I know how much you guys hate this, but if you are willing to use a couple of backwards facing turbos, you can still make your part FullSpeed That's what I'm doing at least

FT»Osaka says:

erikfzr says:

Cxom says:
If any of you have any suggestions I'd be more than happy to take them. This layout was the best solution I could find. If you must, think of it as a challenge in originality.

You could combine plots of different shapes, e.g. 8x16x5, 8x15x6, 10x10x7 with more or less the same volume, so each builder could stretch the track a little in one direction or the other.

Another thing I would suggest is to deliver each plot with the actual CP that will be used in the end, already with an additional block at each side of it, so every builder can at least guess the current angle/speed and try to figure out the best blocks to connect to it. There should be all kinds of checkpoints, and why not, include some hills, woods and lakes from the start right at these CPs?

We discussed this before starting to hand out layouts, and scrapped the idea, basically because each layout would have to be taylor-made and its position would be set in stone. Which means that if I had, let's say, part 72, nobody would ever finish the track ever out of frustration (I can be a bit hardcore). This way, if somebody goes ahead and decides to do some hardcore shit, you can just move their part around to the beginning and reorder.

It's just about balancing tradeoffs and following established rules

zack11 says:
I know how much you guys hate this, but if you are willing to use a couple of backwards facing turbos, you can still make your part FullSpeed That's what I'm doing at least

Backward turbos and fs, lol. I hope your part is among the first ones and remember to make sure the whole thing is easily respawnable without much time loss from the turbos or else I will probably get too pissed to even finish the track!

And when it comes to the limitations of building space, 8x8 (or whatever it was) is plenty for Valley imo taken how huge the road and platform blocks are compared to the car. It's not too hard to be original either even if you have to build from the lowest height of your layout to the very highest if you have the motivation to build something good and take your time building your part. In my opinion it's more impressive if the builder can come up with something good when he's at disadvantage like that than when he has it easy and have to end the track to the same height he started it from.

lolita ) says:

zack11 says:
I know how much you guys hate this, but if you are willing to use a couple of backwards facing turbos, you can still make your part FullSpeed That's what I'm doing at least

Backward turbos and fs, lol. I hope your part is among the first ones and remember to make sure the whole thing is easily respawnable without much time loss from the turbos or else I will probably get too pissed to even finish the track!

And when it comes to the limitations of building space, 8x8 (or whatever it was) is plenty for Valley imo taken how huge the road and platform blocks are compared to the car. It's not too hard to be original either even if you have to build from the lowest height of your layout to the very highest if you have the motivation to build something good and take your time building your part. In my opinion it's more impressive if the builder can come up with something good when he's at disadvantage like that than when he has it easy and have to end the track to the same height he started it from.

Since it should be easy to complete each part, I tried to give my part an Arcade style, so that you can run through at the very first attempt, and I was feeling a little tight within the 8x8, and it sure is far away from 400+ full speed tracks with forwards and backwards turbos

Me & Lolita's part is ready, will be sent soon

I think I need to re-phrase myself:

I feel it is impossible (for me) to make a GOOD part. That is/feels NON-repetitive. Because I have problems with blocks being HUGE for the 11x11 part. And I need to go up in the air. I guess that is my main concern. The 11x11 could be ok. But only if I were going down. But since I need to build up, I need all the space, just to get higher. Jumps are impossible, since then you have the speed-problem again. Making good jumps on Valley is VERY hard. (imho) Since the varience in the speed makes it impossible to counter, smooth and proper landings, due to the lack of space.

In other words: When I have to build from down to up. I will never be satisfied with my part. Because it is all around just getting to that top-CP... And NONE of what I've build in my over 20 attempts, feels genuine or proper. It drives like a "nine-to-five-office-job-after-30-years" to give you an idea of how boring it is
So I guess I want to ask the following:

Is it possible for me to get a "reverse-block" to build on? So CP starting @ top and then going down?

Cause maybe there are ppl that are not troubled with this form of building. I know I have not released any Valley maps yet. But the ones I did make, and all of my tracks in my TM-life so far: Always use basicly the ENTIRE map So I have troubles enough as it is in small area's. And since I am bound to the height-problem now...

Plz some feeds for the backs!

DaKKoN

Recognize the problem On another note, SOME people got to make the upwards sections and make them cool, right?

I think I can hook you up with a downward part Dakkon

Whenever you're ready!

(More then happy to receive! )

erikfzr says:

It's just about balancing tradeoffs and following established rules

Then what's the point of having 75 different builders?