http://community.webshots.com/photo/78584309/78584725YMmLti

Hint where to get some remotely similar texture? (Not the one from lunsp1 / lundead.wad). I'm willing to do some porting. Someone mentioned tribes textures?

I honestly recommend all mappers... or just anyone visiting northern Sweden to check out Storforsen (in Bredsel, near �lvsby, south of Jokkmokk).

Gutta cavat lapidem 

http://rpg.spawnpoint.org/images/maps/rpgdm1_1big.jpg 

Yeah well I've learned this:

you can't build maps without a solid concept and layout. My layouts were completely spontaneous and I hoped for the best. Then I get to building and realize it sucks and well... with the recent inspiration and kick-in-the-face that is RPG's 'and all that could have been', I'm starting over and putting some more thought into this.

The ironic thing is RPG probably built it spontaneously. Am I right RPG? 

DO NOT start over from scratch. One valuable skill you will learn as a mapper is to rework the parts of the map you are not satisfied with until they look good and fit together. Having layout problems? Rip out a part, rework it and put it to use elsewhere in the map. Rince and repeat. Yeah, it seems "so much easier" to just start over but 1) you are less likely to finish the map and 2) you will learn A LOT by reworking your old map. 

I think this is such a subjective issue as well. Like when I stated you can't build a map without a good, well thought out layout and progression. Not everyone would agree with that. But it seems to work better that way with me.

I feel like, reworking is more work. When you have a blank canvas, so-to-speak - it's easier to see things come together - rather than this work I'm dissatisfied with. Of course I am bound to hit the wall again, and what am I gonna do - start over again? I'd hope not.

So I see where you're coming from, but I also feel if I put more thought into this, it'll show - and I'll be more satisfied as I build. For me, once I have a layout - the paths are there and it's easy for me to build along it. Whereas without something predefined, I think "what next?" and then I take 2 weeks off thinking about it. 

The main central area that the player keeps coming back to--including the outdoor area and the indoor corridors at the silver key door--were a copy of the incomplete layout I made for the original RPGSP2, which died from QBSP errors when I tried to make the terrain out of tetrahedrons. (Little known fact: it was IKBase, and featured yet another Shambler reference.) The rest of the layout (i.e. inserting a room at each branch of the layout) was built spontaneously.

For serious, layouts are over-rated. After I finished RPGSP1, I built several DM maps and didn't release them because I thought they had dodgy layouts, but when I went back and looked at them a few months ago I didn't think they were that bad.

You act like you might finally make a perfect map--one you're totally satisfied with. It isn't going to happen. People are so superficial that bad layouts really don't make that much of a difference; even to a lot of the people on this message board. And despite all this self-deprecation from you, we still have absolutely no evidence that your SP layouts are bad in the slightest. 

once I have a layout - the paths are there and it's easy for me to build along it. Whereas without something predefined, I think "what next?" and then I take 2 weeks off thinking about it.

Planning out layouts and rooms beforehand is the best way to map. RPGSP1 took 9 months to build because I didn't plan it well. But that's not to say you can't plan out the rest of the map around what you already built. 

Yeah I agree, you can build along side the plans. This is quite inevitable and happens when I build as well.

I'm just worried about putting out shitty maps that look good but play like shit. That's about it. 

small first; on the lines of an e3m2 The Vault of Zin, or e1m6 first. Take several days to get it just right and release it. It beats the hell out obsessing over the big picture. 

I've got plans for medium-sized maps, but they require entirely new texture sets. I actually can't wait to get around to that but I've got to get this done first.

I just drew a new layout for map 1. While it retains the general idea and progression of the map that I've worked in, it now has a more interesting layout and start-area. I feel reworking it now has definitely been worth it. I'm more sure of this layout than the original. 

Maybe everyone has Kinn-envy :) 

The only thing envyable about Kinn is how he can be so fat and still manage to type on a standard keyboard. 

I was wondering if there is a way to get the -sunlight function not to have zero falloff...

I am using -sunlight in my map, and it produces really nice and crisp shadows on the ground -- which is great. But I also have skylights that are ~1024 (or more) units from the floor... and the bright spot on the floor looks a bit silly to be honest :/

I want to release this map during qexpo, and if I can't get this problem worked out I'll just go for the regular "put lots of lights near the sky and hope for the best" technique :) 

I was wondering if there is a way to get the -sunlight function not to have zero falloff...

I am using -sunlight in my map, and it produces really nice and crisp shadows on the ground -- which is great. But I also have skylights that are ~1024 (or more) units from the floor... and the bright spot on the floor looks a bit silly to be honest :/

I want to release this map during qexpo, and if I can't get this problem worked out I'll just go for the regular "put lots of lights near the sky and hope for the best" technique -- but I don't really want to do that! :) 

oops :/ 

...is that you don't actually want sunlight. 

Try Yaw and Pitch to make sure the sunlight doesn't shine straight down.

or

Try anti-lights in the area where you don't want full sunlight. 

stretch the sky brush up like 512 and put a bright point light inside it near the top. 

i'll try all of those things when i get back from dinner. in short, i like the cool shadows that sunlight makes, but not the ugly unrealistic stuff it can also produce! 

Don't forget -light and -sunlight2. 

I didn't understand the question, really. What is causing the "bright spot" on the ground? If you're using sunlight, you shouldn't also use intense point lights as that would defeat the purpose of the sunlight.

You can however add other ambient point lights around to make the outdoor lighting more interesting, but these should be low-intensity and with low wait values (e.g. 0.01).

You can also try using the _anglesense key in worldspawn (only affects sunlight then) with lower values than 0.5. This will reduce the angle attenuation and create a more intense sunlight, especially on vertical walls.

If you then lower the intensity of the sunlight to compensate, the difference in light levels between the ground and the walls will be smaller. If that was what you wanted ... 

So for a hazy sun effect I could have a high _anglesense value? 

what i wanted was for the sunlight to be more natural, in other words, not make a straight shaft of light straight down with no falloff whatsoever..

HOWEVER... that method is great for creating detail on the floor, for example, above ceiling fans or something... but not in great big open (and tall) areas where it just looks silly having a circle of light on the floor. anyway sunlight2 seems to do the trick.. thanks 

Sunlight falloff on earth over distances of a few hundred feet is imperceptible. So why is not having falloff "unnatural?" 

I'm not sure what you mean by "hazy" here, but experimenting with the _anglesense value in sunlight can offer very interesting outdoor effects. A low value makes individual brush faces harder to spot as the junctions tend to disappear.

A high value will really pronounce the brushwork, creating an almost surreal impression of a "silky" material. Maybe not the most realistic variant, but it definitely offers an interesting look.

Entity or global _anglesense values can also be used for different effects.