A Community discussion forum for Halo Custom Edition, Halo 2 Vista, Portal and Halo Machinima

Home  Search Register  Login Member ListRecent Posts
  
 
»Forums Index »Halo Custom Edition (Bungie/Gearbox) »Halo CE General Discussion »Requiem - Extinction on Steroids

Page 10 of 43 Go to page: · 1 · ... · 7 · 8 · 9 · [10] · 11 · 12 · 13 · ... · 43 · Prev · Next
Author Topic: Requiem - Extinction on Steroids (1498 messages, Page 10 of 43)
Moderators: Dennis

Echo77
Joined: Jul 20, 2010

Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.


Posted: Dec 17, 2010 05:10 PM    Msg. 316 of 1498       
Quote: --- Original message by: CAG Gonzo



Edited by CAG Gonzo on Dec 17, 2010 at 12:10 PM


Lovin' the conduit. Although.... it seems rather familiar....
>:D



CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Dec 18, 2010 10:02 PM    Msg. 317 of 1498       
ftfy? Eh?

Anyways, I need some ideas for Red side (with the POA and conduit). I'll take ANY suggestions and evaluate accordingly. Anything you have for the map geometry in general would be appreciated and evaluated as well. I'm running out of ideas. I only need a little bit more 'objects'/terrain subsets (like the conduit is one, the crash site another, the lakes and beam emitter yet another, etc). A few more will add more relief to the map, and break up all the hills and cliffs. Plus they can add more realism to the environment, and give me legitimate spawn points for spare vehicles for those of you that have to bail in the middle of nowhere.

So, please give me some ideas quickly so I can evaluate and integrate ASAP and get to meshing all the pieces together. I'm soo close to wrapping up the construction and moving on to mapping.


Echo77
Joined: Jul 20, 2010

Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.


Posted: Dec 18, 2010 10:23 PM    Msg. 318 of 1498       
How about some Forerunner outposts scattered about? Kinda like the ones in Halo Wars. Maybe even some of those Sentinal Factory things.


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Dec 18, 2010 10:53 PM    Msg. 319 of 1498       
Forerunner outposts are sort of already in there. I have the Infinity pipes and a covered beam emitter on blue side, plus a forest will also go in there, in addition to the secondary chasm. On the red side, I have the secondary wall and the conduit.

Some more Forerunner structures would be beneficial, but I also need to conserve poly count. The main chasm, however, will be severely reduced, as inspecting several maps (notably campaign maps from Halo 1 and 2, and Project Lumoria) has furthered my cliff modeling techniques (notably, less is more). These polys can be spent on more structures, but still.

As for the Sentinel Factory things, if you are referring to the objects seen in the Quarantine Zone, I cannot include those. One, too many polys. Two, it's too large to fit on the red side and provide enough natural terrain, given the size of the map. Three, it'd take a while to model, since if it's going to serve the purpose of providing additional terrain to be explored, it must be crashed.

I was going for something more along the lines of a structure that is neat and mysterious, yet compact and tall, kind of along the lines of a beam emitter together with its pipes. It is compact, yet tall and visible from around the area. Something like that would be nice: tall and there for a reason (to shoot beams of energy, for example), rife with places to explore and duck and cover, yet not too campable, and complete with other, independent structures (like the pipes).

It is a lot to ask for, but I'm just saying that that's what I'm aiming for. Anything close should work nicely, too.


Echo77
Joined: Jul 20, 2010

Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.


Posted: Dec 18, 2010 11:02 PM    Msg. 320 of 1498       
Quote: --- Original message by: CAG Gonzo
I was going for something more along the lines of a structure that is neat and mysterious, yet compact and... visible from around the area. Something like that would be nice: tall and there for a reason... rife with places to explore and duck and cover.





This thing? It's tall and skinny, but you could probably see it from pretty far away, especially if you had it jutting out of a cliff somewhere. You could rip part of the interior, too, giving the players a lot of places to take cover within the structure.


