Home
Contact Us
Login
Register
Store
Exchange
Browse The Scrapyard
Forum
Donate
Here is the first part of the results for the designers elite contest. I didn't got enough time for it this weekend to finish it and I also have homework to do now, but it is midnight now and I have to get to do my maths
![[lol]](https://www.coastercrazy.com/forums/images/smilies/icon_e_ugeek.gif "test"){kind=icon}
Anyway, this is why I split it up in at least 2 parts but expect at least another 7 judged entries tomorrow and another 7 the day after tomorrow. I hope the rest of you will have some more patience (I know it has taken to long but I have been extremely busy and I also had to judge the RCT2 contest etc. etc. etc. yada yada yada blah bla bla....)
Note: your overall score (the counting score) is NOT an average!!!
Unfortunate Smiley ?????? El Aguila
Well, what can I say, glad I am finally here to judge the last chance and probably so are you. So thanks for the patience you had with this. I??????ll judge the next round in reversed alphabetical order, I guess
Technical you ride was very nice, the supports looked good, the track was nice and smooth, the elements well shaped. But actually there was one very very big problem with your layout. Did you ever notice while riding, the ride only has two right hand moving elements? The first right hand element is the corckscrew. All the elements before it were left hand, which made it really out of pace.
Next time you really have to watch this because it also took of from your adrenaline score. Your track really was very nice but this is just a really big downside. However, there is one more thing, I thought the part from the MCBR to the final brakeruns was a bit short and boring, maybe adding a tight helix and some good tight curves would have brought this to life a bit.
Originality was ok, the dual immelman element was pretty nice but besides that there wasn??????t much original to the track. I also suggest you put some time at studying supports a bit, because when you make a 90 degree corner with one node, you notice a gap on the connection point. By using two nodes, and letting the both tubes intersect, you won??????t have this gap. For example you can check out some of the better rated rides in the exchange, or check my ride Renegade for an example of what I mean.
That about it I think, next time spend some more time on your layout and you??????ll have a shot on winning.
Technical: 8
Adrenaline: 6
Originality: 6
Overall: 7,3
Tyler ?????? Tsunami
Hey Tyler, first of all sorry it took so long to judge your track, but I just judged them in alphabetical order, so?????? you were second to last. Anyway, you made it to the next round which is likely to start tomorrow. I??????ll give you an explanation of the rating I gave.
Technical: The track did ok on this aspect, the track did have some bumps and the supports really need some work. Maybe this is just a matter of a lack of time because on this challenge a lot of people have used prefab supports, so you are not the only one [:p]. The track layout itself was pretty strange, the ground clearance remains very big in quite some dips, which is pretty much a waste of available speed imo, the custom supports also were rather odd, especially the frame next to the station building, it is really way to big and strong for what it has to do, just two separate normal supports would have done the trick.
Adrenaline was ok but I felt the track could have been paced a bit faster with more intense inversions in it, just like the classic SLC??????s have.
Originality is raised a bit due to your rather odd support work, I can??????t deny it is an original way to do it. However, besides that there is not much too it, so an average score here.
Next time focus a bit more on getting the layout good and smooth and get the supports a bit more of a realistic look.
Technical: 6
Adrenaline: 7
Originality: 5
Overall: 6,2
Stratacoaster15 ?????? Malcolm
Hey Stratacoaster15, I??????m sorry to say you didn??????t pass to the next round, actually first of all because you didn??????t stick to the rules, actually this one: ??????None of the existing supports may be changed or deleted?????? Which you did to suit your track??????
Technical the ride was pretty bad, it was rough and really had some big jerks in it. Besides that the support work also needs a lot of work, basically it was just all prefabs and they don??????t look pretty. Also the track simply lacks supports, some parts of your ride are just hovering and I never heard of self-supporting track??????
Adrenaline wasn??????t good either, the track had some really slow parts, the track was short and too stretched out. That wasn??????t all the downsides actually, the elements were a bit out of shape, like the first immelman, it??????s way too stretched out on top, making it slow. Next time you might want to take some close looks at how real ride elements are shaped to get more exciting elements on your ride.
