Raap

Toss it around on Metro.

I've never created anything for an RTS before. Seems tricky to create assets for it when you're so used to larger scaling and perspectives. What's up with the low resolution textures in these games though? They cannot handle higher resolutions? Or maybe it's just me who always zooms in to the maximum to inspect things...

I will, if I ever get a functioning .lvl file from a recent version. No work will happen on the map until it, well, can actually happen.

This is why many games opt to hide infantry heads under helmets and other facial implants. Could probably slap some goggles on most infantry to make them look less, uhm, well, just not what they look like now. WTB character artist?

No mid-match team swapping, too many issues and points of frustrations. Nopers, any bot related swapping based on any logical algorithm should be done on match start, or not at all. If a match becomes unbalanced while it is ongoing, then there is another way to balance things via introducing a handicap of sorts that gives the lesser team certain perks, these perks would unlock based on a certain minimum threshold that would be required, for example triggering a discount (or partial refund on purchase) when a teams total ranking score is significantly below that of the opposing team. However when I last suggested anything like this, I was met with resistance. I remain however, completely convinced that scaling gameplay elements are key to the long term survival of W3D projects. Disagree all you like, but I've played countless competitive games, even designed for two in an advisory role, and the recurring success story is always about games who are dynamic and reactive rather than rigid and static. Dynamic match balancing is something that needs to be embraced, not fought.

What exists there right now is fine. The UVW coordinates on these meshes were set up with the old, unedited textures in mind. You cannot really go about and edit existing texture files, it causes unpredictable problems. You have to make new ones and then properly apply them on the assets - I know you cannot do that part yourself however. There is no file limit or anything. The only thing another texture does is increase the download size, but in 2017 that is not a problem (if it is, I'm sorry but the rest of the world moved on!). To explain a little why UVW is applied differently all the time, it's mainly due to different artists having different styles, and also back in 1977 when those buildings were created, the concept of stretched textures was acceptable. Nowadays we use more strict format ratios (for example any 1024x1024 tilable terrain material is applied at 5.0 x 5.0 x 5.0. Exceptions always exist however on a case-by-case basis, for example when a material is supposed to perfectly fit the scale of a mesh, or when more manual UVW's are applied such as when drawing on surfaces, or up-scaling for level backdrops. So no, what you're seeing now is normal, and the way to work with it is to create new files and applying them in 3DS... This is also the only way to remove outdated stretching.

Mod aboose.

It'd become a rivalry, which is a good thing. The hope here is that, with time, AwesomePlayerA and B will be joined with AwesomePlayerC, D, E, F, and more. It is natural because the function of a ranking system is to be a ladder, someone HAS to take up those AwesomePlayerSpots and be assigned to different teams. Besides, you're quite possibly looking at a scenario where a matchmaker can also line up AwesomePlayerA and B to fight AwesomePlayerC, D, E, and F, if the ranking scores balance out.

C&C3/KW was, in hindsight, the only decent RTS produced by EA post-Generals. Besides, that image was there since Chop made the house, it's not new.

You can remove K/D or Death scores but you'd only really try to cure a symptom rather than the root of the problem. What makes people ragequit most often? Not just quit because of a map coming up they do not like, but true rage quitting? That's purely dissatisfaction to the extreme due to the current match situation. The root problem is actually two problems, from where I'm standing. The first problem is the most obvious; Games need to end faster when key production buildings are lost. I've beaten this horse to death but people still resist the idea, despite "farming" a team that cannot fight back properly being a recurring problem. The second issue is going to be harder to solve, but is quite fundamental to the ragequit factor... Team distribution balancing. Right now the server just randomly throws people into a team from one match to another, with no reasoning in it. The result is a very random match outcome where playerskill often floats to one side meaning the other team is not going to have as much of a fun time as they could be having if teams were more balanced around a measurable concept of individual player skill. This is why research should be done towards creating a system that evenly distributes players between teams based on their ranking, to prevent a situation where AwesomePlayerA ends up in the same team as AwesomePlayerB and deciding the outcome of a match before it started. So, more balanced teams, along with matches ending faster when critical production buildings are lost, should result in a faster map turnover rate, less stale farming matches, and in general higher retention as a result. Naturally you can do more to improve on the ragequit issues, there is always general QoL changes you can make to the game, improve server and client performance, etc. Edit: As for punishing a rage quit, what, are you serious? A ragequit is never truly voluntary, it is a breaking point in frustration, why punish a frustrated player... Do you want him or her to quit the game permanently? Madness.

"Game objects will usually be DXT1, hud objects will usually be DXT5." - Partially correct, DXT5 is used for any texture with an alpha channel and not just for HUD elements. Another thing with putting files in your data folder is that some can flag you for cheating (I don't know the specifics).

Ah, the problem is, you edited existing textures rather than creating new ones and applying them. No cause for alarm though, you can export your textures under a new name (like t_electrical_XXX.dds), and a designer/developer can properly assign them within the assets. You should avoid overwriting existing textures because many of them are used in several different assets using verried UVW coordinates, so you get weird results in unpredictable places!

