What would you look for in a new map format?

[Slamoid]

Now that the new Model format is here (However buggy), maybe it's almost time to look for a new map format. My ideas:

• Backwards-compatable engine

• Multiple 3D Light Sources

• Multi-layered terrainmapping (BSP?)

• Tile-based terrain (OTA style, take less ram and make bigger maps easier)

I would reccomend a BSP-based tile system. For example, have each tile really be a 3D model, so the map file would really be two parts: a header for description, wind and tides, lighting locations/types/timings, ect, and the second part for the tile locations/positions/rotations, and the mapfile to be in ASCII format.

Samples of proposed filetype (second half):

Code: Select all

Tileset.Tile.Positions.Rotations.Scales

Code: Select all

GreenWorldTiles.FlatTerrain.(0,0,0).(0,0,0).(1000,1000,1000)
GreenWorldTiles.HillA.(0,0,500).(0,70,0).(500,500,500)
MetalWorldTiles.CubeTile.(50,0,-200).(30,50,70).(100,100,100)

The only problem I could see in this map type would be the scaling. Maybe leave that out, because as maps are scaled up texture quality would be lost. But having a 3d-model maptype would allow for multi-layered maps that would be easily made.

Anyone else?[/list]

[SwiftSpear]

I like the current map format... it just needs some expanding...

Multiple light sources is something I would definately like to see, but more in terms of tank headlights and whatnot than 3-4 suns.

Backwards compatibility is assumed.

I think it goes against the nature of an RTS to add too many multilayers. honestly I don't think BSP is the right path for TAS, we have a far more powerful heightmap engine then anything I've ever seen done with BSPs... I say stick to the heightmap and features, just add some way of having units walk over features.

Terrain is tile based in spring. Chat with some mappers, they are all about the tiling to bring down map sizes.

[smoth]

I would like areas that under no curcumstance will have deformations..

or the ability to save a map at the end of the match with all of the decal permanently applied along with deformation and wreckage.. at the very least deformation and wreckage. I think it would be VERY very VERY awesome.

[Torrasque]

Backwards-compatable engine

Yes, of course.

Multiple 3D Light Sources

Yes, and perhaps more athmospheric effect.

Multi-layered terrainmapping (BSP?)

Hu? You understand that you will have to redo 80% of the game to support such thing?

Tile-based terrain (OTA style, take less ram and make bigger maps easier)

It's already tile based.
Some "just" have to make a programe to assemble them in an easy way.


It's not really a new map format, but It could be awesome if we could add feature, tree, geothermal vent in game.
More, having some tool to adjust the height map irl. You can already create crater very easly.
And then, having a way to save the map.

[Weaver]

I rather like the grphical map system we have now. I never made a map for TA but within 2 days of DLing spring I had made a playable map. Then the new format came out and it never got released.

Here's my take on layers for an ultimate map format.

Sorry for the ascii art I am at work so I can't upload a picture.

Code: Select all

                          ^
    overlays___         //  \    
           |   \       =      \  
           |     \   //         \
                   //             \
-----=======------/
 soft           /   hard
 earth        /     rock
 ___________/
/

There would be volume layers for materials like rock and earth and overlay layers for grass, roads etc. All could have speed and hardness modifiers, but the overlays would be destoyable to reveal the layer beneath.

Its probably too much to ask for, so what would be nice is a reflection layer, which isn't so easy either as it would need to be at least as high resolution as the main texture.

Maybe if it was used with the detailtex and defined per terrian type as others have requested it could work well.

[aGorm]

I'd like to say "DIE " But im not that nasty realy...

In all seriosness though please lets not change the map format AGAIN. Its fine the way it is. It can now do EVERYTHING that a comercial RTS one can do. I mean, how many RTS's have multiple levels of playing field? Realy? All we need is a way to add bridges and this is complete.
Think about multi layer terrain... how many implications will that have? Hundreds!!

aGorm

(ill post more later)

[Kuroneko]

I'd like to say "DIE " But im not that nasty realy...

In all seriosness though please lets not change the map format AGAIN. Its fine the way it is. It can now do EVERYTHING that a comercial RTS one can do. I mean, how many RTS's have multiple levels of playing field? Realy? All we need is a way to add bridges and this is complete.
Think about multi layer terrain... how many implications will that have? Hundreds!!

aGorm

(ill post more later)

mmmm metal fatigue...

