A Path Beyond Submit an APB Map Request!

[delta]

Also, cruiser:

 

[MPRA2]

 

The most requested is Cruisers... But those cannot happen due to gameplay limitations.

We can totally do cruisers now because I've found a substitute for 2-turret logic. All we need is a model.

 

I'm actually surprised people gave up on asking for airplane physics, that used to be very hyped up back in the day and looked like it would become a reality at one stage for Gamma, but it never worked out.

People were just asking for this ingame yesterday :/

 

I'll ask for it for the 100th time. AIR............ CRAFTS............ IN........ APB....

just reading all of the map suggestions makes me want to dig deep into the internet to find older versions of APB like .9935 just to play these past maps.....

Aircraftkiller had some really interesting maps and detail... FjordsTR is probably my second favorite Renegade map so far.... the first one being Soviet-AlliedTest from Renalert/.9935

[Raptor29aa]

 

 

The most requested is Cruisers... But those cannot happen due to gameplay limitations.

We can totally do cruisers now because I've found a substitute for 2-turret logic. All we need is a model.

 

I'm actually surprised people gave up on asking for airplane physics, that used to be very hyped up back in the day and looked like it would become a reality at one stage for Gamma, but it never worked out.

People were just asking for this ingame yesterday :/

I'll ask for it for the 100th time. AIR............ CRAFTS............ IN........ APB....

just reading all of the map suggestions makes me want to dig deep into the internet to find older versions of APB like .9935 just to play these past maps.....

Aircraftkiller had some really interesting maps and detail... FjordsTR is probably my second favorite Renegade map so far.... the first one being Soviet-AlliedTest from Renalert/.9935

Yea .9935 had a lot of maps. Like classic camos (two ore trucks no WF, and insane sniper action). Volcano (smoothe but very hilly terrain impossible to get off good v2 or arty shot) A Path Beyond which was supposed to be a land sea air map. Shallow grave... The list goes on. LoL I still have the throwback folder.

[SarahNautili]

aah, good ole Camos Crossing. That brings back some memories, and not fond ones either!

[MPRA2]

Well I'd throw my out of this world like horrid skills at map making if I only knew how to make maps for Delta.

[des1206]

Hey Raap, hey guys, listen.

 

What if we had a map, where the Soviets started with several Allied vehicles in base, and vice versa? The Soviets can get an APC, MGG, Radar Jammer, and Phase. The Allies can get a Mammoth, TT, V2, and maybe MAD. It would be cool to have a mech/mammoth combo or Soviet TTs being covered by MGG support.

[Raap]

Hey Raap, hey guys, listen.

 

What if we had a map, where the Soviets started with several Allied vehicles in base, and vice versa? The Soviets can get an APC, MGG, Radar Jammer, and Phase. The Allies can get a Mammoth, TT, V2, and maybe MAD. It would be cool to have a mech/mammoth combo or Soviet TTs being covered by MGG support.

 

I think we'd want to avoid setups like that to prevent player score data issues. There is also consistency concerns with something like that, and not to mention balance concerns.

 

Designing a level with those things would be opening several cans of worms with very negligible payoff.

 

The wish you have can be broken down to a basic request; The request of more unit and map variation. This can be achieved with other means (see Hostile Waters).

Edited May 17, 2016 by Raap

[des1206]

 

Hey Raap, hey guys, listen.

 

What if we had a map, where the Soviets started with several Allied vehicles in base, and vice versa? The Soviets can get an APC, MGG, Radar Jammer, and Phase. The Allies can get a Mammoth, TT, V2, and maybe MAD. It would be cool to have a mech/mammoth combo or Soviet TTs being covered by MGG support.

 

I think we'd want to avoid setups like that to prevent player score data issues. There is also consistency concerns with something like that, and not to mention balance concerns.

 

Designing a level with those things would be opening several cans of worms with very negligible payoff.

 

The wish you have can be broken down to a basic request; The request of more unit and map variation. This can be achieved with other means (see Hostile Waters).

 

Sure, but you could just exclude that map's win/loss data during the balance analysis.

 

What I am interested in, is to see the interesting strategies an "unholy alliance" can come up with. Besides, Hostile Water doesn't grant you the vehicle mix ups.

Edited May 17, 2016 by des1206

[MPRA2]

Theres a few map ideas of mine that I am pretty reluctant on throwing out. (Granted I'd have no problem doing so if I could make and script these maps)

But I would like to see more Seamist/Hostile-Waters type maps where cooperation is needed to complete an objective.

So far I have 2 ideas for maps that could furthet show off unused content like the chronosphere/Iron Curtain/Chronotank/etc.

Of course none of these will be usable by the player, as was stated before in another thread where the chronotank was broken to all shit, and currently, the "superweapons" like chronosphere and Iron Curtain are impossible to impliment into APB at this time (as far as I am aware.)

So heres my 2 ideas:

1. A temperate map in the middle of a German summer, Allies and Soviets both want to test their new technology. (This map will work like hostile waters, but have a seamist style gameover). The Soviets must defend their Iron Curtain, while trying to destroy an Allied Chronosphere, and vise versa. If the Soviets destroy the Chronosphere, a large number of Iron Curtain infused Mammoth tanks will come out of the Soviet's facility tunnel and roll to the allied base, destroying it. (The mammoths would be godmode with a light red texture to represent the Iron Curtain's effect).

If the Allies Destroy the Iron Curtain, 5 (godmode) chronotanks will appear at the soviet base, destroying it.

