Spring RTS Engine

A much better looking (and pretty diferent) version of TEST. The sand is again the test texture . It ended up so sand looking and cute that I think its good enough to please the guys that only play on texturized maps .

I will upload it to file universe as soon as I fix some issues left. I also would like to upload it to unknow files but I didnt got how I do it yet...

And while I fix, I also would like if someone telled me how I customize the water .

Aditional note: since it got only 1 texture it looks like a plain field on the before game minimap, like metal heck.

Kinda... blobby. You can (and should) do much better than that.

Hum... what exacly means blobby?

I know I can do better, I pretend to change the water color since I think the island would look a lot better winhout yellow water around...

YELLOW MAP IS YELLOW...

manored good try but...

This map still doesn't have a valid reason for existing. It's a sum of work I, who have never made a map to completion before, could throw together in half an hour. You haven't made a map, you've made an off center splotch on a height map bitmap and mixed it with a tiling sand texture... or is it just solid yellow? even worse...

I can understand if you were going something along the lines of "this is what I currently have but I can't figure out how to make a realistic looking texture and height map, can someone please give me some tips?" We could highlight parts in the various tutorials that are relevant to the difficulties you have or even give you specific tips. What you have made here is not a playable map, and not even to be mean, but frankly it's just stupid. There's really no point in "releasing" maps like this. It's not worth releasing unless it's a new and original gameplay mechanic that hasn't been done before, or it's a realistic attempt at graphically improving something tried and true. This is neither.

No one would play a graphically impressive off center splotch in the middle map because there is no game play relevance to it, you might as well just have a map with no land, which would be equally stupid. Why would I want a useless splotch of land in the middle of my map? Why would I want to play a sea map that has no graphical interest or redeeming dynamic? Asside from the duck phenomena which basically caught on purely because of it's comedic value, not because there was any quality to the mapping, people won't play maps that have no game play or graphical interest. Why would they? Hell, even green fields, one of the most game play unusual maps ever, looked pretty good in terms of the texture.

Actual that island isnt suposed to look like an island, but with a big bunch of sand that has be lauched there... does it do?

And yes, I would like to know how to make/find nice looking texture .

About the gameplay value... I think that some people like to play on duck style of map (very fast, comm degladiation) so I did one type i never had say before: one with lots of water. The island does not really have one clear use, use your imagination .

manored... you dont release stuff like this.. you release something after you have further developed skills.. your map doesnt look like anything, and honestly we really need to put a stop to these silly maps like duck and so forth.. Its getting old.. Most people want to play a map that is decently balanced, and on top of that LOOKS good..

This map looks like nothing.. it cant be worth playing on more than once if even..

GO TRY AGAIN.. ok.. seriously no one produces wonders on the first go, not even forb, go look at his first map if you can find it.. He will agree its utter crap.. it takes time to produce something worth releasing..

Hum... ok.

I will make a much bigger version with a diferent shaped island that will make it actual worth taking the island. And yes, It will have better textures and a more natural island too .

manored, I think you need to take some time to refine whatever concept you're going for and do it right. I mean, if the island has any value, the map can't possibly be balanced if it's randomly offset, and if the island doesn't have value whats the point? It's not eye-candy, thats for sure.

My point is you need to take a step back and really think about what you are trying to accomplish, then utilize the help of many of the experienced mappers here to acheive that.

Also, it's really hard to get people to play a map that looks bad, first impressions mean a lot.

Fanger wrote:GO TRY AGAIN.. ok.. seriously no one produces wonders on the first go, not even forb, go look at his first map if you can find it.. He will agree its utter crap.. it takes time to produce something worth releasing..

hunter did a pretty good job w/ Tangerine...

Edit: Also, for you map to have success, you HAVE to keep in mind game balance, amount of resources, etc. That's not to say your's needs to be the same as the maps that are out, but if you are going to try something new you need to have some idea of how these decisions affect gameplay. No one will want to play a map that has flawed gameplay.

Hunters probebly made quite a few maps before Tangerine. Just didn't release them cause they are...well, cause they're like this map.

It's a good start. But normally, even the best of starts are horrible. God knows my first map was craptastic.

:) My first Map had a Metallmap that was made of rendered pictures.. i really didn`t put one though into ballance, till it was to late

Zoombie wrote:Hunters probebly made quite a few maps before Tangerine. Just didn't release them cause they are...well, cause they're like this map.

It's a good start. But normally, even the best of starts are horrible. God knows my first map was craptastic.

Actually, I know him IRL and personally witnessed him learning TA mapping as he was making Tangerine. Granted, he DOES make maps for various FPS games. Anyway, I wasn't trying to derail the thread, but Tangerine just reinforces my point about planning your map. Hunter had an almost complete idea of how he wanted to map layout and play to be before he ever started making it. Of course things may change on the way, but knowing what you are trying to do before you do it will make your maps better in the end.

nuff of the god damn praise singing of Hunter.. mmmk..

Enough of the hating on hunter, as well.

My point wasn't about hunter at all, it was about taking the time to concieve your map and learn the tools.

Obviously saying no one produces anything good their first time was completely wrong, as I haven't even been around here long and have seen the opposite. No reason to discourage someone by saying they aren't going to produce anything worthwhile any time soon. You're point about it taking time to produce something worthwhile is correct, though, but that doesn't mean you have to waste it on useless maps, just focus it on making quality maps.

No need to derail this thread any further, I just felt *manored* needed a little positive encouragment and thats the example I had firsthand knowledge of.

repeating post is a repeat...

There are somethings I would like to know: What is the use of a tilemap, how it works and how I make one?

spring doesnt use 'tilesets' like you think it does at all.

It takes your texture and splits it up into lots and lots of 64x64 textures, then it gets rid of textures that look the same to save filespace and saves them. Then when it reads the map every quad has a height, a metal value, and a reference to a texture tile.

Thus the only point in using shared texture files is when you render a set of very similair looking maps.

lol, my first map was fail. Complete and utter fail lol.

Marshlands, if someone wants an idea of what NOT to do when making a map ;p

AF wrote:spring doesnt use 'tilesets' like you think it does at all.

It takes your texture and splits it up into lots and lots of 64x64 textures, then it gets rid of textures that look the same to save filespace and saves them. Then when it reads the map every quad has a height, a metal value, and a reference to a texture tile.

Thus the only point in using shared texture files is when you render a set of very similair looking maps.

So it cant be used to reduce the size of a single map?

manored wrote:

AF wrote:spring doesnt use 'tilesets' like you think it does at all.

It takes your texture and splits it up into lots and lots of 64x64 textures, then it gets rid of textures that look the same to save filespace and saves them. Then when it reads the map every quad has a height, a metal value, and a reference to a texture tile.

Thus the only point in using shared texture files is when you render a set of very similair looking maps.

Thanks but how I make one of those to reduce my maps size?