I read on this site that frame rate lag is caused by the number of objects on screen at a time, but I also read from an Invasion source that one shouldn't build across all of forge world, and that's what I've done for an Invasion map. There is flickering when looking in from the edges in forge mode, but not in custom games. Would there be any problems that occur because it spans from the coliseum to the hemorrhage beach other than the framerate caused by the density of objects? The objects are, as one would expect, sparse in many areas. One reason why I suspect a problem is that I haven't seen other invasion maps as large, while some maps on forge hub are experimental in other ways. I can't find out for myself because I haven't gotten a 16 player party yet to test it. I wouldn't want to waste anyone's time if that happpens anyway. Also, do "pieces with glass" include most blocks, or does that refer to windows that reveal more objects to create lag? An answer to any of these questions would be very appreciated; thank you.
The flickering is called disco which is caused only by the number of objects on the map. Framerate problems are caused by the types of objects, most notably lights and glass, and is a noticeable decrease in the number of frames per second on the screen. You may want to look at the list of objects that cause framerate problems and the general guide on avoiding framerate issues. The problem with building a map that large is that it will be terribly to play due to the size. People have already tried and failed to make maps only a fraction of the size of yours. The only thing that can be that large and play well is a race map.
The ocean and water falls have been known to impact frame rate, but in a subtle way. Build a structure on Montana or Alaska, then on another map build it in the canyon. Given the right structure you can see issues with frame rate / flickering on Montana and Alaska that do not happen in the canyon due to the ocean being in view. I know this, because I had this problem with a map of mine on Alaska, and it was suggested I move it to Montana, and this is where I discovered the problem was the entire ocean, any part being in view, with just the right structure. The falls can impact as well for the same reasons.
Thanks for the links and the feedback. I hope that the ocean lag is manageable, because I would have to abandon the entire map otherwise. The map is large because it is essentially a first phase roughly similar in size to MM 1st phase invasion (territories), the island (core) for the second phase, and assault in a bit of Montana and most of Alaska and Hemorrhage. As you'd expect the 3rd phase has quite a few vehicles, but infantry can progress as quickly as necessary because they don't have to pull a core. They can cross half of the third phase by the time they would have barely removed a core, if that makes sense. On foot the bomb carrier moves at 150%. There are 2 mancannons and 2 sets of one way teleporters in the third phase. Sorry if this is too much information about my map on my question thread, but to conclude my answer I would rather experiment and push forge's limits and fail than create another ordinary map.
I began an invasion map that spanned from the beach on canyon to the island. The invaders were spartans on falcons. The intent was to fly to the staging area and take control of it, then move around to the other side of the island and take the core back to the staging area. My thoughts were that my story line was far more realistic, in that a staging area / beach head was not something you start with, but had to take control of if you wanted to move forward and invade something else. The long distance on the falcons gave the pilots opportunity to talk and survey the battle zone, contemplate the battle, and even come in low over the horizon unnoticed if possible. In my mind, such a design can have some pretty realistic story line additions that make it more fun to play. The problems with my map were primarily that of losing the map when I backed up my maps onto a thumb drive, and then not ever having the interest to go back and build it again.
Its mostly the reflection off bits of glass, windows, blocks, and the continuous movement of the ocean and waterfall, and the game having to load each segment and activity that cause the most impact to framerate. While natural environments and the background mountains, halo ring, sun, etc have no impact what so ever to framerate. The disco effect can be manageable, and doesnt seem to neccessarily impact framerate depending on what pieces you've actually used. It doesnt mean you have to avoid glass altogether, or any piece for that matter, but when using glass you definately want to avoid having two lets say windows facing across from eachother. And while I wouldnt make such a large scale invasion map I can understand how you feel about creating your own unique idea and having it much different than whats been done before. My opinion is id shorten the scale to paradiso and around half of hemmorrage, not adding anything to montana or alaska, this will help break up lines of sights and objects that the engine needs to focus on loading. Do you perhaps have some screenshots of what your working on?
Thanks Silentraine for the detailed feedback-you answered all of my questions, and now my first post is resolved. I've used a lot of 4x4 blocks which reflect in the coliseum. The only spots in which there will definitely be frequent combat and a view of the ocean are on the island; on much of alaska/montana facing the battlefield lets one see only the sky. I'm afraid I would need several pictures to give someone an ability to estimate the possible lag, and (I know it's strange) but I haven't linked up with B.net because I didn't plan to have the map posted by now. So I uploaded the finished (for now) map and gametype of the same name to my file share (Entire FW Invasion - I didn't have an invasion backstory so I used a generic descriptive title because I only focused on the gameplay aspect), which, if downloaded, would serve better for such an estimate. (gt for file share search: pat7654) I won't really expect anyone to go out of their way because I did after all make it less convenient, but if someone did give me expectations/advice after seeing it that would help a lot before it eventually gets tested. I will look into the customs page on this site for fun customs and a testing opportunity. I'm confident that it will reverse any prejudices for its size.
Ideas like that are pretty good on paper, but my experience it's hard to get players in the right place for all three phases. Spawns are one thing, but the problem really occurs when players survive a phase change - they then have to haul ass across most of the map (or kill themselves to trigger a respawn). This is especially problematic with defenders, since invasion is usually designed with the attackers' experience more in mind. It can already be a bit bewildering on a regular sized invasion map, if you're on defense and survive a phase, figuring out where to go and what to defend for the next one (e.g. phase 1 -> phase 2 on The Spire); on a map that spreads across all of Forge World, it exaggerates the effect.
Mr greenwithagun- What weapons and/or vehicles did the defenders have? That sounds like the most interesting 1st phase I've heard of. Perhaps with the right cover, a wraith could become useful against falcons if the falcons needed a certain angle to hit it. I agree, Nutduster, it is hard to make a large map that transitions smoothly between phases, and I could of spawned a kill zone into the 1st phase area to synchronize the spawns for the 2nd phase, but I figured that the race to the island was the only non combat gameplay element (story-wise, of course there is strategy), even if the arrival times were not exactly the same. The elite defenders take advantage of the "facility's" teleporter system, while the spartans drive. But that's the last I'll say about my map(not including responses) just in case this is spam on a resolved thread.