Spring RTS Engine

No. I had the UV's upside down, and you took the texture which where right side up, and batch flipped them when you converted them to dds, so now they are both upside down.

No.

If you flip a TGA and convert to DDS, it is now "right side up" in both applications... and, unless you're using some back-ackwards UV mapping / painting method, it should look the same throughout your workflow.

At any rate, I've viewed them in-game, and they're fine other than that transport. That is borked, you're correct, and I'm still figuring out what's wrong with it. It's not the skin, it's something wrong with the mesh.

SIgh @ dds

Why do you people put yourselves through the trouble?

Because it uses half the texture memory, has more efficient throughput, and looks better because you have control over sharpness and contrast at every mip level.

Anyhow... the problem is not DDS. It's something wrong with the model, that Spring's ARB shader isn't handling right. I've tested the mesh in UVMapper Pro, it's ok there, it's ok in UpSpring, it's borked in Spring.

OMG!!! SO OBVIOUS!

Bob, you *must* use textures that are powers-of-two!

Here you go... sheesh... it was probably a typo when you made it... I feel dumb now.

powers of 2? like 512 or 256? is this only for dds?

32, 64, 128, 256, 384, 512, 1024, 2048. If it's a power of two, or two powers added to one another, like 384, then it's fine.

And no, that's not just DDS... ATi users get hosed, if you don't use power-of-two, even if it works on nVidia hardware. That includes explosion graphics and such, btw.

Here are the settings I generally use. Still working on a best version for normalmaps, these settings work but aren't perhaps ideal.

Anyhow, I checked the others, they appear to be ok. Good luck with the game.

thanks arg, and every else that help out! and those who stomped me at multiplayer.


edit: well we are adding a few features such as icons over the infantry (since they are so small) and maybe a hot key for the special abilities. A few small tweaks here and there, and the new fixed models, + must do actual homework!, so expect a fixed release next weekend? Maybe thursday night?

Argh wrote:two powers added to one another, like 384, then it's fine.

No.

I believe increments of 128 are the minimum

Edit: Sorry I meant powers of 2. Does that make more sense?

As in
128
256
512
1024
2048
4096
etc

I may be very wrong about that tho.

384 is a no go Arg. Don't worry. I originally did the textures in a larger format so I'll just make a 512 version, and 256 for smaller models.

Forboding Angel wrote:I believe increments of 128 are the minimum

Edit: Sorry I meant powers of 2. Does that make more sense?

As in
128
256
512
1024
2048
4096
etc

I may be very wrong about that tho.

Depending on the graphics card you can start at 2x2 or 8x8.

Okay I am planning for race 2 now, since the 2nd beta is about to be cleaned up for release, to fix the major issues in beta 01.

Any advice on what to do and not to do on races?

The units will have the same roles but slightly different characteristics. The units are formulated for balance in excel, so upping one stat will lower another.

I was thinking each race will have it own quirks for each class of units. Such as (this is all a maybe):
Blu (race 1) will have 1.2x regular damage on their infantry with a .84 to their range, while their vehicles may have regular damage but 1.2 to armor (hit points) and a .84 to range.
And Red (race 2) can have something totally opposite, but of similar alteration.

Careful, range does not balance linearly. Range differences can allow kiting which essentially makes the unit balance 100-0 when microed.

Range balances nicely with speed.

Gota wrote:Range balances nicely with speed.

Not linearly though.

Generally it's better to consider unit roles and how well they do at their designated role and other roles. Trying to fit them into an equation makes it seem like you're not sure what to do with your units. Think about what a unit should be able to do and what not and then make sure that's how it is. Only overlapping units even need their effectiveness determined that accurately and if you have too much overlap it's better to just cut one than to carefully balance them out.

Sides that are just blanket stat alterations are uninteresting, a side should confer a different playstyle and ability set.

a side should confer a different play style and ability set.

Good point KDR.

So is kitting a bad thing if you lower the speed and hit points? I mean how would you balance your units? You just play with them and adjust correspondingly?

What he's basically saying is that a unit can destroy any number of enemy units if it has both greater speed and greater range than said enemy units.

You should also consider the map sizes you want your game played with...
It's important for balance...

Various solutions are to not mix speed, effectiveness and range, lower the ROF or accuracy so that range isn't overwhelming vs. hordes, or give players a unit that can take the hits on the way in.

It's just basic balance stuff.

The key thing is that two sides that are clones of each other either need to be true clones, or you need to expect to have to do a lot of small tweaks. Across-the-board balance usually fails miserably.

You can use turnrate to cripple kiting fairly easily. Basically the idea being that faster units can close the distance more quickly.