Painted Desert

mufdvr222 · Post by **mufdvr222** » 30 Jun 2005, 09:02

Change of plans,, will try and get the new larger version uploaded in the next day or two. {edit} link is to the first version..

http://www.mufdvr.222clan.com/Pd.zip

There are some things I want to point out about this map, firstly; at first
glance the metal output will seem way out but in fact its almost perfect, in
ota there where six types of metal deposit used in PD three on the mesas and the other three types used on the lowlands, there are three output levels which are the same for both groups of metal patch large = 2.0
medium = 1.0 and small 0.5. In this Spring ported version the large give
2.2 medium = 0.8 and small = 0.4. If you total the outputs you get 3.5 for the original OTA painted desert we all know and love, this version will give a total of 3.4 to 3.5 which is 0.1 off what it should be.
The mesas appear very squat and low in Spring, thats
the way their meant to look regardless of the game engine involved, in short they whare always meant to be low and eroded, hence the visible rock banding where the bands get much wider as you get near the top of each mesa.
It was pointed out that maps like desert triad look much better in spring
than Painted Desert ever will, thats true but its because they are made from completely different tilesets, PD has a maximum height (in ota) of 136 where desert triad has a max height of 244 and the map terrain textures reflect this so please don`t even bother flaming over the way the mesas look cos this community has already established quite clealy that the classic TA maps should be as faithfull to the original as Spring will allow and that means the mesas stay low AS INTENDED.
Worth mentioning is that this ported PD is about 10% smaller owing to the size constraints emposed by Spring, the choice was 10% smaller or over twice the size of the ota original, a no brainer really.

Here are a couple a screenshots.

LathanStanley · Post by **LathanStanley** » 30 Jun 2005, 09:21

Always loved that map...

it'll be fun, looks good too

[K.B.] Napalm Cobra · Post by **[K.B.] Napalm Cobra** » 30 Jun 2005, 10:03

Is that regular or large scale spring.

zwzsg · Post by **zwzsg** » 30 Jun 2005, 14:35

Looks like a good job. Visible metal patches, well aligned heightmap, attention paid to stay faithfull to the original.

Looks just like the TA map seen in the 3D replayer. Here's some shots of the old TA map made under the 3D replayer to compare:
Painted Desert - Porced
Painted Desert - Krogoth Approaching
Painted Desert - Krogoth vs Punisher
Painted Desert - Samson
Actually the original map had even lower relief.

GrOuNd_ZeRo · Post by **GrOuNd_ZeRo** » 01 Jul 2005, 00:35

One of my favorite OTA maps, was waiting for the moment it was ported to Spring...

Good job.

NOiZE · Post by **NOiZE** » 01 Jul 2005, 17:42

Wooohoooo :D

i'm gonna love this :D

aGorm · Post by **aGorm** » 01 Jul 2005, 20:17

Just curious... how come it had to be 10% smaller or twice the size? I dont get the logic in that... looks luvly BTW.

aGorm

mufdvr222 · Post by **mufdvr222** » 02 Jul 2005, 01:33

aGorm wrote:Just curious... how come it had to be 10% smaller or twice the size? I dont get the logic in that... looks luvly BTW.

aGorm

I actually spent over a week trying to find a larger texture size that mapconv would work with but it would only work if I went 16384 x 16384 on the terrain .bmp it seems to me that the terrain bmp has to be "EVENLY" divisable by 1024, not just divisable by 1024 otherwise you get a metal map and height map that is not a factor of 1024 IE: if I make the terrain.bmp 12288 which is a factor of 1024,, 1024 times 12 = 12288
divide 12288 by 8 and you get 1536 x 1536 and mapconv won`t use that size.
Anyways The size I chose is closest to the original map and that was the deciding factor in the end I realised an accurate map port should include the maps size and scale.

Post by SJ » 02 Jul 2005, 09:11

Hm mapconv should work with no problems on any texture that is 1024*n so since PD is a 18x18 map in TA that would mean that it should be possible to make the texture 1024*9=9216 and heightmap 128*9+1=1153.

If you retained the original size you would also probably slash the file size from 38mb to 8mb or so.

If you create textures of these sizes and it still doesnt work and you have a fast con upload the original textures somewhere and i will look at it.

mufdvr222 · Post by **mufdvr222** » 02 Jul 2005, 10:03

Ok, thanks SJ. Will make up a set of images based on that and see what happens.

EDIT. I resized the lot and the map is now approaching 70mb,needless to say I won`t be going any further with it.

Also re scaling it stuffs my metal map right up and screws with the mesas something shocking and the visual differance between the sizes in barely noticeable. I don`t think the source images will see the light of day either,, I am on slow dial up and the terain immage is around 200mb.

mufdvr222 · Post by **mufdvr222** » 03 Jul 2005, 13:54

Well here it is
http://www.mufdvr.222clan.com/pdnew.jpg
scaled back up to near the same size as the original, I also decided to change the fog colour to something resembling airborn dust, If I can get the map uploaded then I should have a link back up in a day or two, the file size is now 45.7mb which might be too much for my crap connection speed.

NOiZE · Post by **NOiZE** » 03 Jul 2005, 14:32

don't release it.

Min3mat · Post by **Min3mat** » 03 Jul 2005, 15:03

i concur i like the current version! :) its wonderful! congrats

mufdvr222 · Post by **mufdvr222** » 04 Jul 2005, 01:20

Here is the link again http://www.mufdvr.222clan.com/Pd.zip
to the first version..
And here is a link to the updated .smd file for the smaller version you have already,, RE: fog colour change from white to a light tan ie: airborn dust,, highly recomended.http://www.mufdvr.222clan.com/pdsmd.zip

zwzsg · Post by **zwzsg** » 04 Jul 2005, 20:14

Please take advantage of the 32x32 tiling, 80Mb or 45Mb maps are really a waste of bandwidth, diskspace, and all.

mufdvr222 · Post by **mufdvr222** » 05 Jul 2005, 00:52

zwzsg wrote:Please take advantage of the 32x32 tiling, 80Mb or 45Mb maps are really a waste of bandwidth, diskspace, and all.

I don`t have a clue what you mean zwzsg, I followed SJ`s suggestion to the letter, those texture sizes he specified where implemented in the 2nd version I made and the file size grew by about 10mb to 57.4mb.

Gnomre · Post by **Gnomre** » 05 Jul 2005, 00:56

The map will compress more if you use the same 32x32 pixel blocks over and over. Basically, tile the map as much as possible and it should kick size down.

mufdvr222 · Post by **mufdvr222** » 05 Jul 2005, 01:03

Ok rather than repeatedly telling me TO DO THIS how about someone tell me HOW TO DO IT...............................

aGorm · Post by **aGorm** » 05 Jul 2005, 10:16

assuming you have photoshop...

Take a 32x32 (or a multiplal of) chunk of texture from your map that looks like it happens all over it (in this case the sand)

Cut it out and past in a new image.

Then go filter - other - offset and use it with wrap around

then merge together the seams that will appear and you have a repeating tile!

Select all, and go Edit - define pattern

go back to map, select all the sand with the wand tool, use select - fether to fether the mask, and then fill in the sand with your tile useing the paint bucket.

Simple!

(for other progs i expect theres similare functions)

aGorm

mufdvr222 · Post by **mufdvr222** » 05 Jul 2005, 11:17

Ok thanks aGorm, and now for a dumb question without parrallel in the known universe, am I "cropping" this 32 x 32 chunk of the sand, and how do I know I have 32 x 32 pixels selected? thanks for ya patience

FYI, I have Photoshop 7.0.

Spring RTS Engine

Painted Desert

Painted Desert