The /newstuff Chronicles #73

3 Very enjoyable maps, very much to my tastes. I rate the SWMORT series of maps very highly, and anything Pablo does seems to tickle my doom button (ooer missus).

Nice

Wow. Metabolist's map is damn awesome!

Great levels this time!

All three levels are great. Recorded a maxdemo for mortiser 4, time 2:24 if anyone wanna beat it =)

Heh, AndrewB, since when do you censor level names?

You missed some shtuff. There were some Legacy wads in there, I think.

Once again Pablo shows off his Über l33t skillz

Good job PD

Hmmmmm....Pablo a [][] [] []/[] fan now, is he? :)

Very nice levels! Mortiser 4 looks great, I enjoyed playing it. Pablo's levels were nice too, I especially liked those terrific outdoor areas in both of them.

Yeah yeah, you guys are all having the time of your lives, BUT...

At least if you censor titles, do it with style and stick to the 'official' censored wording: Starsuckers, Inc.

Not being a NIN fan is NOT an excuse :P

Forget you mother funster! as people might say on British TV before 9 pm.

Just played these maps again. 3 very good, entertaining maps. The type of levels that make this nearly 10 year old game still very much worth playing.

As they say; quality is better than quantity... except in analytical inorganic chemistry (my profession), where you need more samples to get accurate readings. ( ;-)

Pablo's maps are damn good, too - he's got a skill which I lack; making good E1-style maps. The few I've tried to make are just ugly... perhaps I'll try again shortly, after I've finished off the Plutonia II levels... could be a long while!

Sure, the maps look nice, but they're rather straight-forward and flat.

Metabolist: most of the ep1 ideas and stuff I get from are from Tobias Münch, now that's a dude that really knows true ep1-ish editing.
Chemical Plant was ass kicking! I don't normaly play zdoom maps, but this one was a must play.

AndrewB: "Sure, the maps look nice, but they're rather straight-forward and flat." That's old school for you, don't like it, live with. And dude, the censored name you used...man, that sounds like a homo's night club!

Thanks for the comments dudes!

"except in analytical inorganic chemistry (my profession), where you need more samples to get accurate readings. ( ;-)"

<smartass>Hmm, not being an analytical chemist I may have missed the point, but the way I understand it, more samples would give a more reliable result, but not necessarily improve accuracy.

Unless of course you were taking your samples over a finer range (eg pH 1,2,3,4,5 instead of pH 1,3,5) in which case accuracy would be improved.

However, that doesn't necessarily mean the total number of samples have been increased. You could have taken 100 samples over a wide range, or 100 samples over a very narrow band.</smartass>

pablo:
* Erik Alm doesn't see any zdoom maps

enjay:
metabolist is right on this one

Why don't you like zdoom maps? They're so juci....

Surely not just with simple repetition though (which is not necessarily what Metabolist said). Simply repeating the same sampling technique over and over will improve your reliability, as in you are more able to rely on your result because you have shown it is repeatable, but you have done nothing to improve the accuracy.

Indeed, if your sampling technique was flawed, your increasingly reliable result would be just as innacurate after many samples.

But as I said, the specifics of "more samples" in Metabolist's particular branch of inorganic chemistry may mean something different to simply repeating a technique to improve reliability. Strangely enough, I'd actually like to know, but maybe this isn't the best place to go into such detail.

Back on topic:

What about those levels huh? Don't they just kick ass and stuff?

No, old school maps were not short and flat. They were simply low in detail. In fact, some of the unflattest unshort maps I've seen were from 1995ish years. Your maps seem to be the opposite of old-school. The only similarity being that they use a few of the same textures that Doom episode 1 did.

...whatever.

Erik Alm: me though it was for zdoom. heh, me so stupid. from now on, I gotta read the txt.

Inferno_45: "Why don't you like zdoom maps?"
is not that i don't like the maps. It can be a legacy/edge/vavoom/boom/ but the problem is the source port. hate 'em

Pablo > *.*

Well, maybe not, but still quite excellent though >^_^<

You are wrong, Episode one type maps are circulated around being very easy, somewhat different in detail but the most noticeable is the repetitive texture placement, mostly 2 stories or less, easy enemies and mostly no Masterminds or Cyberdemons patrolling. Also, just because they are flat should not have a big affect if it looks old school or not.

Pablo's maps seem to be sort of old-school but kind of remind me more of a mega wad trying to imitate episode one, which is just as unique and fun, if not more.

I'm not talking about episode 1 type maps, I'm talking about 1994-95 style addons, user-made WAD's. Very very few early user made addons were episode 1 style. The bulk of E1-style maps have been made in recent years.

Refresh my memory, why do we like E1-style so much? Sure the textures are better and the monsters are less tedious to destroy, but why, why do we like them so much? I mean the fact that E1 had better levels than the other episodes is irrelevant when the author can create better - be it E1-style or otherwise; especially when there are so many user-made textures out there.

What about a temple level? A cave complex? An urban wasteland? A living tower? A village? A planet's surface? A monster hive? A volcano? A multi-level labyrinth? A canyon? A jungle? A castle in the clouds?

Just some ideas. Oh yeah and if you're going to reply "do it your own damn self", haha, I already did. They're just not good enough to upload =)

Well, some of those level styles are in my Fragport megawad (see infoline) eg. village (map 05), urban wasteland (map 14), canyon (map 08), another planet (map 22) and volcano (map 09). Also other great ideas like desert (map 01, 04), remote island (map 07), and a ship in the middle of the sea (map 06) are in it, too. I like traditional styles, but I also love creating new ones like those listed above. If you like new styles like the ones you and I have listed, then look no further than Fragport.

If you repeat the same experiment many times you will not get the same result every time, the outcome will be affected by a random error which makes the reading less accurate. More samplings will enable you to sort out this error from the true result and will thus make it more accurate (still with a small error). If there are any factors that affect the outcome in a non-random way (systematical error) more samplings will not help you though.

Not exactly. I am an ex-statistician<G>

Here read this, it's not bad and pretty easy reading:

http://trochim.human.cornell.edu/kb/sampstat.htm

With an afternoon head, rather than a 2 am head, I'm seeing the difference between repetition and increased sampling. Haven't had a chance to check out the link, deep, but will do.

The reason I got hung up on it was we expect students to be able to answer exam questions like "Why did Jim repeat his experiment and take an average of the result?" by writing "He repeated the experiment to make the result more reliable". However students insist on writing "he repeated the experiment to make the result more accurate" which will not get the mark in the exam. Like I said, I just got hung up on that and couldn't see the wood for the trees.

So here you go folks, if you are sitting any science based exam in Scotland this May/June and you see a question like "Why did Jim repeat..."

If you want to throw away marks, say to make it more accurate.

If you want to get a mark, say to make his result more reliable.