Caldera- New map

[mother]

Concept is a larger version of Ashpen(8x8). This is 12x12. Shoulda been taller, owell, .




Uploaded to FU (look in latest file's, had to upload to TA section... Something is rank in the state of TA:Spring uploads @FU)

Enjoy.

[mother]

http://www.fileuniverse.com/?p=showitem&ID=1326 btw

[Warlord Zsinj]

With no offense intended with any criticism:
It doesn't really look like a volcano, the colours are a little odd; and I think the transition between each step of colour is a little abrupt. Perhaps this is why it looks a little odd.

Finally, can I suggest making the actual mouth of the volcano; perhaps a little bit red and impressive.

[hrmph]

A caldera is a collapsed volcano. Imagine one that has exploded and sunken into the middle area. I think maybe the water inside the crater would look cool with a red tinge to it.
Aside from that, this map rox! Great playability, and makes for some interesting games.

[mother]

With no offense intended with any criticism:
It doesn't really look like a volcano, the colours are a little odd; and I think the transition between each step of colour is a little abrupt. Perhaps this is why it looks a little odd.

Finally, can I suggest making the actual mouth of the volcano; perhaps a little bit red and impressive.

Well (thanks hrmph) as was already pointed out this isn't a 'Lava Spewing Volcano' its a Caldera (hence the name).

To explain the complaints inre the texture transitions... Aren't you on a 56k modem? I would have thought you appreciated 1mb vs 15mb downloads And the abrupt color changes are to make clear distinctions between terrain types.

The overall look of the caldera though is pretty accurate. FWIW it's a pumice caldera. Here are a few googled up snaps of the real stuff...













And the color chosen for the water was meant to reflect the trapped volcanic gasses (primarily sulfer).
ie






Hope that helps to clear it up for ya!

[AF]

Very much so, however my unstable net connection is groaning under the strain of the largest picture having so many others there.

[IMSabbel]

Well, yes. But non of your pics looks even remotely like your map.

Sorry, but the map looks like it has no texture at all, just 3 plain blobs of different shades of brown.

[mother]

Well, yes. But non of your pics looks even remotely like your map.

Sorry, but the map looks like it has no texture at all, just 3 plain blobs of different shades of brown.

LOL

I guess we'll just agree to disagree. So you've actually downloaded and played the map then?

Hmm. Now Im tempted to use fancy textures and low compression and give you all a 50mb map with ambiguous terrain boundries, but damn it will look more like the pictures.

I honestly cannot win! If I make a good looking map, people complain that it really doesnt matter how it looks, it needs uber gameplay, and its too big to download... If I make a map aiming for gameplay and small size, people (at least I've seen you play IMS...) attack me because they think it doesn't look pretty enough. Can I point out how many much *uglier* maps have been released that neither of you bitched about?

edit...
Sorry... Just gets a bit frustrating to spend 10's of hours on something only to have people take cheap shots. Constructive, well based criticism is one thing- but this ain't it.
.../edit

[mother]

Very much so, however my unstable net connection is groaning under the strain of the largest picture having so many others there.

Sorry about that Atlantai, guess I was trying to make a point there

[AF]

No probs, but try to use thumbnails in future

[IMSabbel]

@mother:

The problem is, it does look like somebody drew it in coreldraw in 8 minutes, so its hard to appreciate that you spend that much time.. It may only be 1MB, but that minimap (and the screenshot) is so insanly ugly that i wont even considere downloading that much for it.

_maybe_ the minimap is just decieving, but especially the inner area looks exactly like just a linear gradient between two splines. That makes it look even more cheap and artificicial than the not existing blending between the color areas.

[raikitsune]

great map mate me and a freind just played a match of WD on it and decided the objective was to take the centre of the "pit" was good fun keep up the good work.

[mother]

@mother:

The problem is, it does look like somebody drew it in coreldraw in 8 minutes, so its hard to appreciate that you spend that much time.. It may only be 1MB, but that minimap (and the screenshot) is so insanly ugly that i wont even considere downloading that much for it.

_maybe_ the minimap is just decieving, but especially the inner area looks exactly like just a linear gradient between two splines. That makes it look even more cheap and artificicial than the not existing blending between the color areas.

Woohoo!!! Coreldraw!! I rated a less insulting insult then others! Not 'mspaint' this time!

Dude, step up and show us what you've done. I can't recall anything artistic or mildly creative. BTW nothing 6144x6144 with multiple RGBA channels happens in 8 minutes ok?

I expect you to post a better looking map within the next hour. Started from scratch... Thats what nearly 8x as much time as you say you need.