Originality wasn??????t any good, there wasn??????t anything in this ride which made it original from the rest of the tracks I??????ve ridden since I got No Limits.
Next time you really have to spend some more time on the shaping of your track, the track layout and the supports. Also keeping an eye on pictures of real rides might be a good idea, so you??????ll get some neat looking elements and supports.
Technical: 3
Adrenaline: 5
Originality: 3
Overall: 4
Stealthy ?????? The Condor
Hey Stealthy, you did a pretty nice job on this ride?????? but I??????m sorry to say?????? you didn??????t?????? drop out [;)]. So congrats you made it to the next round.
Technical it was pretty nice however, the track had some flaws, mainly the supports, the supports were overall just one level to thin, most support look like matchsticks under this ride which wouldn??????t hold up in real life. Keep in mind that with the G??????s the stresses on the track can be enormous so these thin little things just won??????t do.
Then the track is pretty good, but it is too stretched out in places, the problem with this is it could use some more intensity near the end. The helix is good but actually not shaped very well, you can see the G??????s are very unstable and are making big changes constantly in the helix, which means it isn??????t shaped properly, try to maintain a constant radius increase or decrease to prevent pumping.
Adrenaline was pretty good, but like I already said in some places it got a bit too stretched out and I think that the layout in general is rather?????? odd. Some elements are also a bit misshaped like the Roll-Over element, the twist on top is way to long and not heartlined, also keep an eye on heartlining your inversions in general.
Originality is not very special, however I liked the sort of roll-over turn you had in your layout, but besides that there wasn??????t much more original to it.
Overall spend some more time on getting the supports right and try to be a bit more realistic with your layouts to get a great track next time.
Technical: 6,5
Adrenaline: 7
Originality: 6
Overall: 6,3
Bino Maus ?????? Cleopatra??????s Curse
Hey bino, I??????ll start with the good news first, you passed the qualification round. However, you just passed because this ride had the usual bino maus mixture, cool theming, bad ride. I??????ll tell you once more to spend more attention to the ride instead of on the theming. The ride itself was rough and the layout was not creative in any way. Besides that the support work was awfull most were just standard supports which look even worse than normal because of your 3ds ground which causes the footers to ??????vanish??????.
Adrenaline wise the ride was ok but because of the boring layout, nothing special.
Originality was the best aspect of this ride, but mostly due theming. Next time maybe make a ride without theming because there is just no progress in the quality of your trackwork at all, you just keep focusing on theming, so that is what has to change to improve.
Technical: 5.5
Adrenaline: 6
Originality 8
Overall: 6.5
Buster ?????? Rubbish
Hey Buster, for Buster understandings the name of this ride fits it, but in general this ride was still pretty good compared to most submissions for this contest. The main problem with this ride is just roughness, too fast transitions and even a G spikes due to a rough point in the track. However, overall the ride was pretty nice, technically it was a bit of a let down like I explained but the adrenaline level was high throughout. I think this ride did have the potential of being a fun and well built ride if it was just a bit smoother. The originality is good, the ride is well paced, intense until it hits the brakeruns, basically a superb ride which just has some big flaws. Also more attention could have been spent on details, like supporting the catwalks in the right points (end is hovering). However, I know you just bodged this togheter in little time, so I can understand it is rough and doesn??????t have as much detail as your other rides.
Still a very nice creation and I am looking forward to see what you will come up with in the next round.
Technical: 6,5
Adrenaline: 8,5
Originality: 8
Overall: 7,8
Coaster992001 ?????? thunderhawk
First things first; you passed to the next round of the content, but just. The ride was ok but the trackwork in general was rather odd, strange elements, too long banking changes so overall the track was just pretty weird, besides that the support work was odd, connecting all the connection points won??????t help a lot for structure stiffness since the track already does that in a way. Also the track was oversupported like mad in a lot of places, take it easy with the prefebs because they really spoiled the looks of this ride. Then I remember one more little problem, the MCBR braked on the friction wheels instead of on the brakes, bad thing!
The adrenaline factor of this ride was ok, the pacing just seemed to be a bit out of place which caused it to lack some thrill.
The originality level wasn??????t too bad due to your choice of elements, next time try using some different elements than just your favourite inline twist [:p]
Overall an average ride, but since the minimum for this contest was just a 6, you made it.
Technical: 4,5
Adrenaline: 6
Originality: 7
Overall: 6
Coasteragent99 ??????
Hey coasteragent, you also made it to the next round, but not really with a safe margin. The track lacked adrenaline and technically the track wasn??????t very good either.
Technical, the track was rough especially the banking changes and transitions should get more attention and do not use trim brakes to alter speed to radically as you did near the end of the ride. Besides that the ride is slow in places, like the MCBR and the G forces could use some work, they could be slightly less intense when you optimize the track some more. Your support work was pretty good, still could use some work realism-wise, but still very good.
Adrenaline was ok, for as long as it lasted because the track was too short in my opinion. Also the pacing wasn??????t very good, but that is something personal so I won??????t take of for that too much.
Originality was ok too, the environment brings up your score and of course the 3ds and total good look of the ride and some original elements.
Overall a pretty decent ride, but next time try to put some more work into the track because it really needs a makeover.
Technical: 5
Adrenaline: 6
Originality: 7
Overall: 6,3
Daan1990 ?????? Bug Attack
Hey Daan, I??????m sorry to say that this ride did not pass for the next round, mainly due to the fact that the track was very repetitive and overall not very original.
Technically the track wasn??????t too bad, the track had some rough bits and pumping, besides that the lift at the end was rather odd, I thought this really was a big downside of this track. Also the ride is pretty slow in places (MCBR, first drop). There were just a lot of odd things to the layout, another example of this is that the first drop doesn??????t drop to the ground, but stays about 10 meters above it. Then in other places it comes to close to the ground. Anyway, enough about your technical score.
Adrenaline was ok, the speed was maintained throughout the ride but the layout was like I said very repetitive which made it boring.
Actually there was nothing original to this ride besides the 3ds, so a low score on this factor.
Overall this ride just lacks the extra touch on every aspect, next time try to be more creative with your layout and the results should be a lot better.
Technical: 5
Adrenaline: 6
Originality: 5
Overall: 5
Dirk Ermen ?????? Amazon Hunter
Hey dirk, your track made it to the next round, but it was very close for you too.
Technical the ride was ok, most places felt pretty smooth however, it is not perfect at all. The elements are (or at least feel like) prefabs, you are working too much with 90 degree elements, the train comes in and goes into an element and comes out 90, 180, 270 etc. degrees later which makes the layout feel pretty dull. Next time try to make it a bit more twisty. The support work also was pretty odd, some places were oversupport, others lacked good strong supports. Try to spend some more attention on this and sticking to one style of supporting.
Adrenaline was ok, the track had speed throughout but could use some more creativity for a better pacing and thus more fun.
The originality was slightly raised by the support theming but the elements were still very common and thus not very original.
Overall you should just try to be more creative with your trackwork this should improve your rating a whole lot.
Technical: 6,5
Adrenaline: 6,5
Originality: 6
Overall: 6
E-man ?????? Elixer
Hey E-man, well when first looking at your ride it was clear that you did make it to the next round.
Technical: The ride could use some more attention when it comes to layout because I thought it was pretty weird you kept such a big ground clearance in the first part of the ride, it was high above the ground all the time, not really taking advantage of the height of the lifthill. At the end it came to close to the ground and there also were some support hits, you should make sure you test your track carefully before you submit/upload it.
Adrenaline was pretty good, the track was nicely paced but becamse pretty slow in places, in some turns and the MCBR for example, try not to use a MCBR to brake but just let the train run trough and use it as a possible safety feature and not as a trim brake.
