I'll finish it I'm debating on building this in the ice cave just for perfect lighting. It would looks better with mountains in the background, but do I risk it? Someone tell me if I should.
Ice cave, if you break out of the map there is a sweet flat layer of fog you could have just under the playable areas down there. It would look great.
just put a receiver in the cave and script it to move down outside the map, keep trying to use it until it stops killing you and voila. I can personally show you later if I worded that strangely.
@Xandrith i assumed you were going to make it floating on rocks so i thought you would just move it over the chasm.
No, it's gonna be build into a mountain, like this. The plan was to have the fog hide the surrounding and bottom of the mountain to create a sense of mystery.
No? That's exactly what I thought he was going to do. Put the towers on mountains and have fog at the bottom. The chasm is bottomless so the fog would be easier to sell.
Yeah, don't build it in the cave, the mountain backdrop is authentic and the structures are all high up in storm peaks.
I was poking fun at the fact that he said "no" to what you said you thought he was going to do then went on to describe what you said you thought he was going to do (as I understood it at least)
^This guy makes terrible maps - and is ESPECIALLY bad with terrain and natural environments. Don't heed his words of false wisdom. --- Double Post Merged, Jul 21, 2016 --- Obvi, D4rkDeath is the subject of my comment and thus is quoted
Dude, your signature, it's ****ing massive. Could you please replace it with something smaller? Thanks.
Only if you promise to 'like' the map, Schnitzel. But....I may likely do so, as it is a bit big and it was cool for a day or two. Update: It has been done.
I played one of my older maps yesterday and I noticed something. It's something that I have mentioned before and others have pointed it out to me, but I think I finally understood it yesterday. I am a macro Forger. All of my designs are very cut and dry as far as their pathing goes. I create spaces with simple, predictable paths that require the player to win an engagement prior to entering those spaces. When it is a playspace that I expect there to be a lot of traffic, I add micro elements into the fold to prolong engagements. However, my transitional routes are usually uncluttered and unobstructed. If you want to move on my maps, you have to either win a fight, or chose a different route. You can't move and then change your mind halfway through because you will be punished. While my structural maps have not been as developed as my terrain maps, this seems to be the case on them as well. Granted, I am not the kind of structural Forger who would make a map as intricate as Bungie's old dev maps. One of the few people who can pull that off these days is @Given To Fly, but it's not really my forte. As I said last time, I think I am going to stick to this style of design. I recognize that it might be a limitation, or simply an inability to design micro elements, and that might lead to designs that lack profound depth. However, I feel like it is more of a preference in that I don't want to put more geometry than is needed on my maps. At a certain point, I feel like any given layout peaks in its ability to support geometry, and in my case, my designs tend to hit that plateau fairly early on. I just found it interesting to self reflect like that.