If you want features speak now..

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 06 Feb 2006, 09:50

NOiZE wrote:The scale on maps vs units IS the same as in OTA!

And the peewees are not alligned perfectly so i could hav crunched those missing two in there aswell!

EDIT:

This was with the OTA mod in spring btw

you are wrong noize. That does not prove a thing. Look at the above picture with the mechs and trees. All your picture proves is that the SPECIFIC map at a specific zoom looks similar.

This does not in my eyes prove that spring is in a similar scale. In fact I know from my mapping experiments that the terrain texture and height map are as far as relative size go are actually smaller. What I am talking about is the fact that...

A: the heightmap and terrain map are relatively smaller(which is again what SJ was talking about with the resolution)
B: The trees(which are currently the ONLY standard feature in spring) are out of scale.

The maps can easily fit the scale if the author does the extra work. That is not what I was talking about. Your are in the outfield on a bunt.

Maelstrom · Post by **Maelstrom** » 06 Feb 2006, 10:52

meh, just make them however you want, and people will be happy. If they are not, then they can make their own features. Your making the features, you decide on the scale.

NOiZE · Post by **NOiZE** » 06 Feb 2006, 11:23

mother wrote:
The First dude also wrote:"zoom" or camera is irrelevant!!

Minispring should be called OTASpring as it uses the EXACT SAME SCALE as OTA. Spring Doubled the sizes, I mearly brought them back to what they would be in a fully 3d world.

Now a 32x32 map is REALLY a 32x32 map, whereas with Original Spring it was a 16x16 map given the scale.
etc. etc.

I just wanted to show the mapsize vs unitsizes are the same in OTA as in spring...

I did not say a word about trees

FLOZi · Post by **FLOZi** » 06 Feb 2006, 13:29

Mother, I can't remember where he said it, but it was definetly said.

Spring is in OTA scale, footprint blocks are just half/double resolution, depending how you look at it.

Anyway... surely scale is all relative in Spring.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 06 Feb 2006, 23:29

Thanks for the info guys, I start tommorrow on the features.

mother · Post by **mother** » 07 Feb 2006, 16:57

Well it certainly looks like I was wrong! Sorry guys.

The good news is that now that fact should be readily findable.
(Scale, not me being wrong, damnit, well both

)

wizard8873 · Post by **wizard8873** » 07 Feb 2006, 17:06

i dont know if its been mentioned or if its even possible but what about destroyable buildings? i imagine it would take a lot of time but it would also be cool to see a battle in a city and while the units battle, multiple shots hit a skyscraper. the building takes so much damage and then collapses takes out units in a certain blast radius. that or be able to see chunks of buildings being taken out. like i said, i dont even know if its possible or how hard it would be but it would bring in some cool realism to urban battles.

AF · Post by AF » 07 Feb 2006, 20:56

That would be possible but not without certain adjustments beign amde first to the sprign engine (the majority of which are due in the next release, and are related to features and the dissapearing act they do if they're huge and tall (see agorms tree map or the big bridge map))

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 07 Feb 2006, 21:11

If spring supports everything that OTA supported... yes

And yes, the features will have 3-2 stages where applicable.

For example...

Light post
1st: full health normal lightpost
2nd: just part of the pole

Building...
1st: full structure(with lights where applicable)
2nd: partial structure, exposed parts
3rd: pile o' rubble.

so yeah... they will be destructable. And if features can still set off weapon calls when they die we may be able to get damage from destroyed structures.. I hope this is true because I wanted fuel trucks and stationary fuel storage tanks :).

mother · Post by **mother** » 08 Feb 2006, 00:36

smoth wrote:And if features can still set off weapon calls when they die we may be able to get damage from destroyed structures.. .

From what I understand features are currently wreckages- So you can have a heap for it, but you don't have access to the live->dead transition.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 08 Feb 2006, 01:32

kinda the other way aroud.

A feature yes, does not have a dead anim.

