Warzone 2100 Forums

I suggest to divide the grid which we have now(1x1) on 2 but only for a new maps, old maps will use the old "big" grid. Thus the new terrain renderer will still use the old big tiles to draw textures but tiles will have 2x2=4 polys and 9 vertexes. I mean - 1 new tile=4 polys. This will allow mapmakers to detail their maps much better and also new textures will not look like flat pictures on a cliffs, for example. Also, This will allow to not use normal maps in terrain engine.

MaNGusT wrote: Also, This will allow to not use normal maps in terrain engine.

Not sure, I think you mean to say this WILL allow normal maps.

-regards macuser

macuser wrote:

MaNGusT wrote: Also, This will allow to not use normal maps in terrain engine.

Not sure, I think you mean to say this WILL allow normal maps.

-regards macuser

No, I meant what I said.
there are no needs to use normal maps on terrain.

MaNGusT wrote:No, I meant what I said.
there are no needs to use normal maps on terrain.

In that case, the thing from your sig:

P.S. Sorry for my English.

is true.
You should have wrote it like this:

Also, this won't allow to use normal maps in terrain engine.

KukY wrote:In that case, the thing from your sig:

P.S. Sorry for my English.

is true.

That is why I wrote that.

Sorry, right now i'm really comfused. Why would you not want normal maps for terrain?

macuser wrote:Sorry, right now i'm really comfused. Why would you not want normal maps for terrain?

Well, maybe because some tiles are confusing, or have custom tlesets, or too much of somethng.
Now I confused myself

macuser wrote:Sorry, right now i'm really comfused. Why would you not want normal maps for terrain?

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=2383&start=90#p51184

I see, that would be one HUGE normal map . But how would a 4 tri tile help instead of normal map?

macuser wrote:I see, that would be one HUGE normal map . But how would a 4 tri tile help instead of normal map?

Now a mapmakers can move up and down a 4 vertexes(1 tile = 1 poly), if 1 tile = 4 polys they can move a 9 vertexes in each tile. It means that a terrain will be detailed much better.

I am not sure I understand. Tiles are not one polygon today - they are composed of two triangles (think: everything in Warzone is made out of "pies"). There is still no center point to adjust, but you can "bend" the tile to create nicer surfaces.

I think something like this would be enough, only 1 additonal point, but gives additional control over a tile and saves triangles number relative to your suggestion(8:4).

Per wrote:I am not sure I understand. Tiles are not one polygon today - they are composed of two triangles (think: everything in Warzone is made out of "pies"). There is still no center point to adjust, but you can "bend" the tile to create nicer surfaces.

Yes, I know - engine uses only triangles.
I think that a tiles are too big, they don't allow to make smooth edges, corners, hollows, heights, ditches, holes, craters etc. . I suggest to tessellate the grid -> 1 tile = 4 polys = 8 triangles = 9 vertexes.

KukY wrote:I think something like this would be enough, only 1 additonal point, but gives additional control over a tile and saves triangles number relative to your suggestion(8:4).

Interesting idea!

MaNGusT wrote:I suggest to tessellate the grid -> 1 tile = 4 polys = 8 triangles = 9 vertexes.

That would make creating maps really painful, unless flaME improves a lot. I really don't know if that's necessary, probably the devs have more to say of it than me, but probably making each tile divided into 4 triangles would probably reduce our poly count limits for AR models, and that's not good

Olrox wrote:That would make creating maps really painful, unless flaME improves a lot.

Of course! Thus flaMe should use brush(es) with strength and size options to operate with groups of vertexes.