WiP in WiP, post your screenshots!

Ælement

I'm so happy :D
aa
Dec 21, 2010
1,483
1,616
no idea where this will go...

35GUh.jpg
 

Deodorant

L6: Sharp Member
Oct 31, 2011
263
214
Seeing as Bloodhound's take on Highpass got criticized because the two big ledges overlooking the point made it too defendable, and seeing as out of the 4 different areas per side from which you can attack the point not a single one is even ground, I decided to try and swap the steeper ledge for a much flatter one that can be accessed on both ends in Gastrointestinal. Does that look like a sense-making change or should I go back to the old way?

2013011600001.jpg
 

Dr. Spud

Grossly Incandescent
aa
Mar 23, 2009
880
855
Seems fine, though splitting the paths on the top-right/bottom-left of that screenshot seems unnecessary. If you want that little raised hill, I'd connect it to some path further back, not just have it slope back down to the ground.
 

Janeator

L2: Junior Member
Dec 12, 2012
66
26
2nd screen from what is currently named 'Oldworks'. Still no skybox, just so you can see the magnificient amount of power 4 displacements. and still pootis all around.

nskOu.jpg
 

Janeator

L2: Junior Member
Dec 12, 2012
66
26
I already thought of that. will mostly add props or something, idk. as i said, te central part still needs to be 'done'. One of the concepts i had bfore was covering it. But it seemed to me that'd be reducing sniper's action. nevermind, i gtg.

Also splitting lvl 4 disps into 16 lvl 2 disps, like crappy aperture walls lol.
 
Oct 6, 2008
1,965
450
you can see the magnificient amount of power 4 displacements.

Speaking of Power 4 displacements - what's the deal with those anyways?:confused:
 

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,100
4,621
There are so many triangles on p4 displacements that physics calculations easily get out of control and can cause servers to crash. You can't predict everything, no matter your intentions, so it's better to use p2 or if you really must p3 displacements.

I also think it's easier to make smooth curves at p2.

Don't cut displacements either. Just remake them in the shape you need.
 

Freyja

aa
Jul 31, 2009
3,011
5,839
Nothing is wrong with P4 displacements. You just need to be very careful when using them. It's all about vertex density, and yyler said, and not a problem inherent to P4 displacements.

A 1024x1024 power 4 displacement is exactly the same as 4 512x512 power 3's.
 

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,100
4,621

Yes, but then you get a displacement that's twice as dense as if you'd made it that size in the first place, and sewing it with other naturally made displacements will get annoying or challenging. It's better to just redo it to save time in the long run imo.

And yeah, there's nothing wrong with P4 displacements in theory. But as always you can't foresee how everyone uses your map. It also fills your physics data really quickly--you can see this in the compile. I don't know why you'd needlessly bloat that.
 

soylent robot

L420: High Member
May 26, 2009
499
394
But the point itself is quite exposed. If a soldier were to stick around on the point they'd likely get sniped eventually.

Soldier isn't on the point himself, he's somewhere where he can see it. The ramps make it very easy for Soldier to shoot other players off the point from a distance, and his targets can't do much because there is nowhere to dodge without falling off anyway.