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Dec 18, 2010 11:19 PM    Msg. 321 of 1498       
I like that. I will see what I can do. I will probably take it from Death Island, since I don't want a full interior. I doubt I'll take all the surrounding cliffs, and will extrapolate a more complete exterior to the structure, that way the structure itself is readily apparent. I will also take the pipe and pillar structure from b30, seen on the beachhead we secure, again extrapolating a more complete exterior. Additional structures will also adorn the extrapolated exteriors to give a little more life, but I won't go all out, as I'd love to.

Thanks for the idea! This should provide enough terrain subsets to complete red side. I'm still open to more suggestions, however, and welcome anything you guys have for me.


Echo77
Joined: Jul 20, 2010

Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.


Posted: Dec 18, 2010 11:38 PM    Msg. 322 of 1498       


CMT A30 SPV2 had some cool structures. The little Covenant outposts might make for something interesting to set up near the crashed cruiser.


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 12:05 AM    Msg. 323 of 1498       
True. I do need Covie tech present. I will look into that.

As far as poly count goes, however, what is a good figure to aim for? Currently, my total scene file as nearly 120,000 faces, BUT, most of those go to duplicated objects, and faces that could be optimized (like a bunch I have in reserve in case I make hills). Plus I'll save several thousand once I optimize the chasm, so I expect to bring the total count to like 80,000...which seems high...but what's the highest I can cram in, and what is an optimal number?


sargejohnson
Joined: Apr 20, 2009

Shall we play a game?


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 01:07 AM    Msg. 324 of 1498       
Quote: --- Original message by: CAG Gonzo
True. I do need Covie tech present. I will look into that.

As far as poly count goes, however, what is a good figure to aim for?


Quote: From: Halo PC Editing Reference, Halomaps

Polygon Count Guidelines for Construction
The following lists the suggested maximum amount of polygons that should be used to construct a level of the indicated type for Halo.

This value corresponds to the construction limit for the world mesh or model for the level, the basic core geometry for the level.

These suggested maximum values are guidelines to insure proper exporting and compilation by the tools as well as reasonable polygon amounts for various other technical aspects of the game.

Multiplayer Levels:
10,000 polygons



Quote: From: Halo PC Editing Reference, Halomaps

Triangle Counts(per scene)

The following lists the suggested maximum amount of triangles that should be allowed to draw per scene.

Multiplayer Levels:
50,000 triangles

The values listed are a general guideline due to the fact that performance is affected by many factors other than triangle counts such as the number and type of materials (shaders) in the scene, sounds, dynamic lights, lens flares, and other game objects.




but I do believe there are many levels out there with WAY higher poly counts than this, so this is just a guideline.
Edited by sargejohnson on Dec 19, 2010 at 01:09 AM


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 01:58 PM    Msg. 325 of 1498       
So it says I should use about 10,000 polys to build a multiplayer level, which corresponds to ~20,000 faces, no? Assuming each poly is a rectangle and is made from two faces each. But then the next guideline says 50,000 faces is the figure to shoot for when considering how many faces will be drawn per scene. I understand the difference, but it seems that the 50,000 figure is estimated from a 10,000 poly map (and the appropriate amount of faces from that map in the current scene) and the rest of the count comes from polys from the scenery items. Well, I plan to have more detail in the map itself, and not as many scenery items to draw per scene.

Either way, that 10,000 poly count scares me. Extinction has about 26,000 faces, but I don't know how many polys that counts for. About 13,000 assuming each poly has two faces, but again, I don't know if that's the appropriate conversion. Either way, most of my polys are spent on the terrain subsets (minimap, conduit, beam emitter and pipes) and the pieces (Sentinel Wall, secondary wall, etc), so I think on average, the poly count may be close...but I really wish I knew for sure.


Skidrow925
Joined: Mar 19, 2010

"ideological sense of respect and tact of a 5yo"


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 03:38 PM    Msg. 326 of 1498       
You should put dent's in different thing's then place destroyed pelican's spirit dropships and life pods. Then those would make great hiding places. Also I could try and whip up a quick structure. Better yet use the big structure from portent. Maybe make it like part of the firing mech?


