That's right, I don't want to work on it any more. Along with several other grts maps, I have decided to get to a point of "done" and then go on to new maps.
So, what does this have to do with you lot? Well, I would like to give you all a last chance to leave some thoughts before you guys go "NO NO WAIT, FINAL VERSION? SHIT SUX THO!"
(click either above image for larger)
Here is the metal map, set for 4v4, I will look at including cheescan's spot thingie, don't worry about that part. Now, I know, that some of you no matter what I do will hate the metal layout, and you all have an opinion on what is a "best" metal layout. I would however like you to be considerate of others and I am not looking for someone to grace me with HIS ingenious design as there are 100s of others who also have good designs. Please just stick to what could be good or bad about the current suggest micro alterations.
So I want you lot to go ahead and post thoughts, which I may or may not heed and if I do or don't, try to not rage/gloat about it to infinity. I just want to get this map where it is
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43 Location: Raegquitting Spring on 04/24/12
The current metal layout is fine also, please don't include the cheesescan stuff. THat is a widget and people can grab that widget if they needs textures. I dunno what's wrong with the current version? It's good and plays well
The valleys were too steep making them zones that units got stuck in a lot. SO I moved a lot of interesting terrain out of the valleys and made them more sand bowls. I flattened several mountain tops for arillery/bertha/guntank placement and broke several round hills into more plateau like terrain. the base areas are now sunken instead of raised up. The shadow harshness has been toned down as has the specular so it is easier on the eyes.
The ridges leading into the craters are unpathable for bot slope tolerance. Just pointing it out as idk how you would make it pathable, also for all I know this is intentional.
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 12:31 Location: Has not played *a in years.
Not to knock on CT (I love CT), but shouldn't it be CT's job to make map's rock spawner configs, and not map makers. I mean if you want compatible maps can you include them in the CT installation. This might also be better for avoiding conflicts from home made spawner configs.
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 12:31 Location: Has not played *a in years.
Sand traps are good in some ways, but if they are taking up too much room maybe plateaus would be better. It's so hard to choose because I like both ideas so maybe I'll keep the older versions too if you decide to change them.
[17:43:10] ** [S44]SpikedHelmet joined the channel. [17:43:16] <[S44]SpikedHelmet> there you are [17:44:55] <[S44]SpikedHelmet> smoth your map breaks my computer [17:46:12] <[S44]SpikedHelmet> what THE FUCK [18:01:36] ** [S44]SpikedHelmet left the channel( ).
tells me fuck all I need a pastebin of infolog or something more than a sweeping accusation.
Joined: 25 Aug 2004, 12:31 Location: Has not played *a in years.
I wouldn't let it bother you smoth. Spiked just probably spilled his cocaine into his desktop's fan intake while playing your map and broke his computer.
When I launched the map my computer would get massive performance drop, everything was black with the minimap, UI and actual map textures only periodically blinking in and out.
However I think this was because I had a lot of other processes going on as when I shut them down it worked normally.
Very nice map. I think the "pavement" should be just regular desert though.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 0 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum