Giant scale maps

udm · Post by **udm** » 09 Apr 2007, 19:05

Hi guys I'm looking for maps that are good for large scale warfare similar to Supcom. Most maps are catered for team based warfare or 1 on 1 ie. have opposing sides. For example, Supreme Battlefield is big but it doesn't have that FFA feel, it's more like team head on or 1 on 1 head on. I'm looking for a map that's just gigantic in general, something like a larger version of Mars. Anyone got anything good to recommend?

Reason being that I want to try out NOTA in an all out large scale 5-player FFA

RogerN · Post by **RogerN** » 09 Apr 2007, 19:13

Plains and Passes is 20x20, which has about 50% more land area than Supreme Battlefield. I'm not familiar with maps larger than that, although I know there are some.

AF · Post by AF » 09 Apr 2007, 19:38

There are numerous 32x32 maps.

Comp1337 · Post by **Comp1337** » 09 Apr 2007, 21:53

Epic. Play Epic.

PicassoCT · Post by **PicassoCT** » 09 Apr 2007, 22:44

If you have good Machines and LAN - play Trenches or Intercontinental but for realy challenging Terrain i would recommend FAs Map, he has tried a lot after he perfected his style. Maps don`t need to be big to be great!

Me recommends Iron Gauntlet
http://spring.unknown-files.net/file/20 ... et-v02.sd7

http://spring.unknown-files.net/file/21 ... Reuploaded
http://spring.unknown-files.net/file/22 ... ntal_32x32

Isaaccc · Post by **Isaaccc** » 10 Apr 2007, 02:25

Moon Quartet is like a 20x20 comet catcher

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 10 Apr 2007, 06:39

http://spring.unknown-files.net/file/11 ... _Hills_v3/

Craggy is 28x28 and can easily handle a ten-player FFA; you'll just have to set up boxes.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 10 Apr 2007, 08:46

you need to update the texture on that with one of forbs new climates.. I vote for the fot hill basin one.. that would be tight... sandy bottom and grassy hills :)

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 10 Apr 2007, 09:51

Try this one. It's 30x30.

As a note smoth, my new climates only work with the pro (that is $25 versions of L3DT), and even though I would happily give all my climates to him, something tells me he doesn't really care enough to spend $25 on the program.

As we speak I am rendering Dessicated Sinkhole for him Foothill basin style.

I don't think you guys understand the horsepower needed for doing multiple climate maps (that look flawless). Ya, I could easily make l3dt render different climates at different heights, but it never looks as good as rendering with 2 different climates and combining in photoshop, which takes a lot of time, effort, and patience. Especially with images the size of this one (14336x14336).

Many people have mentioned this over time, and honestly I wish people would realize for what they are asking. It's not exactly as easy as one would be led to believe.

The saving grace is the fact that I can render all the maps , att, normals, light, and simply switch out the textures for the new climate, so all I have to do is render the texture twice. It's the photoshop work that takes forever. 8 gig photoshop scratch files are not fun at all. Neither are color range selections that take 5 minutes to complete.

PicassoCT · Post by **PicassoCT** » 10 Apr 2007, 13:54

Good old FA - always complaining but if (the socialistic bastards

) from the boards request something - you can shure that it will be delivered in HiQuality in at least two - or three weeks. So don`t be scared of - just ask right away

Erom · Post by **Erom** » 10 Apr 2007, 14:38

Forboding Angel wrote:8 gig photoshop scratch files are not fun at all.

God, that makes my head hurt just thinking about it.

1v0ry_k1ng · Post by **1v0ry_k1ng** » 10 Apr 2007, 15:20

with NOTA its cool for the map to have good areas of sea too, as sea pwns

rattle · Post by **rattle** » 10 Apr 2007, 17:35

8 gig photoshop scratch files are not fun at all. Neither are color range selections that take 5 minutes to complete.

That would be 5^infinty minutes here. Make one little mistake and duh. Do you keep a smaller file to experiment on?

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 10 Apr 2007, 18:22

I usually break the giant maps up into sections. The reduction in time easily makes up for the small amount of extra work.

aGorm · Post by **aGorm** » 10 Apr 2007, 18:25

If he's anything like me he prob cuts out a chunk of texture to experiment on. And ocasionly work on a layer by exporting it as a new image and closing teh rest.

(or maybe he just waits alot...

who knows)

aGorm

VonGratz · Post by **VonGratz** » 10 Apr 2007, 22:14

Altored_earth.
VonGratz

Guessmyname · Post by **Guessmyname** » 10 Apr 2007, 23:27

Forboding Angel wrote:Try this one. It's 30x30.

This + Epic Legions = insanity

LOrDo · Post by **LOrDo** » 11 Apr 2007, 21:08

This seems like the appropriate place to ask this... Ive been in the planning stage of a really cool really huge map. How does SM3 handle large scale maps in comparison to SM2?

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 12 Apr 2007, 00:54

1 or 2 texture layers, not too bad, 3 or more, terrible.

LOrDo · Post by **LOrDo** » 12 Apr 2007, 02:13

Spring RTS Engine

Giant scale maps

Giant scale maps