SlappyThePirate
Joined: Aug 24, 2009

You are irritating, I'll release nothing


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 05:16 PM    Msg. 327 of 1498       
What I do for damage crater is:
Make a geosphere with about 4 segs
Apply a noise modifier to it so it's nice and noisy
Stick it half-into a structure
Run a subtraction boolean on the structure and sphere, so the sphere makes a noisy hole in the bsp.


PRPatxi
Joined: Oct 30, 2010

Dennis, free me from this suffering


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 05:39 PM    Msg. 328 of 1498       
Quote: --- Original message by: SlappyThePirate
What I do for damage crater is:
Make a geosphere with about 4 segs
Apply a noise modifier to it so it's nice and noisy
Stick it half-into a structure
Run a subtraction boolean on the structure and sphere, so the sphere makes a noisy hole in the bsp.


What do you guys use to make your awesomeness? Is it Maya or 3ds Max?


Skidrow925
Joined: Mar 19, 2010

"ideological sense of respect and tact of a 5yo"


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 05:48 PM    Msg. 329 of 1498       
Quote: --- Original message by: PRPatxi
Quote: --- Original message by: SlappyThePirate
What I do for damage crater is:
Make a geosphere with about 4 segs
Apply a noise modifier to it so it's nice and noisy
Stick it half-into a structure
Run a subtraction boolean on the structure and sphere, so the sphere makes a noisy hole in the bsp.


What do you guys use to make your awesomeness? Is it Maya or 3ds Max?
3ds MAX FTW.

Also make the structure thingie look like this:

Well... not exactly like that but I hope you get the idea.


sierra117
Joined: Jan 10, 2008

If sex is good exercise, why are there fat sluts?


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 06:05 PM    Msg. 330 of 1498       
for the entire scene, i would recommend ~50,000 as the tutorial says.. But ~10,000 faces to be rendered in each portal. Since your map is relatively large, and there would be more than 10,000 faces been drawn at a time, Id recommend a "foggy" sky or something along those lines.
Otherwise you'll get clipping when ingame, like Hugeass & Coldsnap do. (Where its a large massive white piece/sky been drawn where a face(s) would be. Until you are at a certain angle which is unpredictable [but usually up close]; then the face would be drawn. At the cost of others being replaced with the "sky effect")


Skidrow925
Joined: Mar 19, 2010

"ideological sense of respect and tact of a 5yo"


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 06:23 PM    Msg. 331 of 1498       
Quote: --- Original message by: sierra117
for the entire scene, i would recommend ~50,000 as the tutorial says.. But ~10,000 faces to be rendered in each portal. Since your map is relatively large, and there would be more than 10,000 faces been drawn at a time, Id recommend a "foggy" sky or something along those lines.
Otherwise you'll get clipping when ingame, like Hugeass & Coldsnap do. (Where its a large massive white piece/sky been drawn where a face(s) would be. Until you are at a certain angle which is unpredictable [but usually up close]; then the face would be drawn. At the cost of others being replaced with the "sky effect")


Clipping Distance Changer.


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 06:50 PM    Msg. 332 of 1498       
I use gmax.

I'm thinking about including the distance changer either with my map, or include a reference to it so people can get it.

I know what you mean by the 'Sky Effect'. I was thinking foggy, too, mostly so the edges of the map would be less apparent. It would also fit nicely with the theme of the map.

The picture of the structure you posted: it is a nice structure, but Forerunner was not the first thing that popped in my mind when I saw it. I've never believed that circular and round structures were of a very Forerunner origin; I prefer angular designs, mostly 45 degrees. Basically blocky shapes with chamfered edges (that's how I make them anyways; start with the basic, block shape that matches the profile of the design, then chamfer the corners. Bam). So perhaps something close to your design would work, but if it has five of those struts, then you should either add 1 or 2 more, or take 1 or 2 away. I don't think the Forerunners do anything in 5's). But I must also point out that your structure appears to use good modeling techniques and construction.

I could make a crater fine, but why would I put one in? What created it? An explosion, or a collision? I try to give every shape and design a reason for existing as it is and where it is in the map. It all adds up to a better experience, in my opinion.

By the way, I ran a test optimizer on my map; it cut the polys down by 10,000 to about 18,000 for the main map. I'm going to finish with the map design, then optimize, then mesh, then map. Also, I'll be revisiting the minimap with my new, furthered techniques, and I discovered that each side of the minimap, which consists of one of the camps and one bridge has nearly 30,000 faces...so, I will be doing a lot more optimization there, including a full remodel of the bridge, which I never liked anyway.


Skidrow925
Joined: Mar 19, 2010

"ideological sense of respect and tact of a 5yo"


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 06:57 PM    Msg. 333 of 1498       
Well it may be hard to see in that render but I did put 6 struts. And that actually isn't that good of a model. Just a bunch of extrudes and bridges. Also I just meant to give you a general idea for a structure.

Also if you think that took good modeling techniques... lol.

And for the craters Just put like crashed pelican dropships escape pods and maybe spirit dropships. Don't add those in GMax though. Those are for sapien. Also I would be glad to do environmental work for you (trees, rocks, etc.) if you want me to. Don't have much else to do ATM anyway. lol.


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 08:00 PM    Msg. 334 of 1498       
Noted. I believe the techniques you used are good construction techniques compared to ulterior methods out there, and the structure actually looks complex (somewhat) instead of a cheesy block, like most of the custom models on this site.

I don't think craters are the deformation of choice to use with crashed vehicles, unless said vehicles literally dropped from the sky in some sort of cataclysmic event that completely killed all horizontal motion and increased the vertical motion...but since most vehicles crash with a horizontal vector, crash sites are needed, aka skidding, elongated trench. But that could also be modeled by the same technique described above.

Which reminds me, the POA that I have...I'd like to Boolean that into the map to conserve poly count (unless polys concealed by other polys aren't actually contributing to the scene poly count), but am looking for a way to Boolean the two together so that the hidden polys are moved, like the ground under the POA, and the POA under the ground. Applying the Boolean to the map and picking the POA as Operand B doesn't work at all unless I choose Union. Even then, it only creates the appropriate intersections, but doesn't do away with the extra polys. I thought choosing the POA as the main Operand and the map as the second might correct this, but it turned the POA into some mess of polys, as if it target welded a bunch of vertices together, reducing the POA into an undiscernable mess of triangles.


Higuy
Joined: Mar 6, 2007

@lucasgovatos


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 08:20 PM    Msg. 335 of 1498       
I doubt the model is error free. Just by looking at it without wireframe I know almost all the objects aren't attached together. You need to cut around were objects go and weld the vertices together. Otherwise, don't count on getting this ingame.


SlappyThePirate
Joined: Aug 24, 2009

You are irritating, I'll release nothing


Posted: Dec 19, 2010 10:22 PM    Msg. 336 of 1498       
Of course, because so far the bsp is several objects... for gmax, I suggest using boolean to get an accurate cut.


darkassassin14
Joined: Jul 23, 2007

El. Psy. Congroo.


Posted: Dec 22, 2010 11:36 AM    Msg. 337 of 1498       
omg this looks even better than the last time i looked at this. and about the pelican. make the hull "metal (thick)" instead of hunter shield. i'm pretty sure humans didn't have reflective metal to build with. as for the conduit. bury all but the pipe looking things and a small section of the floor. and the two structures should be buried, one partially and the other heavily. make the lake a little shallower than a pelican. and for all vehicle physics make the water friction high enough to slow them down to half speed. for the POA just sink it a little into the ground and delete the extra polies from the bottom then mesh it with the ground. should save a few polies.


DA_Ender
Joined: Oct 22, 2010

()R h GD


Posted: Dec 22, 2010 08:04 PM    Msg. 338 of 1498       
Map is really taking shape man looking good.

Just please for the love of god make sure you accurately terrain and exact portal it.
Otherwise its going to lag like a beast as soon as you populate everything.

Keep up the good work and good luck with the inevitable tool errors that are the joy of halo editing.

