Whats your golden dimension?

Discussion in 'Mapping Questions & Discussion' started by SmallBiscuit, Mar 6, 2017.

  1. SmallBiscuit

    SmallBiscuit L7: Fancy Member

    Messages:
    463
    Positive Ratings:
    242
    A lot of newer mappers will probably tend towards 256 as the dimension that they base every single thing in their map off of...
    When I learned that 256 was a massive height for the pathways, and having a room 4 256's wide was bad, I decided to go to 128, and that was crap... I never even released that map...
    Since then, I have learned about 192, the freaking best height ever... so far, my maps have generally been scaled correctly with this dimension...

    so my question for all the experienced members is: What is your 'Golden Dimension'?
     
  2. killohurtz

    aa killohurtz Distinction in Applied Carving

    Messages:
    1,005
    Positive Ratings:
    1,157
    There isn't one. A good layout is gonna use a variety of dimensions wherever they're appropriate. For example, you can make a height difference of 64, 128, 192, or even 256 work depending on the context. 192 is the generally accepted minimum ceiling height, but you want some buildings with higher ceilings to allow for vertical gameplay indoors. Even doorways can be larger than the standard 128x128 or 192x128. My point is, don't fall into a trap of making everything the same size just because you think you found a magic number - that doesn't make interesting maps.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  3. sooshey

    aa sooshey :3c

    Messages:
    522
    Positive Ratings:
    418
    If you want "Golden Dimensions", check out this section of the TF2 Mappers Reference. Those are engine coded distances you might find useful.
     
  4. Blade x64

    aa Blade x64 Logical insanity

    Messages:
    204
    Positive Ratings:
    463
    64 is the devil.

    48, 96, and 192 are the real MVPs.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. MegapiemanPHD

    aa MegapiemanPHD Doctorate in Deliciousness

    Messages:
    972
    Positive Ratings:
    485
    I like the 3rd dimension personally.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. [Rx.] Christian Troy

    [Rx.] Christian Troy L4: Comfortable Member

    Messages:
    186
    Positive Ratings:
    50
    Agreed, good standard for a minimum but by no means the only height needed. My maps vary on this but no lower than 192.
     
  7. Another Bad Pun

    Server Staff Another Bad Pun over my dead body

    Messages:
    585
    Positive Ratings:
    1,212
    Any sized brushwork goes I think, as long it's divisible by two, clean, and scaled reasonably.

    Standard dev walls are 128x128 units. Most wall textures are 192 units tall, I believe. 64 units is exactly eye-level and the maximum jump height.
    This height is also often annoying.

    48x48x48 is perfect for minecraft blocks.

    If you're bad at scaling, I recommend compiling often to get a feel for an area ingame, although that eats up time. Just don't play as scout.
     
  8. Idolon

    aa Idolon the worst admin

    Messages:
    1,550
    Positive Ratings:
    4,443
    I used to stick to the 64 grid, but I've recently gone down to 32 because I want a bit more granularity. Working on a 16 unit grid feels off because I stop being able to eyeball the differences. The difference between 160 and 176 is pretty insignificant, while I think the difference between 160 and 192 is worth considering.

    64 unit jumps require crouch jumping which doesn't feel great. 32 unit differences require a jump, though they don't always look like they should and are irritating for it (though they're not as painful as 64). 48 is the magic height difference cause it feels jumpable and is jumpable, though I usually try to only use these where a floor height will be off the 32 unit grid for as little as possible. I believe the train cars at Badlands mid are 48 units tall (with 48 unit crates)?

    96 is a nice height difference (esp. for scouts), though I think I prefer 128 for anything someone might hide behind cause it feels less like your head might be poking above for an enemy to notice. 192 is a nice height difference, though I've also found myself using 160 or 128 in similar cases (a 16 unit floor slab will allow for a comfortable route under provided the space isn't very large, and sometimes you do want a space to feel small).

    I make my walls 16 units thick, which feels about right for concrete. Buildings with small framing and thin walls (wood and metal shacks) get 8 units of wall thickness and 8 units for the interior beams. I'll sometimes use 32 unit thick walls if it's convenient.

    I generally use 128x128 or 128x160 for flanks, 192x128 for decently popular routes, and just make something up for anything wider (though usually these are at least 160 tall cause anything less feels cramped). Taller doors usually coincide with areas where a height advantage looks down onto the door so that the top of the door doesn't get in the way of fighting.

    Room size is a really inexact science and I don't have any advice beyond "Do what feels right." Height differences have more exact answers about what you should use when cause they're about individual gameplay moments between two players, while route sizes need to accommodate a lot more variables. I think generally route length corresponds with route width - long thin flanks really suck.

    Assuming a 0.25 texture scale, most HL2 textures are 128x, most TF2 textures are 256x. A select few are larger than that (brick/wall028 is 256 wide, 512 tall). No texture is 192 units tall unless you scale it that way yourself (or the texture uses $basetexturetransform).
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
    • Like Like x 1
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2017