Which Map do you want to have?

wizard8873 · Post by **wizard8873** » 10 Apr 2006, 19:20

alien crystals, canyoning, or mountain ranges

Egarwaen · Post by **Egarwaen** » 10 Apr 2006, 19:31

Min3mat wrote:i don't understand Argh!
do u want maps which ARE symetricall and look man made?
or amps that are not symetricall (u mentioned comet)???
those sure aren't symetricall! do u want semi symetrical??? XD

I think what he's saying is:

1) He wants some attention paid to gameplay dynamics, not just looks, when designing maps.

2) He wants maps that look like somewhere worth fighting over, rather than just Random Wilderness 425. If possible, these elements should be integrated into the gameplay.

3) Symmetry isn't particularly relevant. Though I'd think part of gameplay dynamics would be balanced sides (IE, no player has an inherent terrain advantage), and symmetry would be the easiest way to balance sides. But I'm no Argh.

Argh · Post by **Argh** » 11 Apr 2006, 03:45

What Egarwaen said above is a good summary of where I stand. I would be most pleased if maps were made that weren't necessarily symnetrical, but were carefully game-balanced, looked like land worth fighting over, and were actually interesting, not just random trips to Nature.

Given that I have reviewed people's experiments on these issues, and am now aware of the problems people are facing (Smoth's experimental city map was most instructive), I will sit down and do a heightmap that will address my concerns, and discuss practical methods. I think the relying on L3DT is steering people towards methods that will only allow them to do certain things, and we need to think outside the box.

I would've gotten to this sooner, but as usual... I have to work, and stuff, so my time is limited

IceXuick · Post by **IceXuick** » 11 Apr 2006, 13:26

Well first off all i'd like to say that these are just concepts of landscape types. I did render all these maps within an hour. (however the height map is 4096x4096, which means i can render them @ TA spring engine 64x64...)

As strange as this might seem, I agree to most critics of argh.

A map must force players to think. A map must have balance. And most important, it must have good gameplay. Although i don't think every map should have ruins, or human remains in what ever way. The core story line of TA didn't have this, and city/urban maps aren't everyone favourites. And Greenhaven, Darkside, Moon Quartet or Painted Desert where nice to play without these humanoid remains... So i guess thats just a kind of taste.

Again back to the concepts. I now do understand which maps people like. In the near future I want to work on gameplay as much as possible. Good looking maps are nice, but ugly looking with great gameplay are eventually better!

Maybe i should post a poll thing, with sketches of layouts for (height)maps. As far as fighting for a specific map, there should always be choke-points, and specific points of interest that players want to reach (and hold), for strategic or resource advantages.

Argh, maybe you can post some sketches of heigtmaps?

thx for all the replies of everyone so far!

IceXuick

Dr.InfernO · Post by **Dr.InfernO** » 11 Apr 2006, 15:12

Map 4 - Rocky Islands
in a 64x64 format would be super. but pathfinding would be a hell! Maybe only 40x40?

NOiZE · Post by **NOiZE** » 11 Apr 2006, 15:14

shadows get inverted when maps go bigger then 34x34 if i'm not mistaken!

Egarwaen · Post by **Egarwaen** » 11 Apr 2006, 16:25

IceXuick wrote:A map must force players to think. A map must have balance. And most important, it must have good gameplay. Although i don't think every map should have ruins, or human remains in what ever way. The core story line of TA didn't have this, and city/urban maps aren't everyone favourites. And Greenhaven, Darkside, Moon Quartet or Painted Desert where nice to play without these humanoid remains... So i guess thats just a kind of taste.

Speaking purely of the storyline of TA, in terms of justification for fighting... Remember that most of the galaxy's resources had been exhausted during the war. So fighting over areas with metal made sense.

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 11 Apr 2006, 16:25

Argh wrote:...I think the relying on L3DT is steering people towards methods that will only allow them to do certain things, and we need to think outside the box.

bullshit

I understand what you are trying to say, but for organic maps, this is simply one of the easiest and best programs...

I like organic maps. I don't care for city/urban maps so I don't do them. I like creating my own world.

Argh, you need to make a heightmap so ppl can see what you are talking about. Oh and btw, all my maps are hand drawn, I use l3dt to smooth and convert to 32bit (helps get rid of contours) and to add erosion.

Sorry, I just don't care for being referred to as unoriginal.

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 11 Apr 2006, 16:36

IceXuick wrote:....(however the height map is 4096x4096, which means i can render them @ TA spring engine 64x64...)