[[K.B.] Napalm Cobra]

Tile-based terrain (OTA style, take less ram and make bigger maps easier)

It is tile based, theres just no tools to do what you're asking.

[Torrasque]

I'd like to say "DIE " But im not that nasty realy...

In all seriosness though please lets not change the map format AGAIN. Its fine the way it is. It can now do EVERYTHING that a comercial RTS one can do. I mean, how many RTS's have multiple levels of playing field? Realy? All we need is a way to add bridges and this is complete.
Think about multi layer terrain... how many implications will that have? Hundreds!!

aGorm

(ill post more later)

mmmm metal fatigue...

But in metal fatigue, layers are "independant". It's more a teleportation to an another map.
I don't remember ballisitc projectile going through one layer to another and other things like that.

Ihmo, multilayering is not a very good idea.

[SwiftSpear]

The way I understand the layering that weaver is talking about I think it's a bad idea. That way every layer would need to have it's own texture map, it's own feature map, and a bunch of other crap that no one wants to deal with, expecially with the poor map compression we have right now.

I'm sorry, but when it comes to having the more streamlined game, pseudo realim > realism any day.

Certian pseudo realistic aspects I would like to see improved apon however, like the joints between typemaps, and the ability to add multiple detailed textures.

[Weaver]

I'm sorry, but when it comes to having the more streamlined game, pseudo realim > realism any day.

I agree, my layering ideas are too much for the format, the engin and map makers, I was just dreaming.

Detail tex per terrain type is worthtwhile though, and easy feature placement too.

[SwiftSpear]

I'm sorry, but when it comes to having the more streamlined game, pseudo realim > realism any day.

I agree, my layering ideas are too much for the format, the engin and map makers, I was just dreaming.

Detail tex per terrain type is worthtwhile though, and easy feature placement too.

It isn't very easy yet... because detailed textures tile we would need to come up with a smooth way to merge between two types... and that could look odd as the detailed texture map is just black and transparent with greys. Because typemap resolution isn't as high as texture map resolution, the merge would need to be pretty soft, as you would see merged pixles on the typemap as giant ugly boxes in the end product if they tranfered even somewhat abruptly.

[aGorm]

Woo, thank god people agree with me.

For the transitions on detail texs... yep your right it would be a hard thing to do well... or maybe not? If you can set your owe detail texs then when you make them, why not make it so that they not only are seemless to themselves, but are also seemless to your other textures? That seems the simple solution. Obviosly all detail textures would have to be the equivilent of 1 pixel on the feature map, which would not be that bad because thats quite a chunk of ground in spring.

Easy feature placement is... a dificlut one. It more a case of we need a new "Sharpmap" style thing to do it with, not a change in the engin.

And on the layering... yes I know there area multi layered games (Earth 2150 anyone?) but the layers are totaly seperate. What you wanted was impossible so I'm glad you have seen the light!

Finaly, if you keep changing things how do you expect me to ever finsh the map tutorials!

aGorm

[Slamoid]

My apologies, I did not know that the current system was tile-based already. Yes, we DO NEED a tile-based map compiler, BADLY. Ok, I think this thread is obsolete, as tiling was the biggest issue.

To be honest, all I meant by multilayering would be solved by being able to add bridges/non-deformable terrain. Those things would be great.

Sorry for being a n00b.

[PauloMorfeo]

What would you look for in a new map format?

Don't know if already mentioned. Can't read everything so i'm just skiming through it.

Script files. So it can have triggers, victory conditions, etc, etc, everything that allows for 3rd party units, campaigns and scenarions.


Even though i'm pretty much sure the developers of Spring (both of them) are more than busy enough and i'm a little scared with the possibility of them working too much, to cope with the lack of man power, that will eventually burn them out...

[Maelstrom]

There is already a basic map scripting thing. Its not very good yet, but it is functional. You cant make it automatially enabled for a map, and you cant easily play multiplayer with it, but there is some basic map scripting already. However, dont get to excited about it, because if dj_oldfields scripting engine comes in, you will have to re-write all your scripts for the new engine.