Merry Christmas


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Jan 9, 2011 07:23 PM    Msg. 339 of 1498       
@Higuy: no, none of the various components are attached. Yet. This is because I prefer to model each one to near-perfection, then boolean-ate them, them tidy up. Obviously, some polys here and there will have to suffer through yet another remapping, but other than that, it should be a piece of cake. Unless specified otherwise, for now just assume that each component is a separate entity in the scene.

@darkassassin14: thanks for the compliment. The material property explains why it kicks so much arse in extinction. It's tempting to just leave it be, because even though it's tricky to down, it does have its vulnerabilities. Plasma weaponry and snipers are its main foes.

As for your suggestions regarding the conduit: those pipe looking things are energy ribbons, not actual pipes. The thicker, shorter pipe things are solid objects that sort of amplify the energy, sort of like transformers and other tech on electrical cables. But I kind of like your idea on covering the floor with dirt. It's tempting, but it would mean I'd need more polys to create a varied dirt surface, even if it would probably make more sense to cover it up in dirt. I'll see what I can do. Those two structures will probably be leaving that area.

For the POA, it's all messed up. When I apply a Boolean to it, it collapses into some chaotic mess...I'll try reimporting, but I like my POA, because it's already warped and deformed. If all else fails, I'll just cut the POA just below the surface, and seal off the open edges. The POA will still be a separate object, but will have a lot less faces.

@Ender: oh joy. Tool errors...I hate them. Thanks though. I'm looking forward to completing it. I have been going through great pains to make the terrain legit and awesome to play on/around (oh noes! I ended a clause in a preposition. Grammar Nazis, watch out), but at the same time, I walk a fine line between awesome terrains and optimized meshes. Nevertheless, I am pleased with the results thus far, which brings me to this...

PICTURES!one!!!11+eleven!

All pictures are about my latest efforts in rebuilding the minimap. I discovered one day that my face count in my master scene was 120,000...unacceptable. I then found out that each half of the minimap had a whopping 30,000 faces! Wretched, I thought. Most of them were in the bridge, which I was never quite pleased with. So I did away with the awful bridge, then proceeded to redefine the concept for the minimap. I am most pleased with the results.

Link to the album:

http://img600.imageshack.us/gal.php?g=minimaprebuild1.png

Picture 1:


You can see that I did away with the surrounding wall and terrain outside of said wall, replaced with hugging cliffs and hills. The sides have been changed by adding in a portion of the BSP from a30, in the light bridge room. I modified said portion with a sort of tuning fork design, inspired from Ascension. I also changed the mapping to reflect exposure to exterior elements. Those portions serve as a sort of containing barrier against the natural terrain. I also feel they add a nice vertical element to the area. Previously, the support structure in the center sported the only vertical element.

In other news, the terrain has clearly overflowed its barriers, and seeped onto the floor of the Forerunner camp. The Battle Creek bases have been moved forward, and the majority of the Forerunner objects have been removed. Some will be added back in to break up the monotony of the area, but overall, the current poly count stands at just over 7,000, a drastic reduction from 30,000.

One last thing: the bridge has not been finished. Even so, I don't think it would bring the count to 10,000 or higher, which means that between the two halves, I will have saved somewhere around 40,000 faces. I think this is a win of legendary sorts.

Picture 2:



An alternate view of the camp. Here you can see the dirt spillage. It's nothing too awesome. Just enough to break the flatness up, and give me an excuse to toss in some rocks instead of crates to provide cover for the players.

Picture 3:



Here you can see the tuning fork design. It's nothing too fancy as I sought to keep the poly count low. This view kind of makes the tuning forks look bent/uneven, but they really aren't. Each portion from a30 is in the same position (aside from being mirrored and on the other side of the minimap, as in same YZ coordinates, but different X). So...yeah.

Alright, let me know what I should do to the bridge. I need to add in some cover for the players, but I want it to look like it belongs on a Forerunner bridge, and I still need enough clearance to get a Scorpion and Wraith through.

(NOTE: I forgot to turn on texture correction, so don't worry about the mapping. It's not final anyway)


Skidrow925
Joined: Mar 19, 2010

"ideological sense of respect and tact of a 5yo"


Posted: Jan 9, 2011 08:32 PM    Msg. 340 of 1498       
To prevent insane booleans attach all objects that aren't touching each other into 1 and mesh them with the main part. That would normally prevent that. Also do as few booleans as possible. Using that technique should help.