Originality was ok, the track was packed togheter quite nicely which also added to the thrill, next time try to be a bit more creative with your choice of elements.
Technical: 6,5
Adrenaline: 7
Originality: 6
Overall: 6,7
Force360 ?????? Egyptian
Hey force360, I??????m sorry to say that your track did not make it into the next round, however I??????m also not so sure if you were suspecting otherwise. This track was truly horrible and really needs A LOT of work, anyway I??????ll try to give you some pointers for your next rides.
Technical the ride just isn??????t right, the main problems you have are maintaining speed, the supports and the track itself was rough.
The problem why the track is slow is just caused by the fact that the track is too high in many places, when you notice the train going slow just lower the track a bit and try to never let the speed drop under about 35 km/h / 21,75 mph. To make sure your track comes along nicely while building build your track section by section; i.e.: start by building a station, lifthill and first drop, then connect the track and test it in the simulator. Only and I really mean ONLY when you are 100% satisfied with the result you continue with building the next section, for example a cobra roll and overbanked turn. Test it again, modify again, ride again, new section, test, modify etc. etc. etc. until the entire track is done. This should ensure you of having a nice track when it??????s all done.
The second main problem were the supports, the track just lacks supports, a track should have a supported about every 10 to 15 ties depending on the strains that they have to endure, or about one trainlength. So your track doesn??????t meet this requirement you have about 50 meter sections hovering all over the place. Then the second thing is that you should try to make your supports look realistic when you are making custom supports my only advice on this is: pictures, pictures, pictures!!! Keep this in mind coaster pics = www.rcdb.com so go there and get pictures of comparable rides and just recreate the supports for an awesome look. Then the last support problem is that the supports are too close to the ride in many places, for example in one of your tunnels you see the support beams well in the tunnel, this means these would for sure do damage to the rides. If you are unsure about whether or not the riders will hit the supports, add a tunnel, when the supports are showing inside the tunnel this means they are too close to the track. Supports should in general always be outside the tunnel, this is also know as the ??????tunnel test?????? not 100% accurate but it gives a good indication of what is safe and what is not.
Then the third technical problem is smoothness, this can??????t really be explained, this is just a matter of practice. Ride some good tracks out there and see how it is done. To get good results I advice to get the shape about right in top or side view and then go into 3d view and ride your coaster by going over the track with the W, S or arrow keys. Go to the vertex which is to be smoothened and highlight it, modify the handle bars until you get it right, if you make it worse, just use ctrl z and keep fiddling around and going back and forth over the vertex until you won??????t even notice it is there.
Then there are a few little problems like bankings where they shouldn??????t be, like in the loop, loops are never banked, but yours was, resulting in high lateral G??????s. Another thing was the trim brake in the tunnel. Never trim but fix, if you build the way I just explained you shouldn??????t be having any need for trims because you can monitor the speed and G??????s closely while building the entire ride.
So here I am at the adrenaline rating, that took quite some time
. Well to the point; the adrenaline was bad, the track was just slow in many places and that makes it boring, so also try to improve on your pacing (flow) of the track. Make sure you get a good variation between right and left hand elements and then maintain a high speed and your track should be a killer. If it is technically a killer to, that is.
Originality was well??????. Simply not there?????? actually some of your moves were quite original and I hardly ever saw anyone letting his track hover all over the place. So I??????ll give you some points here.
Overall: I??????ll be honest with you; this ride was very bad, but I think your next ride can be a lot better if you carefully read trough this comment. I am looking forward to see the improvements on your next ride. Oh, one last thing, I hope you do not take any of what I said as a personal insult because in the end it is all meant to help, because if I wanted to insult you or whatever I wouldn??????t have taken the time to write this essay. Hope it helps!
Technical: 1
Adrenaline: 4
Originality: 6
Overall: 4
Goudly ?????? uhmmm? I forgot, pick and easier trackname next time
Hey Gouldy, you sure are one of the suprising designers for about the moment you came to this site. You improved your building technique from day to day and became quite a good designer. Actually so far your track is the best I have judged and since I have already ridden all tracks you??????ll probably keep that status.
