Custom Gmod map?

41 replies  ·  17 participants

Dec 9, 2009, 11:00 PM#1
why can't we make a custom Gmod server map like some servers got?
flatgrass gets boring with time ;)
and it needs water for boats or awesome coasters :)
Page 2
Jan 16, 2010, 08:35 AM#21
the bad stuff that happens when having 2 brushes making contact.

carve perhaps?
Jan 17, 2010, 11:26 PM#22
Not a carve, but a picture might explain what I mean.

I know this is UnrealEd 3, but the principle is the same.

Notice here, how additive brushes making direct contact with the subtractive brush wall fragments the surface polygons.


Move the additive brushes away from the subtractive brushes' wall on the grid, and the surface polygon count is lower.


Brush collision not only increases polygon count but also complicates the BSP tree and the amount of work the map compiler has to do. A low polygon count means less work the map compiler has to do, therefore optimising the end product. This does count towards the map file size.
Jan 18, 2010, 04:55 PM#23
[This post has been redacted in the archive]
Jan 18, 2010, 04:59 PM#24
Snow isn't a time eater :)

that's right!
I AM A TEAM EATER!
NOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOM...
:v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v
oh you said TIME eater... my bad..
Jan 18, 2010, 05:47 PM#25
Snow isn't a time eater :)

that's right!
I AM A TEAM EATER!
NOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOM...
:v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v
oh you said TIME eater... my bad..

Ocfos have a look at my app please Topic #830
Jan 18, 2010, 07:09 PM#26
Off topic post is off topic. Anyway, back to my original point. I did the BSP optimisation test again, and found that my theory proved to be true.

test1.ut2, the map file where the brushes collide, weighs in at 346,376 bytes.
test2.ut2, the map file where the brushes do not collide, weighs in at 344,891 bytes.

There is a 1,485 byte difference there, and it's only a small map file. On a Garry's Mod build server that uses a very large, custom, non-standard map, that most - if not all clients will not have, that they will be forced to download in order to play, only means that a small map file size is crucial.
Jan 18, 2010, 07:23 PM#27
Indeed, a small map by filesize is important. This is why I use official maps both on GMod and TF2. :)
Jan 19, 2010, 07:09 AM#28
Snow isn't a time eater :)

that's right!
I AM A TEAM EATER!
NOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOM...
:v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v
oh you said TIME eater... my bad..

Ocfos have a look at my app please Topic #830

off topic post is off topic :eek:
Jan 20, 2010, 10:53 PM#29
Whatchu talkin' 'bout foo'?
Jan 21, 2010, 09:56 AM#30
Whatchu talkin' 'bout foo'?


Sorry Dave, you can't pull that off.
Jan 22, 2010, 08:30 AM#31
Snow isn't a time eater :)

that's right!
I AM A TEAM EATER!
NOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOMNOM...
:v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v :v
oh you said TIME eater... my bad..

Ocfos have a look at my app please Topic #830

Jan 24, 2010, 01:31 PM#32
... Well this thread turned to shit.
Jan 24, 2010, 03:51 PM#33
Thats actually pretty cool. We need something like maps you get in phx but combined into one featuring a rail track for building trains and such.
Waters needed for boats. Its best if the map is built at a small size so players dont get pissed about downloading all the textures and other crap
that takes ages to install.

Ill try to start making one :D and see what i can do
Jan 24, 2010, 05:22 PM#34
Same. I'll give it a shot, just gotta brush up on my Hammer/WorldCraft skills. Pun intended.
Jan 25, 2010, 05:04 PM#35
kk lol it would be good as a contest definatly but we do need some pro work =3 like the comunity can give sugestive maps.
Jan 25, 2010, 05:23 PM#36
then we can compile it into one :D
Jan 26, 2010, 01:08 PM#37
Chyeah it should be collaborative not competitive. We are one team/one community after all. ;)
Jan 26, 2010, 07:03 PM#38
I dont like the idea of railtracks , Players would get pissy when someone puts a train infront of theirs
Jan 26, 2010, 09:40 PM#39
Besides the fact that players that have PHX can make their own railtracks, therefore making built in railtracks pretty much pointless. Let's not also forget about file size too.
Jan 28, 2010, 08:35 PM#40
we should talk more specific details about this, i would like to help making this.
2140
of 41 posts
Jan 2010