SlappyThePirate
Joined: Aug 24, 2009

You are irritating, I'll release nothing


Posted: Jan 9, 2011 08:54 PM    Msg. 341 of 1498       
No, I find that it is better to boolean a complex object with a simple object, not a two complex objects.
Some real, gmax boolean tips:
Usually you want to make sure the bsp is sealed before you boolean. Might not make a difference if the mesh is to complex in an area anyway, but try to make the operands sealed objects.
Sometimes you'll want to set the "Copy" option instead of the "Move" option. This will preserve operand B. Do this when you're making several of the same boolean shape, like a barrier or a doorway, to preserver operand B as a template.


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Jan 9, 2011 09:40 PM    Msg. 342 of 1498       
I appreciate the help, but my boolean question concerned why the modifier turned my POA into some chaotic frenzy of a mesh. I know how to boolean my remaining components, and while sealing them may help, I do not have that option in this case; the objects I would be boolean-ating (the walls to the BSP) are part of the seal. Once the BSP and walls are one, I will seal the map off with sky geometry.

However, while we're on the subject, I wish there was a way for me to mesh, say, a somewhat complex wall into a hill, so that some of the hill covered the wall, and some of the wall 'held up' the hill, BUT that the modifier would also remove the extra polys that would be unseen so I wouldn't have to go hunting them down and delete them myself. Currently, I know how to do that in reverse, where it deletes all polys except those involved in the intersection, but I want it to delete the ones involved in the intersection, and preserve the rest.


DA_Ender
Joined: Oct 22, 2010

()R h GD


Posted: Jan 10, 2011 03:23 AM    Msg. 343 of 1498       
Quote: --- Original message by: Julian
From a gameplay perspective Gonzo, I don't think anyone's going to pay attention to that substation if the map is that big. They'll all be zooming about in jets, so my suggestion would be either to limit the amount of flying vehicles or make the playable aread (the canyon) smaller.

Hope this helps.


I hate to say it but he's 100% correct. Players will not go there unless they are forced, or there is some sort of major advantage to be had :(. You can use techniques to try and coax them into going there when populating but still, large maps need an entirely shifted perspective on level design than regular sized multiplayer maps.


Echo77
Joined: Jul 20, 2010

Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.


Posted: Jan 10, 2011 08:45 AM    Msg. 344 of 1498       
Quote: --- Original message by: DA_Ender
I hate to say it but he's 100% correct. Players will not go there unless they are forced, or there is some sort of major advantage to be had :(. You can use techniques to try and coax them into going there when populating but still, large maps need an entirely shifted perspective on level design than regular sized multiplayer maps.


Maybe put a teleporter grid down there. Lots of sencer nodes scattered around the substation that let you jump to several key areas of the map. People would be clawing over each other for a chance to control something like that, methinks.


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Jan 10, 2011 09:48 AM    Msg. 345 of 1498       
Ah ha, see I already thought of this. In CTF and Slayer games, yes, the minimap will likely be overlooked, but I suspect that some smart players will take advantage of this and set up camp there. It does afford lots of cover and ammo. However, the minimap's main purpose for inclusion in my map is to offer an arena in which to play Oddball, King of the Hill, and possibly Race.

By doing it this way, the oddball can be easily contained and subsequently countered (instead of someone snatching it and hiding in a jet, where catching him takes two minutes itself), players can stand a chance of getting to the hills before they move, and if I put race in there, then players can complete laps in a fair time. The thing is, however, that all players will start in the minimap and will have NO initial access to any kind of airborne vehicle. In order to get one, they'd have to leave the minimap and travel to the nearest one. And even so, I plan on limiting the amount of airborne vehicles in those gametypes.

I was also considering making individual slayer types start there, if possible, so that finding people would be easy, but players could still leave the minimap to acquire superior firepower.

