-Greece BETA 1 RELEASED Need Suggestions!

(lennyballa) #21

uhm lamos :stuck_out_tongue: i dont got any missing textures, you guys probably got wrong version, and theres also an fix. Then there are no missing textures.
Why u guys cant find bugs :banghead:

(Ifurita) #22

it was just a good natured poke, and does not reflect anything i found problematic w/ your map - rather your first release w/ the missin textures and before you fixed it.

I liked the world lighting on your map and meant to ask you what values you used.

(redfella) #23

One month to start from scratch to have a working beta for a game like ET is not bad at all.

:chef:

n1

(lennyballa) #24

jep, i don’t take it to serious :stuck_out_tongue: . About the values, in my new release i use
the new q3map2 light compile function, with ambient 8 (i think, il check it as soon as im on my normal pc again, at a laptop now) . I use sd_siwasky. I compiled with samples 2, super 4, and bounce 4.
Any gameplay suggestions?? Is the map good balanced? I think i’ll give the allies a lil bit more advantage in the villa, i new buildable “wall” that is somesort of place to stand and shoot :stuck_out_tongue: , and some health and ammo cabinets in the villa. But for Axis, shall i change the script that, instead of when Axis destroy villa door the capture the village spawn, then they get the spawn as soon as they destroy the first gate? And if i do this, shall i move the gate a little back, so axis have to walk a bit further with the gate? Then instead of the gate i use a old city wall :wink: , like in oasis with the cool voice “Old city wall breached!”. (Somehow that always make me laugh :stuck_out_tongue: ) You guys like this suggestion? (Wall is goinfg to be instead of the strange building, in the U turn, after those 2 broken pillars)

(Ifurita) #25

OK, stupid question. How do you get the siwasky texture to work? When I look in the shader script, there are a bunch of textures neroblue.tga etc that are referenced but are not in the textures folder. All i get is orange and black squares

(chavo_one) #26

nero_bluelight.tga is the qer_editorimage so it’s only used by radiant. That shouldn’t keep the sky from working in game. What error message are you getting in the console? The sky definitely works.

(Ifurita) #27

This is what I get out of the console log:

LOADING… maps/siwatest.bsp

^3WARNING: R_FindImageFile could not find ‘textures/skies_sd/siwa_clouds.tga’ in shader ‘textures/skies/sd_siwa’
^3Shader textures/skies/sd_siwa has a stage with no image

The texture I used was /textures/skies_sd/sd_siwasky

I’m trying out the differnce between using the siwasky vs the wurzburg sky for my map

As for the map, I found it to be kind of odd. It felt wierd as Axis to have to attack forward to the gate then immediately loop back to hit the barricade where the allies could just go from their spawn and drop down onto where the axis start off.

Some of the textures and brush work is odd too, like where you have stairs going up, the end up at the top of a short wall/curb that is higher then the walkway it borders.

(chavo_one) #28

Are you sure that nothing in your test map is textured with skies/sd_siwa? Be aware that both skies/sd_siwa and skies_sd/sd_siwasky exist, but only skies_sd/sd_siwasky works.

(Ifurita) #29

OK, I R an idiot

posted a screenie of the two skies in my map thread

(lennyballa) #30

i use the sd_siwasky from sd_skies/skies_sd :stuck_out_tongue: . So, i should move gate forward?

(Ifurita) #31

oops, posted in wrong thread - sorry

Lenny, overall, I liked the theme and the lighting, I almost think that the axis path from spawn, thru objectives, to the barricade, should be more of a straight line than a U. The forward gate as it stands, is fine.

I think what I find odd, is that given the slope, the people at the top of the hill (allies) have such better access around the map than the people at the bottom of the hill (axis)

The command map is also very weak and needs more work. Shrink you mapcoordsmins/maxes so that the command map fills up the full area

(lennyballa) #32

Jep do that, BUT I NEED SOME GAMEPLAY SUGGESTIONS! Is the map good balanced???

(lennyballa) #33

ok thx, but i’ve done a diffrent thing: I already deleted the first gate, and added it a bit back, and make it look like a old city wall. And when this one is blown, Axis recieve village spawn so they dont have to walk so far :stuck_out_tongue:

(TombardieR) #34

Beautiful map, covert dream this one, i love it. Maybe u could have the villa boards only dynamitable instead of covops being able to blow them cause i found that even with that cool chokepoint on the edge it is still a little easy for the axis once they push thru it, i do love this map. Allies can waste loads of time spawnkilling which is a shame, but if the axis sort their heads out they can overcome this no problem anyhow. beautiful :slight_smile: :clap: :clap: :drink:

(Ifurita) #35

Took another look at your map with particular emphasis on FPS and tris drawn. Overall, the r_speeds were consistantly > 20K and in a couple of critical areas, they were >40K. For example, the back hill, by the arch, where allies would be shooting down at Axis planting at the gate, FPS ranged from 43-57 FPS (P4 2.5Ghz CPU, GeForce 4, 1 Gb RAM, 1024 x 768 res) and r_speeds ranged from 40K - 57K. This is an area that is sure to see some heavy action and once the airstrikes start going off, your map is going to crawl. I threw one airstrike, and my FPS dropped to 29. Here’s what I mean:

Suggestion, make the ridgeline to the left higher so that it blocks vis. This will also prevent the allies from lining the ridge and turning the game into a shooting gallery.

(Loffy) #36

Hi!
r_speeds >60k is high.
I have a similar problem with r_speeds in an outdoor map.

Will a ridge be enough? I mean, does it not have to “reach the sky” - the vis blocking structure - to do a complete vis blocking, resulting in a reduced drawing of polygones (the ones I see in r_speeds 2)?

If the vis blocking does not reach all the way up to the “roof”/sky, then there will be a portal up there. And the “space” (leaf node) infront of the structure (ridge) will be able to “see” the “space” behind the structure. And therefore all the polygones behind the structure will be written. And the r_speeds will remain the same. Or?

I guess the best answer to my question is: “Just try it! If it works - great!”

I want to reduce fps/r_speeds. Well, who doesn’t?
// Loffy

(MindLink) #37

You don’t have to put the ridge up to the top if you insert a horizontal hint that closes the places under the upper ledge of the ridge…
If your ridge looks like this (- ground, | ridge, points are open space) :

…
…
…|…
…|…

Insert a hint face (_) here :

…

…|…
…|…

So it defenitly sits tight on the top of the ridge (or even a little under the top). This should help.

(Loffy) #38

Aha! To create a low leaf node infront of structure, who cannot “see” the low leaf node on other side. I get the idea. To create nodes (“spaces”) that cannot “see” each other. That would do the trick. Must try it with my map!
I guess you could expand on that idea, and add tilted (45 degrees) hints:

_/
…/|…
…/…|…
./…|…

// Loffy

(Ifurita) #39

Take a look at Gerbil’s comments at the end of this thread.

http://splashdamage.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4639&sid=f2932accbc98dddb64f85246a2b24179

A higher ridge, combined with a larger horizontal hint brush at the top would help prevent axis at spawn being able to see a good portion of the top part of the map, and therefore drawing it, and the hint brush would limit what is drawn to only those parts above the hint brush.