "Well...TECHnically, it was a waning gibbous, not a waxing gibbous! I can't believe how wrong you are about moon phases!!!%@#^!@#$"

Good luck getting players for your wad now with that attitude.

You walked into that Mobius ;D

That said... LOL

Thanks for the advice, Rustking. I'm going to get to work on these maps and refine them a bit based on everyone's advice/ideas and come back later and see if people think they are worth playing, or I'll just round up friends occasionally, etc. Thanks, everyone. Feel free to DM me if anyone has any other comments/ideas/whatever. I'm always open to feedback.

Fonze said:

I would like to point out that it is never a bad idea to support the most amount of ports possible; you never know if anybody will play your map at all in a month or year, so why limit the chances of it?

Because upon supporting multiple ports you limit yourself to a very big extent since none of the ports are made the same way and wont support the same things. Supporting Odamex might get Capo to play your mod or something but other than that the port is dead and shouln't be modded for because you will have to work with outated content like no ACS, which in your case would be impossible.

Perhaps if you made a simple DM pack containing no ACS or other custom shenanigans, Odamex is a fine thing to support, but since you want to utilise your own gamemode Zandronum would be the only option. And neither would be Zdoom considering Zdoom has terrible netcode.

Based on the gamemode's description, its hardly different from dog tag, all that honestly needs to be done is placing team starts in the map rather than normal co-op or DM starts and it will work fine in all 3 mp ports. If he wants score messages and stuff to be displayed he can easily do so and retain ZDaemon compatibility. If the gammeode requires anything notably advanced, Zan-only compatibility makes sense, but it just doesn't seem to be necessary in this case - Nothing about what's been described seems to really require any ACS at all, other than for reasons such as a score display, which again is possible to have in both ZD and Zan.

He did state the maps have 3D floors, which if he wants to have would require Zandronum

In that case, he may as well take advantage of the other snazzy stuff Zan supports as well. I'm interested to see the final result!

I've found that generally there are ways within the normal Doom engine to get what you want, so that's what I tend to stick to. One thing that I've experimented with on my maps is how to do a deathtag game with a scoreboard (I usually use a "W1/WR Raise Floor 24" tag to raise a skull pillar but that only results in 5 scores needed and I'm not sure if that's long enough).

Anyway, I made another deathtag map yesterday and I think this one is properly balanced: if anyone wants to have a look at it and make any suggestions, I'm all ears. This one could be made into a vanilla Doom map if I ditched the 3D floors and went with standard doom2.exe linedefs. I might end up doing that for cross-comparability

http://www.mediafire.com/download/u5a1j11u5gddx98/map01-dt.wad

Rules:
- Red base vs. Blue base
- Navigate platforms in enemy base
- Score by throwing switch/teleporting back to own base
- Scoring lowers a gate in center of level to exit (red/blue separate)
- After 7 scores, a special weapons cache is made available to losing team
- After 10 scores, all gates are lowered and exit is available

It's based on MAP01 and seems pretty balanced to me. Probably needs a few tweaks.

Hi again, everyone. I made an Odamex-only DM map pack because my friend has a Mac and can't get Zandronum working. Now I can host a server, but can't play on it myself while hosting like on Zandronum, which is a bummer. (My friend tries to open Zandronum on his Mac but the icon flashes and disappears...works fine for me on Win10.)

If anyone is interested for their own amusement, I took e1m1, idmap01, map18, e4m4, and map11 and edited out the parts that weren't as conducive to deathmatch and added weapons powerups as I saw fit. Also put in some snazzy music.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rdgfagmxupqf5fl/megawad.wad?dl=0

If you all think it'd be worth me doing, I'm thinking about making a 30-map megawad of Doom, Doom 2, and maybe Final Doom levels re-imagined as deathmatch-only maps. Minor tweaks make a big difference.

Doomkid said:

Spoiler

Good lord imagine if the single player GZDoomers spewed this kind of vitriol about boom/choco Doom mapping every fucking time someone made a thread asking how to stay within those limitations. Why does everything have to get so personal, holy shit. There's no reason for so many threads to get derailed this way and all it will serve to do is keep people away from the MP scene regardless of port choice. Keep it to the facts without throwing insults around ffs


Dude, I'm surprised to see you stoop to this - You and the other dudes who run the channel don't get along, but I've offered several times to unban you and every time you've told me not to worry about it.

Reality of the situation: If you come into #dmstuff and start spamming, drama, shit talking and whatever else, that's a one way ticket out. If someone came in there talking shit about the Zan developers and harping on about negative shit about the Zan playerbase their ass would be out as well because that's not contributing anything, it's purely toxic. I'm surprised to see you twisting it like that Decay, you're above that crap.