By default, in all gametypes, there will be no airborne vehicle spawns in the area. Also, some of the more powerful weapons will not spawn in CTF and Slayer games, so that campers do not have access to those superior weapons and wreak too much havoc on the map.

My emphasis will also be placed on superior ground tactics and combat from within teams, with the idea that they should put their good pilots in the few aircraft available to provide CLOSE air support, not 'ima go heer and ovr heer n shootz sum bad guyz w/mah awsum Pelicn lulz rofl lmao lol stfu n00b' heroics. Of course I don't think I can actually enforce that, and have no plans to do so. I will merely limit the number of aircraft available so players will (hopefully) act a little smarter with them.

These are all good points, but if you guys could please also leave something about the current state of the minimap's design with your comments, that'd be great. I want to get this half done so I can mirror it and change it up a bit for the other side, then be done with the minimap once and for all.

EDIT: Echo77, I like the idea of a teleporter hub. My very, very, very, VERY initial design for the grand awesome epic map I wanted to create called for an off-key hub that would be somewhat difficult to get to, but vital to traffic. I will see what I can do here, though currently, I only have the four teleporters that come with the Battle Creek bases. Two are available for wide-spread use, the others lead to each other, as they did in Battle Creek.
Edited by CAG Gonzo on Jan 10, 2011 at 09:50 AM


Echo77
Joined: Jul 20, 2010

Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.


Posted: Jan 10, 2011 10:57 AM    Msg. 346 of 1498       
Quote: --- Original message by: CAG Gonzo
I like the idea of a teleporter hub. My very, very, very, VERY initial design for the grand awesome epic map I wanted to create called for an off-key hub that would be somewhat difficult to get to, but vital to traffic. I will see what I can do here, though currently, I only have the four teleporters that come with the Battle Creek bases. Two are available for wide-spread use, the others lead to each other, as they did in Battle Creek.
Edited by CAG Gonzo on Jan 10, 2011 at 09:50 AM


Some sort of central structure, perhaps, fitted with several teleporter sockets to warp teammates wherever you need them most. Maybe a few senders for ground vehicles, too, seeing as how they had a bit of trouble getting around in Extinction.


Skidrow925
Joined: Mar 19, 2010

"ideological sense of respect and tact of a 5yo"


Posted: Jan 10, 2011 12:49 PM    Msg. 347 of 1498       
As I have said before I would be (very very) happy to pop the map. I know several ways to make people go where you want them.

Such as nice cover and a few teles (like a telehub) and some long range semi-high power weaps that are only very useful in a couple of spots. Or for a tele hub just make a cave like place you can only get to via teleporters and is small enough to prevent rocking n00bing.


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Jan 15, 2011 06:05 PM    Msg. 348 of 1498       
A place only accessible via teleporters seems unbalanced. Seems like the rungs in Damnation near the active camo, except without any way out except via the teleporter. Then you could rain hell on players with little fear of retaliation as long as you keep watch on the teleporter. I don't like that idea. Perhaps I can hide a teleporter that takes you to an easter egg, but that's about it. Still, I do like a hub, and Ender said he'd like to script for me (which I plan to take full advantage of) so perhaps he can get the vehicle teleporters to work for all small ground vehicles.

I may need help in populating, I may not. I can't say. It may be that I need your help for more advanced Sapien work. I've already thought long and hard about cover, ESPECIALLY in the minimap. I've spent hours just trying to figure out the logistics, such as considering how much ground a sniper could monitor in a particular spot, how far a shot (in particular, a rocket) can travel before running into some scenery, etc, blah blah blah. A lot of effort has gone into making something open enough to provide for fun (ish) vehicle combat while still providing enough cover to give foot soldiers a shot at traveling/fighting.


Skidrow925
Joined: Mar 19, 2010

"ideological sense of respect and tact of a 5yo"


Posted: Jan 15, 2011 06:10 PM    Msg. 349 of 1498       
Quote: --- Original message by: CAG Gonzo
A place only accessible via teleporters seems unbalanced. Seems like the rungs in Damnation near the active camo, except without any way out except via the teleporter. Then you could rain hell on players with little fear of retaliation as long as you keep watch on the teleporter. I don't like that idea. Perhaps I can hide a teleporter that takes you to an easter egg, but that's about it. Still, I do like a hub, and Ender said he'd like to script for me (which I plan to take full advantage of) so perhaps he can get the vehicle teleporters to work for all small ground vehicles.