I do not have much comments on this ride really, actually more like suggestions. I??????ll sum everything up; first of all I thought some sections in the layout were a bit stretched out, try some tighter moves and elements, a good example of this I think is the bit where you have the heartline roll, next time try to spend some more attention to heartlining as well since the radius of this roll was a bit too small. (no I didn??????t try to rime [:p]) So because of the stretched out bits I marked of some of the adrenaline.
Then my next suggestion is try some more theming, like an environment, not very hard and pretty much everyone can make them with a little time and effort put into it, same for cartextures and this just gives your ride a nice extra touch.
Two more things I liked about this entry; the twistyness and creativity in the track, I especially liked the modified cobra roll and besides that I think it is awesome you did this in such a short time since I already received your track one or two days after the contest was opened! Nicely done and go for it in the next round [;)]
Technical: 8,5
Adrenaline: 8,5
Originality: 8
Overall: 8,5
Gump ?????? Frozen
Hey Gump, first of all I??????ve got good news, you past to the next round. At first sight the your track looked pretty promising but already seconds after the train came of the lift that hope was gone due to a G-spike and some rough points. The entire track had high G??????s mainly caused by rough bits in the track. Besides that the supports also need some work, they look ok, but pick a style and stick to it because you have a few styles mixed up which doesn??????t look so good. So stick with just one style next time. Also looking at pictures of real (Vekoma SLC??????s) rides would help in this case.
The adrenaline factor on this ride could have been better, it loses too much speed in places like in the Cobra Roll, where the speed drops to about 15,53 mph / 25km/h which could easily cause the trains to stall with strong winds. To make sure your track comes along nicely while building build your track section by section this will prevent problems you had like high G??????s and slow parts. Here??????s an example: start by building a station, lifthill and first drop, then connect the track and test it in the simulator. Only and I really mean ONLY when you are 100% satisfied with the result you continue with building the next section, for example a cobra roll and overbanked turn. Test it again, modify again, ride again, new section, test, modify etc. etc. etc. until the entire track is done. This should ensure you of having a nice track when it??????s all done.
Originality was ok, the support added a original touch, that is for sure, also the first drop was not really anything you see every day, so originality wise this track was pretty nice.
Overall you will have to improve on your trackwork and keep in mind to keep your supports in one style.
Technical: 6,5
Adrenaline: 7
Originality: 7
Overall: 7
Kurtis ?????? Death Star
Hey Kurtis, your track did pass to the next round, but this is probably because I was listening to some good music while riding your contraption [:p]
Technical this ride wasn??????t that good?????? why? The track was rough and not very well paced. Then the supports were stunning, in a negative way. This was a major downside of this ride. With better supports this ride could have also passed to the next round if I was listening to a bad song while riding it, so basically you were plain lucky
.
The problem with the supports is that the distance between them is too big in many places, for example the cobra roll and the supports that you built custom were way too thin and thus too weak to hold up the ride. Keep in mind the weight of these trains is several tons and with some G??????s on them strains of 20 tons can be put on the supports, it??????s pretty much comparable to supporting a house with matchsticks?????? it wouldn??????t really work. So next time I suggest you study some real rides and take a good look at how the supports are constructed and keep in mind a track needs a supports about once in every trainlength, so that is about one support each 10 to 15 ties depending on the G forces at the point of the support.
The adrenaline factor on this ride wasn??????t too good either, the track was just a bit dull and too short. Next time try to be more creative with your elements and make sure you spend some more attention to shaping them, because the loop was pretty out of shape, besides that I doubt if that was hand made.
Originality wasn??????t any good, the ride just had some prefabs thrown in, or maybe they were custom elements, but still they were all pretty much standard. This ride just lacks an X factor when it comes to originality, again the same advice as with the adrenaline, try to be more creative.