Comparing Zandronum vs Odamex to GZDoom vs Boom/Chocolate Doom is fallacious mainly because Boom and Chocolate Doom have easily understandable and distinct purposes that set them apart from other ports. Boom notably set new heights for the Doom engine back in the day, both in terms of mapping features and limit removals, gave birth to a popular mapping standard (many "oldschool" mapsets you see out there these days require Boom-compatible ports) and served as the groundwork for more advanced ports to come, namely ZDoom, while Chocolate Doom aims to stay as close and compatible to Vanilla as possible, since not many computers can run Doom in its original MS-DOS version very well (or at all) at this day and age.

Meanwhile, if you were to ask what Odamex does that other ports don't, what end goal it has as a project that other multiplayer ports don't already seek or simply why you should play Odamex instead of other ports, the reasoning is not as clear as the aforementioned ports above, especially to newcomers. Its development team consists mostly of ex-ZDaemon players/developers who wanted to work on an open-source port, as opposed to Skulltag (not Zandronum) and ZDaemon which are closed-source, that could also provide a free environment for server hosts to work in without having to follow strict regulations such as a subjective master banlist and plenty of other rules that ZDaemon has ("your servers are not your own" comes to mind). ZDaemon's controversial administration and development team as of the past several years drove off plenty of important members from the community, which is why that port's player base has been stagnating (but still hanging on due to its greatly-defined legacy). So it is fair to assume that Odamex's primary goal is to surpass ZDaemon as the oldschool multiplayer port of choice, without ZDaemon's infamous administration issues and whatnot.

The two main problems faced by Odamex right now are that first, its development has (unfortunately) slowed down to a crawl since two years back, and second, ultimately, by being an oldschool port (which in itself is a setback since a great majority of Doom-related activity nowadays stems from advanced ZDoom-based maps/mods) that doesn't look all that much different from ZDaemon, it doesn't have much appeal to newcomers in comparison, seeing that ZDaemon also has a significantly greater legacy.

Going back to my original point, single player port wars like the one you exemplified don't happen because everybody knows what GZDoom does, what Boom does and what Chocolate Doom does, and they're all noticeably different in their own regards. But any onlooker would say that Odamex doesn't have its own established place in the community, and they ain't necessarily wrong about it either. There was a time when I could say that Odamex functioned better than Zandronum as a multiplayer port, but the latter has been updated considerably over the years while the former hasn't changed at all. The only way Odamex could somehow get a popularity boost is if it greatly surpassed ZDaemon technologically (which can be tricky since the port's attached to an oldschool philosophy) and made some surreal netcode improvements. I know some of you still have really funky ideas on how to improve Doom's multiplayer functionality beyond its current status at large!

KevvyLava said:

Anyway, I made another deathtag map yesterday and I think this one is properly balanced: if anyone wants to have a look at it and make any suggestions, I'm all ears. This one could be made into a vanilla Doom map if I ditched the 3D floors and went with standard doom2.exe linedefs. I might end up doing that for cross-comparability

It is your project and you may do as you please with it, but while cross-compatibility can be nice, you should always consider if the growing limitations that come with it are worth that struggle. It is a fact that Odamex has a nearly non-existing regular playerbase, and ZDaemon's playerbase pales in comparison to Zandronum's, so sacrificing 3D floors and more features you would've otherwise wanted to see in your project for a possible (read: not always certain) meager increase in player base and feedback may not be up your alley, but if you're targeting a specific audience over just plain numbers (say, if you want it to please oldschool players in particular), then your cross-compatibility priorities may change up a lot.

The only reason it seems harder for one's project to become popular in Zandronum is because there's a plethora of populated servers with a variety of things on the plate, whereas you don't have nearly as much activity in other ports, which explains why it would seem "easier" for your project to thrive in those places, but that idea is only a relative point-of-view thing, really. At the end of the day, you're not going to piss off anyone if you make a more port-exclusive project (regardless of which one it is), especially not in the multiplayer scene where there are no noteworthy ports outside of the three I mentioned in this post. You do you, man!

Thanks, and yeah, I hear you. Seems weird that Odamex doesn't have better support.

I know people do these ports out of the goodness of their hearts, so I am cautious to critique too much. I love Doom soooo much and I like making maps. But all of the different mods get pretty extensive. My biggest gripe is how difficult it is to just set up a server and get friends to play (seems like every port has a unique issue or two).

I know that because I like more classic Doom stuff and a lot of people like the newer modes/scripting/features, etc., but I think much of Doom's charm is in the strange ways things work. Stuff like 3D floors is a minor change and just allows for some better levels, really. I wish ACS scripting was easier to figure out. I'd kill to be able to assign a linedef to more than one action easily.

I was thinking it'd be cool to do a game mode sort of like Assault from Unreal Tournament...but without scripting, it'd be tough. That's something that I think people might actually play. Who knows. Even if I'm only ever able to get a few friends to play with me, it's better than nothing. I know the odds of it breaking into the community are somewhat low, which is why this map pack I made were classic levels redone...figure there might be some appeal.