[cain]

why didn't just use the caldera-0722-1024.jpg
as texture

(note: map ignorant here)

[zwzsg]

Frankly, after seeing that, I don't want to download and try that map. Looks really too ugly.

Map size isn't proportionnal to texture quality. You can make awful looking map that takes 50Mb, and good looking maps that stay under a MB. The key is to use 32x32 tiles when making your texture bmp, so it matches Spring tiling system.

[mother]

why didn't just use the caldera-0722-1024.jpg
as texture

(note: map ignorant here)

It can be exceedingly challenging to create a heightmap to match a real aerial shot. Beyond that there are some practical issues:
1)green is a bad color for maps right now (due to the way the current map compiling program works)
2)The image is like 1/36 the size needed, and you would be surprised just how messy stuff can get once blown up that much
3)I needed flat areas for bases, and it would be problamatic to expand the boundries of the photograph without looking REALLY craptacular. It can be done, just by people much mroe adept at digital artwork then I.


oooh and
4)Its copywrited

[cain]

tanks for explanations!

I couldn't think that a map could be SO large.

[mother]

Frankly, after seeing that, I don't want to download and try that map. Looks really too ugly.

Map size isn't proportionnal to texture quality. You can make awful looking map that takes 50Mb, and good looking maps that stay under a MB. The key is to use 32x32 tiles when making your texture bmp, so it matches Spring tiling system.

Look z, thats totally uncalled for.

Have you seen the maps you make?
We certainly don't play them because the minimap looks nice, or frankly they're good looking. You are the last person to be speaking out about using single textures or how ugly a screenie is.

I didn't ask you to download and try it, and FYI of course you can make huge ugly maps, but there is a limit to how small they can be. This map was a .smf larger than 2mb uncompressed. Thats not getting much smaller regardless of the size of the smt. I download just about every map I come across, cuz I figure if someone made the thing I can at least take a look at it. God get some principles man.
Hmm... Is it this one, or maybe that one that makes you think you should be commenting? Those are your original maps for spring, yeah? Oh wait no no redhaven is a bad port of greenhaven, isn't it? And CPIA is a port as well... Hmm...

So now we have Azure Rampart. Which is supposed to be geometric, but is asymmetrical... And is made up of 1 _one_ _single_ 'mud' texture. Frankly STFU. [Someone tell me the French equivalent for that?] Really, tell me how this works now... Please.

Im honestly disappointed in you z. For gods sakes man don't lash out at people for things you're far more guilty of.

[aGorm]

Map size isn't proportionnal to texture quality. You can make awful looking map that takes 50Mb, and good looking maps that stay under a MB...

Just to back him up, look at Desert Dunes...

1 Meg, and yet it looks realy nice. This is due to carfull use of textures.

using bloks of colour just means the computer makes more tiles for the transitions between one colour and the next. It would not save that much space.

aGorm

[mother]

Map size isn't proportionnal to texture quality. You can make awful looking map that takes 50Mb, and good looking maps that stay under a MB...

Just to back him up, look at Desert Dunes...

1 Meg, and yet it looks realy nice. This is due to carfull use of textures.

using bloks of colour just means the computer makes more tiles for the transitions between one colour and the next. It would not save that much space.

aGorm

Right. And DD is also also very monotonus, right? I am using 2 textures (1 variant of another) and shading on Caldera. Not too far off what you did on DD. This is totally irrelevant, is it not?
edit...
I just went and poked at 'dunes for a bit. I don't know what you started with, but all the map is now is a slightly mottled orange texture that looks to have the shadows artificially rendered on it. It looks fine, but its completely and totally my point. You could nearly have used a solid orange texture and gotten the same results with shadows turned on. I have no problem with this!

But to claim that you can compare that to something with multiple distinct textures, that is a stretch.

I know z hasn't, but have you actually played the map? It isn't distractingly unnattractive or anything in game (IMHO). If I could have kept the 950 height, I would even go so far to say it was pretty friggin good looking. You both (as well as all mappers) know that a)minimaps are very poor renditions of what the map looks like, and b)graphics settings make a huge difference.

I was tired, needed some shots to show the map after having done a test game.... I just loaded air-combat and took a screenie. With all my settings turned down (host-mode, so I call it).

And frankly none of this excuses the response to 'Hey I just uploaded a new map' with what amounts to 'It sucks, its fugly, even tho I didnt actually look at it, you idiot'.

It's not like I posted 'LOOK TEH BEST MAP EVAH' or something. My map is certainly every bit as good looking as any of z's work-to-date. (we're talking about maps here...)

Don't forget you and I use totally different techniques to make our maps. Mine are all hand made, I don't render the textures.

..edit