Page 2 of 4
Posted: 24 Jan 2007, 16:36
by LOrDo
Those bridges sure look narrow. And the buildspace seems to be minimal. You sure it won't get to porcy?
Posted: 24 Jan 2007, 17:10
by Slamoid
manored wrote: remember populous, then remember how cool you be if spring could be played in populous style maps (planet shaped).
Pure. Frucking. WIN.
I still have Populous, best friking game this side of TA. Spheroid maps in spring would be physically impossible, for only alienware computers can handle that much
PURE AWESOME running through the proccessor.
Posted: 24 Jan 2007, 17:31
by PicassoCT
Sphere shaped Maps are something to Request from the Devs who are making that New Engine... That would be the Right Moment to ask...
And the Bridge will narrow enough to let a Con Vehicle past and seperate the Sea - there are however beaches and wide - open water, i don`t think that this will get porcy - simply because of berthas Range... And if it becomes, it is all 3dsMax and can be changed any Minute..
Posted: 24 Jan 2007, 17:40
by ralphie
The outer bridges make sea units all but useless if they have to go all the way to the top land masses and squeeze through the small opening to get into the other half of the map. (assuming they bridges aren't submerged enough for ships to pass)
Posted: 24 Jan 2007, 19:14
by PicassoCT
I actually copied the Idea from 4 Lakes - it seemed a great Decission to me, to have "diffrent Oceans" so you can built three Time Ships - One Time Close Combat, One Time Inner Seas, to fight for the Middle and destroy mainly Hovers & Amphib Approaching - and the Outer Waters.. that allow you - onc you - or a Teammate has conquered one of the Poles, to attack the Enemys Rear - or if you play north and south - fight for the Isles...
Something diffrent, - i can add diffrent sorts of lightning (theoretical something like Fog... but i have tried it with a little Sun-Moon-Eclipse for half of the Planet. I can also Add a little Reflection, like Waterplanets should have.
=> Graphexample

I will make a Poll about that...
Posted: 24 Jan 2007, 22:25
by hunterw
sphere maps, while immeasurably badass, would also probably make a few programmers go nuts over ridiculously complicated vector mathematics
it would also be pretty difficult to map for
Posted: 24 Jan 2007, 22:34
by AF
It depends how you implement sphere maps.
For example you cna implement donut maps then give the illusion of a sphere like populous does.
You see populous hasnt got sphere worlds. Its top down donut worlds. In top down view its flat. In side view its then warped visually (not physically) to appear rounded. In global world it switches to rendering a flat sphere and placing textures on the surface like decals in spring.
Posted: 25 Jan 2007, 00:19
by manored
Wow... I didnt knew you could do a trick like that...

Posted: 25 Jan 2007, 01:11
by smoth
not this again.
Posted: 25 Jan 2007, 01:21
by AF
The problem with multiple oceans is ti doesnt matter if you succesfully take strategic water mass A because they'll just take water mass B and attack from the coast maybe send planes and amphib, shelling whatever safeguards you have.
Posted: 25 Jan 2007, 02:08
by manored
AF wrote:The problem with multiple oceans is ti doesnt matter if you succesfully take strategic water mass A because they'll just take water mass B and attack from the coast maybe send planes and amphib, shelling whatever safeguards you have.
The problem with multiple oceans is basically the same problem you have with multiple battlefronts...
Posted: 26 Jan 2007, 02:13
by Dragon45
Looks great picasso!
Posted: 26 Jan 2007, 10:24
by PicassoCT
It also makes great Trouble - I used the Glace effect and now i have orange glowing Mountaintops - to hell with Snow..
Posted: 27 Jan 2007, 03:32
by LOrDo
PicassoCT wrote:It also makes great Trouble - I used the Glace effect and now i have orange glowing Mountaintops - to hell with Snow..
Sounds typical for one of your maps. Oo
And post a metalmap already, we all know thats what will bring the map down

.
So mabye we can get some input and fix it before its released :D
I must get 3DSM and learn how to model like that...

. One question, what do you use to do your textures? Does 3DSM do that as well?
Oh yeah, Eclipse effect FTW. And the glace one too if you can get it to work.
Posted: 27 Jan 2007, 14:09
by manored
PicassoCT wrote:It also makes great Trouble - I used the Glace effect and now i have orange glowing Mountaintops - to hell with Snow..
If anyone asks you can say thats a unknow substance in the universe...

Posted: 27 Jan 2007, 19:49
by PicassoCT
Lordo i will post the metall and Feature map before Release :)
For Texture i use PS & Shapemaps (Black&White) Textures and some Maschine generated stuff of 3dsmax..If you combine them long enough you can get anything :D
Posted: 28 Jan 2007, 16:24
by PicassoCT
Posted: 28 Jan 2007, 17:47
by hunterw
talk about running out of ram
i was running out of memory on a 16x16 due to having three layers...mosaic is like the only way to put these huge maps together.
Posted: 28 Jan 2007, 18:53
by PicassoCT
On my first Map a 16x16 i had a Version that had 70 Layers in PS before it collapsed...Bad Me.. :D
But without compiling it to JPGS i wouldnt get it through the MapConv..
Posted: 28 Jan 2007, 21:31
by PicassoCT
Here is a Preview of the Metallmap
Extractorrange is smallBrightRedDot..
For Explenation:
SmallBrigh RedDot gives 1,8 Metall
MediumBrightRedDot gives 4,5 Metall
BigRedDotintheMiddle - gives 20 Metall
SmallDarkRedDot: 3,17 Metall
BigDarkRedDot: 4,25 Metall
Above gets 5000 in Stones on the Northpole
Southpole gets 3000 in Stones ...
Thats it.. no more Metallstones, because i would mess up that for sure. There will be Palmlettos in the Djungel.. and some of Lathans Features...
Cactus in the Desert, and lots of Trees in the Moderate Climate..
Hope it is not that worse.. :D