10 replies to this topic

[Mercykiller_AUS]

I've been playing around with the map editor a bit since many of the space maps are overly cluttered and with the pathing problems in EAW very hard to use. Space maps are pretty easy to modify, but I want to know if there's any way to work out which position the engine puts new space bases in. Is it random, or do they get placed in the order they're laid down on the map, or is it something else entirely? Many of the maps have space base slots in prime defensive locations and I'd like to be able to know that my golans will go in those slots instead of shipyards. If the space station slots are used in the order they're placed in the map editor, I can place the defensive positions last so I can build my golans after all my shipyards.

Also, with 1.2 just around the corner, have the space maps been redone for that?

Land maps are significantly more complicated than space maps. the thing I was wondering about there was, would it be a good idea to scale down all of the units? We can keep the canon weapon ranges in relation to the newly scaled units meaning the new land maps wouldn't need to be so big. And the buildings are awful small compared to the units anyway. Smaller units means we could fit more on the map too if we can up the land battles population letting us have large units of AT-ATs.

[evilbobthebob]

I think I can answer these questions. As for your first one, as far as I am aware, starbases are placed in the order the markers are placed on the map. However, I don't want to go through every map changing the order of markers, so we're looking into some other solutions that may arrive with 1.3.

To your second question, yes all the space maps have been redone to improve pathfinding.

As for land combat, I'm not at liberty to comment

[Phoenix Rising]

Well, it's a choice between scaling down units or scaling up maps. Neither option would be incorrect; both have unique consequences.

[Mercykiller_AUS]

If you were to scale down the units, would it be possible to increse the number of units in a squad? Having 10 TIE Maulers instead of 5, or 2 AT-ATs per squad? Just to give the battles a more epic feel?

[sevrun]

They could, certainly, but unless you tied the whole squad together (not cool) then you'd run into one of the problems he was mentioning. it'd be harder to find/see your smaller units and likely not as much fun to set the battle cam as they go to blasting If they scaled up the maps you're looking at longer load times and the potential for it to take 10 minutes to cross a mostly empty map to wipe out what few defending troops there were in 1 min of fighting. Very realistic, but not a lotta fun.

[Rhakorii]

Speaking of maps, is it possible to stop objects fading in space? As in, the further an object is from the camera, the less likely it is to be visible.

[Phoenix Rising]

There's an binary XML property to disable fade completely from an object. It's Exclude_From_Distance_Fade.

Edited by Phoenix Rising, 11 October 2011 - 02:53 PM.

[Henry X]

I'm in favor of scaling everything down at the moment. Though of course, if the new mapper is making larger maps, then I say just make the units scaled properly.

And can we get things going at reasonable speeds again instead of max speed?

[Phoenix Rising]

We've a ways to go before land combat can be considered final.

[Rhakorii]

There's an binary XML property to disable fade completely from an object. It's Exclude_From_Distance_Fade.

Cheers PR. Just one question... how do I use it?

Let me rephrase that. I've added <Exclude_From_Distance_Fade>true</Exclude_From_Distance_Fade> to my Star Destroyers, for example, but it's done nothing. In fact, it gives me an syntax error, and now they wont load!

Edited by Phoenix Rising, 22 October 2011 - 04:01 AM.
Merged.

[Phoenix Rising]

It's normally used by the planet props; it's possible that it can't be applied to units.