[Map] Korengal Valley [released]

Post by **Rudd** » 2008-04-29 07:46

THE TREES ARE COMING!

looks truly brilliant mate

Post by **CodeRedFox** » 2008-04-29 07:54

I tried a little experiment to make the map bigger and fail BIG time.

The apache is still in debate. It is quite a small map for anything other then bipeds.

General Dragosh · Post by **General Dragosh** » 2008-04-29 11:50

Dr2B Rudd wrote:THE TREES ARE COMING!

No mate its the ENTS, quit yappin laddy...RUN..............

Post by **marcoelnk** » 2008-04-29 11:55

I think there are too many trees...i liked the dedicious brushes on the mountains more... but thats just my opinion

Oldirti · Post by **Oldirti** » 2008-04-29 12:58

apache stays...make it happen.

Waaah_Wah · Post by **Waaah_Wah** » 2008-04-29 13:11

I actually think that it looked better without those trees but thats just me...

Anyways, the map is too small for an Apache

Mora · Post by **Mora** » 2008-04-29 13:24

Yeah less trees would be better in my opinion.

Post by **CodeRedFox** » 2008-04-29 18:46

I have a announcement I would like to tell everyone. Being that my work has started back up and the dim outlook of a 0.8 release I will be looking into making this map bigger. I've learned allot just on this one, like thing I can do and cant do.

I have allot of things I dont like about the map that can be easily fixed/solved by making it bigger (wider yet same hieght). So on that note I would like some opinions. The biggest issues is that because the hills are so high and the map is so small I get allot of cuts in the hills no matter how smooth they are. And a lot more visual issues.

Anyways I'll keep you up on the final word.

I'll be keeping almost the same height which will get rid of the huge hills (which have caused allot of issues)

Mora · Post by **Mora** » 2008-04-29 19:19

Does that mean that the apache can now spawn in the main base without capping some flags first?

Post by **CodeRedFox** » 2008-04-29 19:24

Negative! I'm still a firm believer of working for it. Its all apart of the story. This will still stay mainly an infantry level.

I may remake the valley all together, I'm having huge issues with the surrounding terrain. The valley was good for what it was, but a real location would be way better.

Post by **CodeRedFox** » 2008-04-29 19:39

I'll have to really look into the mountain height because I don't want to get rid of the hill trails.

I'm really not try to reinvent the level just create a level that feels more real. A big problem is allot of the villages and towns are real close to each other, in the valley and in the hills.

I'll keep the fields to 50 x 50 only because anything larger will cause issues, but stacking 4 50x 50 fields make a huge field.

tunnel network inside the village

I'm keeping the tunnels to the hills

=Romagnolo= · Post by **=Romagnolo=** » 2008-04-29 20:08

Make this map an infantary map, and with the experiencie of making this map use to do a BIGGER AND BETTER one

Post by **Hans Martin Slayer** » 2008-04-29 20:19

looking very good there man!

what are you using to create the heightmap?
also, the pic on the left is the 1024 scale 4 version, right?

i'm asking because i'm trying to get into scale 4 maps as well at the moment to start on creating a r/l based map featuring air support. i've tryed to get into terragen today but the results are **** so far, so i guess i have to keep trying there.

??:

i guess you do the heightmap in 3ds?

anyways, i think the idea of making it larger is very good, i'm sure you've got the skills to create an awesome scenario there!

Negative! I'm still a firm believer of working for it. Its all apart of the story. This will still stay mainly an infantry level.

i like the idea of fighting for the air support. so if you're going to provide the insurgents with air defence i think it's cool to spawn the air support when certain flags are captured. another variant of limiting air support would be to give it a high respawn time and tick the spawndelay at start box. just to throw in an idea.

but in the end, i guess things like that depend quite much on testing anyways.

for the trees from your other update: i agree with the other guys, you shouldnt place too many trees on the mountains, maybe just a few here and there or even go with another overgrowth type for the mountains, i'd say that would be better.

and yea i think i've spotted the caves (:razz

and they fit in quite nice now, just try to make the 'fading' between static cave object and terrain a bit nicer if possible, and also having the same texture on the caves as the terrain texture/ colour would be awesome, e.g. so you can choose one of the bf2 colour/texture for your terrain that is quite (or even exactly

?) the same as the object colour/texture. i have no idea if this is possible, but i'd say so..

keep it rolling!

Post by **CodeRedFox** » 2008-04-30 05:35

Alright, had a little talk with Rhino and I not going to restart. There are some bigger afghan maps that are in the works that will give you all the airspace you want

But dont hold out for the Apache.

Post by **AfterDune** » 2008-04-30 16:30

Jonny wrote:I dont know how easy it would be to do, but halving the height of everything would give (almost) the same effect as increasing the size.

And re-model -everything- that is in-game? Whahahahahaahahahhahaa

Post by **Rhino** » 2008-04-30 16:58

Jonny wrote:I mean the terrain, then moving the statics down.

So the terrain will be in the same proportions as it would have been if you made a new bigger version of it.

ehhh its not hard to do, its just simply not worth it.