Technical: 5
Adrenaline: 6
Originality: 6
Overall: 5.999999999 (so I??????ll make it a 6 to let you pass.)
Legolas ?????? Anaconda
Hey Legolas, first of all congratulations for passing to the next round, you are lucky the minimum to pass is an overall rating of a 6 just like many others because most of the track turned in weren??????t that stunning. So compared to the others yours weren??????t so bad. Anyway, to the point now.
Technical: The ride had several problem, first of all, roughness the ride was pretty jerky and when riding it I was able to feel every single vertex in it just because you didn??????t took enough time to smoothen it. I like the lead in to the lift though??????
Besides this main problem you also had some problems with the supports, some were too close to the track and also try to use a bit less prefab supports next time because they just look ugly when they are taller than about 15 meters / 49,21 feet. Also I didn??????t really see the need for having two MCBR??????s and besides that try to maintain speed when going trough the brakesruns, you don??????t have to slow down to almost a complete stop for going trough them, you can also blast trough with 35 km/h / 21,75 mph without problems in a lot of cases, the only downside will be that a ride after the E-stop is used will be very slow, but that doesn??????t matter since in general it should never be used.
Then also watch the placement of trees because some of them were too close to the track and I don??????t think it would be good for the ride to get branches mangled in the wheels or hitting the riders in the face??????
The adrenaline factor of this ride was ok, besides the MCBR the speed was pretty well maintained and the trees added to the thrill too.
The originality factor was just so so, not much to say about this. It was just another ride stuffed with trees. However, tree stuffed rides are pretty rare so you??????ll get some points [:p]
Overall: next time really try to improve on the smoothness on your track and spend some more time on your supports and you??????ll be fine.
Technical: 5
Adrenaline: 6,5
Originality: 6,5
Overall: 6,1
MF2001 ?????? Sentinel
Well done on this one MF2001, this really was one of the better entries for this qualification round of the contest! So it is obvious that you passed.
Technical the ride was neat, the supports looked great with the nice touches on the connecting beams and all custom supports. The track itself was nice and smooth and well paced. However, the supports weren??????t perfectly realistic and I think that could use some work next time, but still I think they look great, just not like the real thing, you also might want to consider to use the autoflanger. About the track itself, again I thought that the final brakerun wasn??????t really needed, you could have added another helix (hmmm, would have been nice if you managed to fit it
) or something ending up into the pre-built brakeruns. Also with the layout I think you really lived up to the objective; a nice compact intense SLC layout, however the corckscrews were a bit too flat, more like B&M??????s, or even not like the B&M flatspins because these were just shaped kind of weird. Anyway, well done on the technical aspect of the ride.
Adrenaline was good too, a nice speed was maintained throughout the circuit and the choice of elements was ok, I would have liked to see some more originality in the layout though. It lacked a bit of originality, for sure cartextures and/or a custom environment would have added to this score for sure.
Overall a very nice and realistic ride, keep up the good work and I??????m looking forward to see what you submit in the next round.
Technical: 9
Adrenaline: 7
Originality: 7
Overall: 8
MFkiDD30 ?????? BreeZe
Hey MFkidd, this was a pretty close call for you, but you made it into the next round, here??????s an explanation of the rating you got.
Technical your ride did ok, the first part of the track was pretty nice but the further it neared the end, the rougher it became. Also when making inversion maybe you should pay some more attention to heartlining. I liked the fact that you used the classic SLC rollover, but I think it isn??????t very accurate and that that element could use more heartlining for example.
Then the supports were very bad, but this could have been due to a lack of time, whatever the cause of this was it still is a shame because I really think the ride??????s overall appearance and ride experience can be so much better with good supports, so if you have the time, spend it on perfecting the supports.
Adrenaline was pretty nice, speed was maintained throughout the ride pacing could use some work, a bit more of a twisty layout would have been nice, but still the ride did fairly good here.
Originality was pretty nice, however I thought the sort of stretched out corckscrews at the end of the ride were strange, they were very very rough and most likely prefabs. Anyway, I did like the elements, they should just have been smoothned out some more.