But you can have features actaully fall apart over time from damage

Follow the feature dead description here in

Code: Select all

[rx79_dead]
	{
	world=All Worlds;
	description=Wreckage;
	category=arm_corpses;
	object=rx79_dead;
	footprintx=2;
	footprintz=3;
	height=30;
	blocking=0;
	hitdensity=50;
	metal=500;
	damage=1800;
	reclaimable=1;
	featuredead=rx79_heap;
      	seqnamereclamate=tree1reclamate;
	}

Code: Select all

[rx79_heap]
	{
	world=All Worlds;
	description=Wreckage;
	category=arm_corpses;
	object=rx79_heap;
	footprintx=2;
	footprintz=2;
	height=20;
	blocking=0;
	hitdensity=50;
	metal=100;
	damage=1800;
	reclaimable=1;
	featuredead=rubble;
      	seqnamereclamate=tree1reclamate;
	}

The final state would be rubble. in gundam annihilation most of the corpses that I have made do this. So it is very do-able. It just does not have an effects assigned to it when it downgrades.

mother · Post by **mother** » 08 Feb 2006, 01:53

Edit:Nm I don't care

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 08 Feb 2006, 02:02

NO, go.. does the spring and OTA have a difference on the way it hand'es features and wreckage? I know that wrekage that is a feature cannot be revived or at least I have heard this but I have no investigated it. Any idea on it?

Maelstrom · Post by **Maelstrom** » 08 Feb 2006, 03:30

IIRC, features placed on a map while compiling cannot be ressurected. Dunno about the difference between features and wrekage though.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 08 Feb 2006, 03:31

yeah, I know... damnit I could go in game and find out but I am lazy... someone here has to know already.

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 09 Feb 2006, 17:50

mother wrote: @SwiftSpear- You seem to do nothing, and constantly cause trouble. And I know I'm not the first person to point this out to you. This is the second 'Smoth' thread (which I'm aware of) that you've been causing trouble in, yet not actually contributing to.

I play spring. I'm sorry you have to be a master modeler or have a destructively powerful computer for mapping in order to have an opinion on these forums. Who do you think you are claiming that I'm trying to cause trouble in this thread anyways? I didn't start an argument about scale. As far as I'm concerned there IS no relevent scale in TAS, how big or small a modeler chooses to make his models in comparison to other stuff is entirely his own decision. Someone doesn't just get to arbitrarily decide that one scale is right and another is wrong. If the scale is too large for TA then maby the features will work well for WD or SWTA. Scale is entirely a matter of opinion and in no way objective. I don't care if SJ and Chris Tailor came together to post in a thread and decided on the same scale. If a modeler decides to make features the size he wants them and not the "official" scale then his scale is still right. Anyone who belives the scale should be different is free to not use that modelers features or make thier own replacement features. hell, if the models were already compleated I'm sure that smoth wouldn't mind scaling them specially by request. This thread was still derailed by an argument about scale that IMHO is about as logical as arguing what shade of blue you belive the sky is.

Argh · Post by **Argh** » 16 Feb 2006, 04:02

Smoth, if you will be kind enough to email me your "to-scale" figure, I will make some new Features for Spring mappers. I have time tonight.

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 16 Feb 2006, 05:58

I am still not sure if I have the scale correct for when I import them into upspring. I am not sure why but there is a change in size... export from upspring into model prog... export back... it is not the same size. so what I have to do is sit down and figure out what mulitplyer is needed for post import scaling I have not had the time to hammer that specific number out

unfortunately, it seems like things get messed up when you bring them back into upspring. I can email you my .wings with all the models in it if it would help. I had to trial and error scaling my features, part of the reason that I have not made an official release is that I have to sit down and make sure they are correct. Again, if you want my .wings file I have no quam with sending it to you.

lmk,
-Smoth

smoth · Post by **smoth** » 16 Feb 2006, 05:59

SwiftSpear wrote:I'm sorry you have to be a master

Please do not put me in this catagory.. I am a novice.

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 16 Feb 2006, 08:43

smoth wrote:
SwiftSpear wrote:I'm sorry you have to be a master
Please do not put me in this catagory.. I am a novice.

Heh, fair enough, the fact remains, the forums aren't for people who make content for the game any more then they are for the people that play the game. This elitist "Your opinion isn't relevent because I make stuff and you don't" shit has to go. Not everyone even likes making game content, and you wouldn't be doing it if you didn't enjoy it in any way. I'm still trying to find something I'm good enough at that I enjoy although I mostly just hang around the artistic areas because I find the things people are doing interesting, while at the same time I soak up info because my brain just works that way.

Spring RTS Engine

If you want features speak now..