way of creating maps without compiling program(mapconv)

[enetheru]

Is there a way of creating maps without any conversion programs?(mapconv or otherwise)

I'm working on a wiki article and would like to know if its completely necessary cheers :)

[koshi]

http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.ph ... 98#p310698

[enetheru]

yep, saw that thanks

And you are excellently helpful on these forums :)

[Kloot]

SM2 ('SMF') maps always need to be converted to binary form for the engine to recognize them, wether by manually running mapconv or by an editor tool like SME.

SM3 maps do not.

[SeanHeron]

There is even a (in my opinion) pretty niffty Map editor for SM3 lying around (though there's plenty of functionality it could still do with):
http://springrts.com/wiki/Maps:Map_Designer

To be honest, when I saw you post about how you'd fought with mapconv (I've been throught that - unsucessfully - as well), I had to think of SM3 :D. There's a thread knocking about somewhere describing the format (it's simple enough), I'll link to it when I've found it.

Edit: this is not what I meant, but the release thead for said editor. It seems he got some negative feedback at the end (which I can't understand).

Edit2: Still no thread, but this wiki page seems to have most of the info: http://springrts.com/wiki/SM3_Map_Format

[Forboding Angel]

I would suggest reading this: http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=3941

this

http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=20363

and this

http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=15390

Before adding yet another mapping article to the wiki.

[enetheru]

Thanks for the resources guys. reading them now :)

[Beherith]

May I add that SM3 is broken. Very broken.
SSMF (Specular SM2) is 100x better than sm3 ever could have been, and is faster anyway.

[SeanHeron]

Beherith: Ok, going way off topic here, but though I've only dabbled with maps a little, I'd like to ask for clarification on one point, and somewhat refute you on another.

• - SM3 Broken: I know shadows are broken - I realise that is a major issue. Anything beyond that broken ?
  - SSMF better than SM3 (even could be): I'm happy to fully agree with you on the potential end products, ie the maps that are made. However, with regard to the process itself, I'm afraid (S)SMF has an enourmous entry hurdle (I'll admit my experience may be skewed - I've never got SME to run for me - which reminds me, I have a new Comp, should try giveing it a spin again). Also, at least to me, it seems pretty balls to make iteration like changes to the map (whereas in SM3 - edit file, run Spring).

Basiclly I would argue both have pro's and con's. I'd be happy to put off more involved discussion till I've actually made a game ready SM3 map (and tried out SME) though.

[Beherith]

I think ive posted this often before, but here are my issues with sm3:
Fixed level of detail per texture phase
No blend+overlay filter
No proper overlay
Broken shadows
Broken reflections
Broken water appearence
Bad performance - especially above 3 texture phases and bump mapping.
No ability to paint on texture- thus only procedural texturing, difficult to draw metal patches, geo spots, roads etc.
No free toolset (though the basic edition of world machine would still be good for it - theres nothing it cant do, but requires a procedural mindset)

What your basically doing in SSMF, is making and smf map, and overlaying an sm3 detail map.