.Map :: MoHAA Mapping

Any advice on the best compile options? Im aiming to finish the map Im working on in a few weeks
Im currently using these:

bsp

-v

vis options

-fast -v

light options

-verbose -fast -bounce 0

I picked these up from the forums here. Are they just for testing purposes, and will they suffice for a final compile?

Any advice, greatly appreciated

Personally, I would do without the -v and -verbose, as these flags simply make the compiler throw out much more text that's generally useless, and camouflages the actual errors.

Some recommended flags:

bsp

-blocksize 0

This disables 'block splits', usually unnecessary vis splits in the map that do little but increase compiling time.

vis

If your map's vis design is clean, compile with no additional flags (without -fast). However, if you did not take vis design into account from the very start then a full vis compile is often practically impossible, and the -fast way is an attractive alternative. Vis is used to precalculate which areas of the map are visible from what positions, and is used by the game to hide areas that can't be seen such that higher fps is achieved.

light

If you compile with -final, automatically all best settings for a final compile are chosen. However, the compile will take much longer than the -fast -bounce 0 compile, with an unpredictable improvement in the end result.

See also: http://dynamic.gamespy.com/%7Emap/mohaa/t.php?id=12

I have produced a few maps and all have been simplycompiled as follows:

-bounce 0 in light options as I regard radiosity lighting as a total waste of time.
Other than that I do normal BSP, normal bsp vis and normal light-not final light.
Now I may not be doing a final compile correctly but as far as I am concerned the maps have turned out reasonably well and after some testing there has been little difference between certain setting than others (other than timewasted doing radiosity etc).
My opinion and not neccasarily the correct one.

Thanks for the advice JV and Unknome.

I made the classic mistake of not designing the map on
paper first, and thus didnt take into account the way MOHAA likes things to run.

Consequently, the map is kind of a messy sprawl, and a final compile may be out of the question. I know now, if I ever build another one, I`ll plan it out first.

Yea realy all maps should have a plan to go on...
I give this advice but I have never used a plan in any of my maps, I create a building and carry on from there
Makes for hard work realy.

Not sure about the final compile as mine is still running. Started it when I was at the age of 20, now im 52 with 3 grown up children and Im still waiting for it to finnish. I would sugest taking a hammer to your machine and quietly cursiing the day you started to using radiant.

[img][img]http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/6557/4window7cn.jpg[/img][/img]

Lmao
Hehe Iv'e had some maps like that.

i remember making a relatively small map but very detailed, just a manor with a grounds and a few misc buildings around it, that because of the design i'd made you could see nearly every point in the map from anywhere else, thus making it the slowest map i've ever made.

Which taught me how to make "sightlines". just on paper drawing straight lines from corners to corners around the design of your map and seeing where you might be able to drastically improve fps simply by inching a wall out more.

wow i can spam and ramble simultaneously.

i'm on this deal also with my new stadium map. problem is this, the stadium is basically one big ''frame'' ( made up up tons of brushes ) used to surround the actual playing field. i was hoping to make the playing field look like those indoor dirt tracks they use (hills and valleys with paths through) for a ''gladiator'' type game play but making the field through easy gen and just compiling the field by it's self on the side to test with lighting and sky box is going to take 3 hours min. could i make the field detailed and would it cut down on the time ? if you look at the vid i put in bragging for the stadium, the ground is flat but you get the idea of how big it would be. the .bmp i'm using in easygen is 33X73 (3200 u X 7200 u).

while i'm on easygen: how come it seems you only have a limited character oount to type in the top texture and after it converts to a .map and is put into radient there's only the one texture you used for the top showing ?

I haven't looked at your map m8 but I assume that most, if not all areas can be viewed at one time, or from any one place at any one time.
Building a map like this makes it almost impossible to manualy vis or make structual brushes of any use.
In a map of this kind you may as well make all brushes detail to speed up the compile as none of them are physicaly going to aid the compile process.
I'm sure you know this already PKM and i'll be sure to d/l it to make sure what i'm saying ain't complete crap

after i wrote that post uknowme; i suddenly remembered lod terrain (it's rare in my maps that i use any kind of non flat terrain) and went ahead and made the initial playing field (as seen in the bragging thread i started awhile ago for this map). cool thing is though by getting used to easy gen, i may have finally solved an idea i've had for awhile for another 676 series map: detroit snow.