Aruuugh(no referring to the forum goer arugh, this is an arg of frustration)

you of all ppl should know better

Look, you to start rending your maps in a 1 to 1 ratio in bryce. 1 to 8 is basically just taking a 4096 x 4096 and resizing it which looks like crap, plus, the bumpmapping looks really really bad at that point.

For making a 16 x 16, make a heightmap that is 8192 x 8192, the import that heightmap and render at 1 to 1 ratio.

IceXuick · Post by **IceXuick** » 11 Apr 2006, 22:45

Yeah Forboding,

I know, but in bryce a 4096 heightmap can render up as large as you want! so... i do not render 1 on 1, but 1 on 8.

:)

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 12 Apr 2006, 00:46

IceXuick wrote:Yeah Forboding,

I know, but in bryce a 4096 heightmap can render up as large as you want! so... i do not render 1 on 1, but 1 on 8.

:)

you're missing the point

zoom in on cathralda, notice the yellow splotches? THat's because you did it at a 1 - 8 ratio.

try 1 to 1, then you'll understand I imagine. I realize that it takes time, but suck it up and do it anyway.

submarine · Post by **submarine** » 12 Apr 2006, 00:49

rocky islands

LOrDo · Post by **LOrDo** » 12 Apr 2006, 02:35

Alien crystal/ mountain range and canyoning are the best.

Argh · Post by **Argh** » 12 Apr 2006, 03:26

And Greenhaven, Darkside, Moon Quartet or Painted Desert where nice to play without these humanoid remains... So i guess thats just a kind of taste.

I'm not opposed to scenes set in natural surroundings- just to terrain that doesn't have any obvious worth, that lacks context and some backstory.

Modern games like DoW, WCIII, AoEIII, Kohan II, etc., etc. all have terrains where there are places of obvious value, history, and interest. Many Spring maps have metal maps that look like bare metal shining through the ground, which was an OTA bit that didn't really make much sense even then, aside from the fact that they were forced to use bitmaps placed on a grid... and color-matching them to be more interesting would've been a royal pain.

Wouldn't it be much sexier to have metal patches be the obviously rusting corpses of dead robots, the rotting foundations/ruins of former cities, piles of metal tailings next to the ruins of some enormous manufacturing facility, etc.? It's these sorts of things that really make a map really charming to me- taking a moment to get down close enough to appreciate the details. A few things like that can really make up for a lot've bland tiles elsewhere, imho.

[edit] Er, Foreboding... I have always enjoyed your maps, although I think that "creating your own worlds" should also include a reason why people/intelligent robots/whatever should be fighting over them- backstory is an important part of design, along with naturalism.

And I am not demonizing L3DT- it's a great tool, and it works very well. However, it is not the end-all and be-all. I think that we can approach things in other ways, however. I am working on a map to demonstrate some things, but my time is limited, so please bear with me.

Tweenk · Post by **Tweenk** » 12 Apr 2006, 12:54

If we had Gaia player at last, there could be neutral buildings to be captured i. e. an old, but functioning powerplant, metal mine, radar tower, an incinerator which converts metal to energy etc. However, it would need mod changes and scripting, but I think this is basically possible.

Dragon45 · Post by **Dragon45** » 13 Apr 2006, 17:18

Let me just put my tw bits in:

It's not the tool, it's the person using it.

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 13 Apr 2006, 19:09

Dragon45 wrote:Let me just put my tw bits in:

It's not the tool, it's the person using it.

very very true

PicassoCT · Post by **PicassoCT** » 13 Apr 2006, 20:16

Hey calm down.. Icesxuicks Map Cathralda is good, whatever you got against the Tool or how the Author uses it.

What Really is a Problem- is that it is very hard to balance a Map in a Game with hundreds of Units (Many not even known [known ment as "used regullary in various tactics] to the Veterans ) and where half of the Players get whiny when the "usual" TankRush and Berthawar don`t work as regullary.
It is okay to point somebody on Mapmistakes he made, but it is not gentle to just preflame everything (and those screenys look great) that is going to come...

IceXuick · Post by **IceXuick** » 14 Apr 2006, 02:02

thank you for relativating all.

I do not take it personally, i try to look through and find the answer im looking for.

Going to design some concept map setups tomorrow, which again i will post too choose from.. then i will do the crystal thing on it :D

Anybody who has nice crystal features ?

LathanStanley · Post by **LathanStanley** » 14 Apr 2006, 02:39

the tiberium.... I guess you could photochop them and twist the color from green to purple... he grey on the base should stay ok...

make em really big too??

Spring RTS Engine

Which Map do you want to have?