@ChopBam I've not seen this expert quality difference from GIMP, so this is the first time I've heard of this. I do quite a bit of custom texture work and regularly use existing textures are a bases for consistency, and I just never noticed it. Also be sure to generate mipmaps on export, unless you want your textures to look weird in-game. This setting is commonly overlooked. Also when importing dds files, do not import existing mipmaps; generate new ones upon export!

That airfield model was triggering me quite a bit. Low detail mesh, low detail textures, no damage animations and emitters, and a hilarious Battlelaf voice line edit. @Pushwall @ChopBam is there a possibility Battlelaf can return to do some of the lines properly that we've been voice splitting so far? I think we're around 20 to 30 lines right now that were edited and not recorded properly, and I can easily think of an additional 20-30 lines for future-proofing. Edit: By the way, the airfield was created along with most of the buildings in like, 1977. This was the high standard back then!

Hah, yeah, some of the textures on buildings are quite outdated, but so are the models themselves. They have become somewhat iconic though. But I suppose this is the nature of any old project, look closely enough and you spot the age in quite a few places.

Now that's a name I haven't heard in a while. Whatever happened to him? Perhaps it could be worth it to reach out to other former developers and contributors, and see who has spare time these days?

I'm not talking about balance, not at all. Let me give an example. Two kids go to a candy shop, the owner hands one of the two kids a bucket of candy, and the other kid gets nothing. Or in more game-native terms, a designer creates unique content for one team while giving nothing to the other team. This is of similar magnitude as when you'd only give naval power to one team, or only helicopters to one team, or only a missile silo to one team. Airplanes aren't just another vehicle, they are a new and unique category of content. If you added a Soviet Super Awesome Mammoth Tank Supreme, the Allied team wouldn't really lose much by not gaining an equivalent since the Soviet Super Awesome Mammoth Tank Supreme doesn't add anything new to the table. Content diversity helps to keep players interested in the game, which means greater player retention. Not utilizing something like this to the full potential is wasting a big opportunity. Ye followin'? Edit: From my point of view, adding an Allied equivalent is similar to adding Snipers. They make sense for gameplay appeal purposes.

Airplanes are one of those "Big Deal Additions" that would improve gameplay a lot if both teams had access to them. If Red Alert never featured Hinds but only Longbows, I can easily imagine a counter having been created a decade ago because helicopters are not an insignificant segment of gameplay diversity. As for asset creation, well I've never in my life created an airplane before so I cannot comment on the complexity.

Nope, doesn't answer my question. A mesh can be created from any number of ELEMENTS. The question unanswered is whether or not W3D prefers meshes to be a single connected element, versus more than one. Or perhaps it doesn't care. I've know about the rest for a very long time - although thanks for reminding me on WWskin meshes being incompatible with vertex solve, this has relevance to me as I was going to experiment with a way to batch-animate ground cover foliage within a single animated W3D file using WWskin to emulate wind movement in a universal pattern. Scratch that then! As for LE, I have no issues with it on Win10 - Are you using the latest version? Pushwall continuously has to feed me a new file to keep up with his work environment, as compatibility issues are a regular occurrence. These updated tools are not publicly available, which doesn't help this very topic much.

Should have known there was a reason for delaying the patch. Excellent choice trying this on Guard Duty, the map really needed something to make it more exciting than, well, guard duty. Take that 2007! Ten years later, W3D finally offers airplanes! Looking forward to the solution to enable them on high-tech maps (Siege was created for airplanes). Also the MiG. Also the to-be-created Allied equivalents. Also me getting triggered by that helipad airfield texture resolution...

Too many pixels!

I was messing around with the idea of creating a stylized grass texture, a proof of concept and first iteration, if you will. The attached file was created using 4 different grass images as a base and then heavily stylized using an extensive list of image altering effects and filters. Similar logic could be applied to any material type although the process of creating textures like this is quite time consuming - this one took me about an hour. The flip side is, you won't be needing 10 grass textures, just two or three, since the point of stylized textures is easy to recognize features without realism. Click a few times to see the full 2048x2048 resolution image. Edit: I'd show the non-filtered version but a max file upload size of 5.86MB is too little, and imgur doesn't like such big files. Edit2: Grass foliage would then be hand-drawn grass "sprites" to blend in well with the ground material. Already experimented with this a little bit on APB's Siege; the shore orange ground plants are not real pictures of a plant (I bet nobody noticed)!

Why not look for an environmental artist as well then? According to your blog that's not something you are specifically looking for (modeling and texturing civilian buildings is just one specific part of environments). Edit: Same applies to foliage. It'd help if you also were more specific in what you're looking for (besides naming civilian buildings and foliage). A sample or example of the preferred art direction for environmental assets is missing.

I wouldn't risk touching the aircraft death logic, it looks and functions just fine as it is. The pilot "auto-ejects" and falls to his much intended death. It's only naval vehicles where the complications exist. Regarding Demolition Truck passenger killing logic for naval vehicles, if your ship is blown up near a shore or 200 meters out into sea, it shouldn't matter since you're on the vessel at the time of destruction, making you "go down with the ship". Fair point on Naval Transports that reached land however (although, why stay inside the transport when you reached land and are under attack?).