Project Reality Forums

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:Also if you where going to put your PLA main on the main island and the USS Essex in the SW I would be tempted to move all your terrain and statics north quite a bit, a big operation but its very possible and would give you even more water between the carrier and the shore which is only a good thing

I might as well just move everything SW and move the carrier to the very NE. It would give it more room then. Would be a bit of a job. I could just move the overgrowth, and hieghtmap with photoshop, so not too hard.

I would rather have the PLA main where it is now even if it means moving everything around.

If this is made good, beats barracuda by far.

VapoMan wrote:I might as well just move everything SW and move the carrier to the very NE. It would give it more room then. Would be a bit of a job. I could just move the overgrowth, and hieghtmap with photoshop, so not too hard.

I would rather have the PLA main where it is now even if it means moving everything around.

Ye, the problem I have with the SW corner being the main base is it dosen't seem a very logical place to put your base I mean, if you where the PLA General and you needed to defend this island against a possible USMC attack, would you say build the base there where your cut off from the main land or would you build it on the main land where you need to be?

From a gameplay perspective it has the same disadvantages for the PLA side as it dose in r/l, hard to get to the main land from it and that will really slow up the game play a lot and make it much harder for the PLA to defend from attack.

So ye I would stick the PLA Main on the main land but its up to you

It would be cool if you added the thunder effects and rain. Then map would be perfect.

I agree with Rhino, it'd be best to put the carrier in the open ocean in the SW and have the small island as an objective. You can make it a heavily fortified position with temporary rally points at the start of the match.

I think the most ideal spot for the PLA main would be the NE corner (option 1), it allows more objectives elsewhere whilst still giving the PLA ground forces easy access to defend them. The PLA team can use the bridge to go south instead of just west and use boats to go around the coast.

Really nice so far i love island assallts and the jungle theme.

Also good to see more maps for the chinese

Damn it, i really got hyped try out the map and say what i think about it but sadly i was getting the memory crash thingy and after that crash without a error, too bad =/

I just tested you map and I can say that I LAG. The map is ok for a jet, big enough but when you get near the island with any flying asset it's really LAGGY. You need to kill some undergrowth and overgrowth. Flat terrain is ok, look all the other maps you dont need undergrowth everywhere and remove alot of undergrowth near the shore and trees. Make more beachs.

My specs :
Intel Core 2 Duo CPU E6550 2.33 GHz
2GB RAM
NVDIA GEforce 8500 GT

Considering that alot of player have about the same specs, it will really be unplayable. Maybe its just on my computer but I don't lag on all other maps

Pvt.LHeureux wrote:My specs :
Intel Core 2 Duo CPU E6550 2.33 GHz
2GB RAM
NVDIA GEforce 8500 GT

Considering that alot of player have about the same specs, it will really be unplayable. Maybe its just on my computer but I don't lag on all other maps

??: It's 2010... those are 2006 specs. I feel sorry for the PR community if that is what the majority have to endure for PR.
CPU - Fine but could be overclocked
RAM - 2GB? Double that at least for PR
Graphics - 8500GT... blaugh. Time for an upgrade to a gaming graphics card

Eeeh. PR is not 2010, I mean the graphics dont go up each time a new version is up. Bf2 is 2005 and as I said I run all the maps without problems and have medium-high graphics. Dont forget that my CPU is 4.66 GHZ. Dont have any problem with my RAM and GC. I run STALKER SoC with dynamics light and good shadows without problems. PR is not a challenge for me. And if I had the money I would update it for sure

I'm generally around 40FPS on PR but on this map I fell to like 20FPS when I'm flying near the Island.

Is the editor supposed to have absurdly low FPS when working with over growth?

Probably, because the editor doesn't use LOD's as far as I know. I know my editor's FPS isn't smooth when I show the overgrowth.

Thanks for those who downloaded it. The main reason was to see if anyone got any errors or lag.

The error and lag is propably caused by the undergrowth. It was fine a while ago but recently it started giving me errors, which means I really have to nerf its viewdistance and height.


Could those having errors please go into the operation_hailstorm map folder, go into client.zip and server.zip and DELETE the following files:

Undergrowth.dat
Undergrowth.cfg
Undergrowth.raw
UndergrowthAtlas0.dds
UndergrowthAtlas.tai


This will save me having to reupload the map to see if its the problem.
Thanks

Will try that ASAP

So I just tested like you said and all is ok. It doesn't lag anymore and I run to 60 FPS while flying and about 70-80 FPS when walking/driving. So the undergrowth was the problem. So just remove some (especially the ones near the water, make beachs ) .

And here I got Screens of stranges things and cool things about the map. I know that the map is not 100% finnished and that you will add more stuff and correct things too. So :

Roads Problem :










So as you can see there's trees in the way (always lol) and some elevation block the road sometimes. Its like this on all roads. So check your roads and correct this

Now, white spots :




I'm just wondering what are those. Maybe buildings locations or other things?

Add a ladder here (maybe you were going to do it, but just to remember it ) its inside the bunker on the top of the mountain :



And cool stuff :

View from the mountain :



Little sniper spot to watch the radio tower :



And just another thing. Turn the carrier. Because all choppers are facing the limit of the map, so instinctively players will go in the limits with the choppers. And if you plan to add a jet. The pilot will turn to the left, so in the outbound (I did it all the times ) . Its just a reflex to turn left like in all BF2 vanilla maps. So just turn the carrier.

So its a goodwork and keep it up

I just tried the map with the overgrowth, VD & fog @ >1000m and it kinda hurt my FPS

28 was the minimum around the middle of the map, but the outskirts held at around 80. Turning undergrowth off did little to change the FPS for me. It appears the fog does not change whether the objects are rendered or not, because I set the VD & OG render distance to 1000 but the fog to like 700 and it still had low FPS. I suppose it's a result of having so many trees

20 fps is still playable
on my test map i have 40k trees and 37k field statics and the worst fps count i mentioned was around 16 (starts lagging but still playable)

Na, 20 is just too low. If anything, 25 should be lowest, as that's about what the human eye can see anyway. Though 30 would probably be even better as "lowest playable fps".


yes, 20 is playable, but it's not nice to play at all .

Thanks

All of those things are being worked on atm.
The little things you see on the map are where the villages will be.

I could tweak the overgrowth more, just change some of the density values, especially with the mangoves.

EDIT: The reason why the overgrowth renders so far in the fog is because the overgrowth renders in large squares. This means when you like at the edges of your screen at certain angles, you can see large patches where the overgrowth hasnt rendered.

EDITEDIT: When I clear overgrowth for roads, fields, beaches, and houses later it will lower the overgrowth number also

[R-DEV]AfterDune wrote:Na, 20 is just too low. If anything, 25 should be lowest, as that's about what the human eye can see anyway. Though 30 would probably be even better as "lowest playable fps".


yes, 20 is playable, but it's not nice to play at all .

Agreed, I'd rather buy new hardware than play at <60fps