I may need help in populating, I may not. I can't say. It may be that I need your help for more advanced Sapien work. I've already thought long and hard about cover, ESPECIALLY in the minimap. I've spent hours just trying to figure out the logistics, such as considering how much ground a sniper could monitor in a particular spot, how far a shot (in particular, a rocket) can travel before running into some scenery, etc, blah blah blah. A lot of effort has gone into making something open enough to provide for fun (ish) vehicle combat while still providing enough cover to give foot soldiers a shot at traveling/fighting.


Well for a tele hub area you could have every teleporter go 2 ways. Then they would have to watch every single teleporter.


CAG Gonzo
Joined: Apr 2, 2009

Retreat? Hell! We just got here!


Posted: Feb 1, 2011 10:49 AM    Msg. 350 of 1498       
Noted.

More pictures. Please comment on them. If there are no suggestions for change, the minimap will be virtually done. I just have to weld the bridges together, and remap a few polys, and BAM! The minimap will be completely done. For the record, the new minimap not only looks tenfold better, but it also cut the poly count by over 30,000 faces! For the fun of it, here are the two versions:

Album:
http://img69.imageshack.us/g/minimapbluetop.png/

Old:


Yucky and bland; high-poly, yet low detail, and too much flatness.

New:


New, sexy, almost fully mapped (and it was a pain to map the details), with a new, more Forerunner-esque bridge layout inspired by b40. The Battle Creek bases are still there, but have been moved closer to the bridge support structure. The majority of extraneous objects have been removed, replaced by a portion of the lightbridge room from a30. Hills and cliffs spill over the Forerunner tech, breaking up the flatness, adding cover, and giving some life and story to the old Forerunner setup. It also means I can put trees and rocks in without it looking weird.

Closeups:

Top of blue side. Note the spillage and shapes of said spillage. IGNORE the fact that the floor mapping is off. This happened when I mirrored red side and changed it to reflect a semi-unique side. Remapping will occur when I weld the sides together.


Perspective blue side. Note that the bridge now angles downward about 1/4 in; this was done to provide some cover more than anything. A sniper/rocket launcher perched (but undoubtedly camped, because too many people are noobs) at the peak of said incline could probably handle any incoming unit with enough ammo, but such a camping spot is still vulnerable to snipers elsewhere. But we'll see how the beta testing goes.

I also added in some lights and two decals (to each side), colored according to their respective side. Here, you can see a large blue decal on the a30 component (there is one on the other side as well). Other than that, it's a pretty good layout, with what I think is a good blend between artificial tech and natural elements.


Red top. Nothing else to note, other than the change in shape and design to add uniqueness to this side. Obviously, the circled objects (Hog and Wraith) reflect the scale of the design.


Red perspective. Same as blue, I put in large decals on the a30 components, in addition to red lights.


A far perspective view, showing the full span of the minimap. All in all, it has less than 30,000 polys (26,000 I think) and is orders of magnitude better than the old design.

And finally, a closeup of the center of the bridge:


The center sports two structures that tie into the energy ropes that support the bridge. You may notice some sort of grating in the center of said structure. Underneath that is more of the energy. It runs the length of the structure (down and into the bridge, and up through the top interior of the structure, than down into the bridge). Two thicker structures adorn the exact center of the bridge, on the edge. These structures are designed to prevent someone from firing a rocket or sniper straight across the whole bridge.

Additional scenery items will decorate the minimap to add cover, but this is the base design right here. Tell me what you like/don't like so I can finish this bad boy up and move back to the main map.

 
Page 10 of 43 Go to page: · 1 · ... · 7 · 8 · 9 · [10] · 11 · 12 · 13 · ... · 43 · Prev · Next

 
Previous Older Thread    Next newer Thread







Time: Thu November 21, 2019 2:05 AM 609 ms.
A Halo Maps Website