Technical: 5
Adrenaline: 7
Originality: 7
Overall: 6,3
Mistikme ?????? Xabriel
Hey mistikme, I??????m sorry to say that your track did not pass to the next round of this contest.
Technically this track wasn??????t too stunning, the track was very very rough and the prefabs were not integrated into the layout very well. There is imo not much wrong with using prefabs, as long as they aren??????t recognizable as prefabs because they don??????t fit the track. In your case the transition from your track to the prefabs usually was a rough jerk. Also trimming the speed to make it trough a certain element is pretty much the worst thing you can do. Nothing wrong with trimming the speed, but a trim is just to manage the speed very slightly, not to brake it. Also when using the emergency stop the train stalls on the trim brake. Besides the bad track the supports were pretty bad too, the custom supports did not look good and were pretty wobbly. I suggest you take a look at some better rated track in the exchange and see how the supports are built.
Adrenaline is ok, however the ride wasn??????t very enojoyable due to the rough track and the support chopping some arms of the rides while riding. Make sure you check supports aren??????t too close to the track. The track also didn??????t have a good pacing and was pretty slow in the end, because of your neat trim brake [:p].
Originality wasn??????t anything special either, I really didn??????t see anything on this ride that could be could original.
Technical: 5
Adrenaline: 6
Originality: 4
Overall: 4,8
RealityRider ?????? Shear Survival
Uhmmm, well it didn??????t took me more than 5 seconds to conclude this track wouldn??????t make it into the next round, then I started wondering since when Vekoma is producing self-supporting track??????
Technical: To be honest, this ride was technically horrible, the track was very rough and more important, hovering?????? The track has like a total of 10 supports, you have entire loops hovering, the entire first drop?????? hovering! Track doesn??????t hover, even without trains on it this would collapse. Besides the extreme lack of supports the track is very rough and features two G-spikes. You really have to fix things like this if you want to get a better rating than you got now??????
Adrenaline wasn??????t good either, riding a track this rough and with G-spikes wouldn??????t really be a thrill and even if the track was allright, the layout still isn??????t very staggering.
Originality, well I never saw a track hovering around like yours so I guess that is something original on this track.
Overall you will have to improve to get a more decent score, you might also want to read the comment Force360 got in this contest since he also had quite some tech problems which might also help you. Also looking at some good tracks on the exchange would be a good idea and you should also try to gain some coaster knowledge in general.
Technical: 1
Adrenaline: 4
Originality 6
Overall: 4
s.kko ?????? Sicarius
Hey s.kko first of all congratulations on passing to the next round. I??????ll just make a short comment for the rating you can find below.
Technical: The ride was ok, but it did have some flaws. Basically I thought the layout of the track was rather odd, the fact that it maintains a huge ground clearance in the first part, it doesn??????t take full advantage of the speed that could have been gotten out of the lifthill. The second part of the ride, after the MCBR is very stretched out and that makes it quite boring.
The supports also could use some more work realism wise, I really dislike the support you made on the loop which looked really weird. I suggest you take a good look at some pictures of comparable rides and good rides in the exchange to learn some more about the way you can build good, realistic looking supports.
Adrenaline: The helix at the end also was a bit misplaced because it was way too slow, it pulled about 1.6 G??????s which is pretty much nothing. So next time try to maintain your speed a bit better and when the speed drops near the end, make the elements tighter.
Originality was ok, the terraforming added a bit to the experience so that was a good choice, besides that the twist into the MCBR was a nice touch, however, not very well executed since the speed was slightly too high when entering it. Anyway, not taking of for that, overall a pretty nice ride but with a rather odd layout.
That's it, the next round will be up ASAP. I'm sorry that the judging took so long, but I got ill about half way trough and if you realize this is 14 pages of text in Word, you might understand there's a lot of work in this. But I'll try to get the next round running as soon as I can.
I'll notify everyone who passed trough email. [:)]
