IrishTaxIDriver
L6: Sharp Member
- Sep 27, 2008
- 271
- 150
You really gotta open that point up. If you're gonna make it kind of enclosed, go with 384x384 or larger. Even something like 384x512 would be preferable.
Trestle
- Thread starter The Political Gamer
- Start date
- Apr 19, 2009
- 4,460
- 1,724
Old final!
New final!
Also a few improvements to 2nd.
New final!
Also a few improvements to 2nd.
Your areas need to be less like squares. Also, lose that badlands spire ASAP. It's worse than the sawmill waterfall in terms of "holy shit, it's that prop from that map".
Your points would be a lot more interesting if you figured out what sort of resource they are based on. If you figure this out before you make them/your map then you can base your layout of the surrounding area on this knowledge too. Having them on "barely raised platforms" is just a cheap way of providing an objective to fight over. Everyone knows the high ground is important, but the objectives themselves should be based off of your aesthetics and theme. This way players feel like they're making real progression through your environment, particularly in 5 CP push which does have the tendancy to have arbitrary control point objectives (mostly on the 2nd CP).
Your areas should probably also be 25% smaller. (Not entirely your fault, it's the texture scale that influences that slightly over scaling).
Your points would be a lot more interesting if you figured out what sort of resource they are based on. If you figure this out before you make them/your map then you can base your layout of the surrounding area on this knowledge too. Having them on "barely raised platforms" is just a cheap way of providing an objective to fight over. Everyone knows the high ground is important, but the objectives themselves should be based off of your aesthetics and theme. This way players feel like they're making real progression through your environment, particularly in 5 CP push which does have the tendancy to have arbitrary control point objectives (mostly on the 2nd CP).
Your areas should probably also be 25% smaller. (Not entirely your fault, it's the texture scale that influences that slightly over scaling).
Last edited:
- Apr 19, 2009
- 4,460
- 1,724
I was kinda torn between multiple styles when it came to bocking out a theme for 2nd so I settled on leaving like that for the later stages when the layout is more or less set in stone.
Now on the subject of the badlands spire I am a little hesitant to remove it because I more planned the hole area with it in mind and it would take complete rework. Nevertheless, if I must I would remove it in later versions.
Oh and about the scale... yeah I still kinda suck at it don't I? :S
Now on the subject of the badlands spire I am a little hesitant to remove it because I more planned the hole area with it in mind and it would take complete rework. Nevertheless, if I must I would remove it in later versions.
Oh and about the scale... yeah I still kinda suck at it don't I? :S
Removing the spire can be a bitch, i know because i had to rework the spire area in Panamint. But the sooner you get rid of it the better. You don't need it and it's a horrible prop anyway.
If you're stuck for an alternative spire-y like structure, just consider something like gravelpit C. But even Gpit C and the spire are very very tall, boardering on excessively tall at that (Gpit less so because it has those platforms all around it).
If you're stuck for an alternative spire-y like structure, just consider something like gravelpit C. But even Gpit C and the spire are very very tall, boardering on excessively tall at that (Gpit less so because it has those platforms all around it).
It's not necasserily the fact that it's a "prop"... Sure, the 2fort sniper fences, badlands spire, sawmill waterfall and nucleus spinny thing that get so overused are props, but really it's just that they're so unique and thus recognisable. Like the hydro bowl. That's not a prop... but it would be equally cheap pasting that it into your map. IE It'll still be the hydro bowl, just now it's in your map.
Making it out of displacements only inadvertantly works by making it not look like the badlands prop (Which should look cool if done right and designed well). Though It will be really time consuming, and probably a lot more effort than you'd want to put in for an alpha (make it func_detail brushes first, then change it in beta), but atleast you can control the height.
Making it out of displacements only inadvertantly works by making it not look like the badlands prop (Which should look cool if done right and designed well). Though It will be really time consuming, and probably a lot more effort than you'd want to put in for an alpha (make it func_detail brushes first, then change it in beta), but atleast you can control the height.
Last edited:
- Apr 19, 2009
- 4,460
- 1,724
Changed the name to cp_trestle to make the spelling gods happy. 
- Apr 19, 2009
- 4,460
- 1,724
Its just a big ass skybox over the hole thing atm. :V
- Apr 19, 2009
- 4,460
- 1,724
I will seal it properly for public release jfyi. :V
absurdistof
aa
- Aug 10, 2009
- 1,240
- 399
I demand less square more interesting spaces. Lose the BL spire as grazr has been saying, but to be fair it did look a LOT better then it did.
Where is cp_doublecross?