 

2. My second idea is a Seamist type idea where in the outskirts of a Siberian village, the Allies start with 4 silos, a helipad, barracks, and Service depot... But cannot be reached by soviet forces because of their base being positioned on a cliff face. The only was allies can get off the base is with an allied only access tunnel, or by chinook. Soviet forces get a whole base with a war factory, radar dome, flame towers, sam sites, refinery barracks, and 1 tesla coil. The allies have 45 minutes to infiltrate a soviet base and destroy a nuclear tech center (or missile silo) to prevent a nuclear launch on their base.

Just wanted to get these ideas out... maybe someone could take interest in them, or I could possibly make them if/when I learn how to make maps.

I know they are pretty dumb ideas, but hell.... might as well try to show my creativity in the only way I can atm..

Edited May 17, 2016 by MPRA2

[delta]

Hmm, I feel like with that second map idea...if Allies are limited to infantry, well infantry rushes on most APB maps end up being pretty predictable as to where they'll occur since there's only so many weakpoints in a base for them to exploit. So Soviets could just camp those spots all day long and Allies won't be able to get through.

[Raptor29aa]

I do like the ideas. The idea #2 could work if the soviets had no silo and the ore truck was unprotected.

I had a similar idea and tried to map it out in gmax. It was a reverse seamist map. Soviets where up on a high hill and had to defend a dome with helipad, barracks, and silo. The allies would have a full base with AA and pillbox defenses. At the end of a timer missile subs would demo allied base.

Edited May 18, 2016 by Raptor29aa

[MPRA2]

Hmm, I feel like with that second map idea...if Allies are limited to infantry, well infantry rushes on most APB maps end up being pretty predictable as to where they'll occur since there's only so many weakpoints in a base for them to exploit. So Soviets could just camp those spots all day long and Allies won't be able to get through.

I do like the ideas. The idea #2 could work if the soviets had no silo and the ore truck was unprotected.

I had a similar idea and tried to map it out in gmax. It was a reverse seamist map. Soviets where up on a high hill and had to defend a dome with helipad, barracks, and silo. The allies would have a full base with AA and pillbox defenses. At the end of a timer missile subs would demo allied base.

The point of the second map is offensive seamist, kinda like what raptor posted. Allies DO have access to lolbows and Chinooks, the soviets of course would have a refinery and one silo. But as stated before, soviets have no way of damaging the small allied outpost, unless they steal a chinook or longbow because allies will not have any defenses other than 3 pillboxes. The soviet endgame would be a badger bomber flying overhead and paradropping a nuclear warhead onto the allied outpost. On another note, the soviet base will have multiple weakspots and a power plant of course for spy sabotaging. The power plant will be in a seperate part of the main base... ah heres my little shitty scribble map... sorry for the real tiny text. I also added a small town with 2 supply trucks for allies if they are smart to get to them first, otherwise.... soviets have no use for them. Also, the small lines of dots represent the OT path towards a mixed ore field.... I spent like 2 minutes scribbling this down at work... If i had a bigger piece of paper, i could have given the map more detail or rework it to look better....

Edited May 18, 2016 by MPRA2

[Killing_You]

I could see V2s and Minelayers being somewhat problematic on this map. Perhaps with some artillery guards and extra tunnels, this could be much better. Although it does look great in its current form.

[MPRA2]

I could see V2s and Minelayers being somewhat problematic on this map. Perhaps with some artillery guards and extra tunnels, this could be much better. Although it does look great in its current form.

well. i just need the weekend to roll around and a better camera than my Galaxy S4. oh and some bigger paper....... I wont use paint because somehow paint makes things look really cartoonishly stupid... I wont make the mistake again.

the thing would be, V2s wouldnt be able to hit the base due to it's height, and being on a cliffside... like ridgewar, but no vehicle entrances, higher allied base, and further back. Minelayers could be a problem.... but Engineers now play a very vital Minesweeping role. I might have snipers removed from this map because so far that would be the biggest problem for the Allies, since they are kind of in the open unless there are hills and debris. Ontop of that they are only limited to Longbows and Chinooks..... I'll rework the location for the Soviet Power Plant to make it look a bit.... RA-ish and so it doesnt look like it borders the map boundaries. It was actually supposed to be more out in front and not connected to the base, only walled off with 2 entrances... maybe guarded by a flame tower... Still in the Pre-final-design-pre-alpha.... pretty much just right out of my limitless MPRA-tivity filled mind.

Edited May 19, 2016 by MPRA2

[Einstein]

Not bad ideas. On #2, you could leave snipers in and have some fox-hole type things embedded in the mountainside for allied snipers maybe? It would give V2s and enemy snipers something more interesting to do (or try to do). Then the allies inside the fox-hole things could cover the allied infantry against soviet snipers.

 

I'd like to see more base concepts on these.

[MPRA2]

Wow.....On any normal day back then on ren and Gamma-Nuclear winter, I'd get called out for dumb ideas.... I'm actually really suprised that there are people who are taking a liking to the map ideas. I'll get to work on larger map layout when I get home after work, or if i have time and can find the paper.

 

Update: Came up with the Camos crossing remake I'd love to see.

Allies and Soviets still have the player controlled Ore Truck, the new gem field at the town, and its infamous hill, but the bases now come with 2 light defensive structures, 1 silo per team, and a Service depot to repair your truck when you dont have the handimech! The hill has become a bit more of a tactical place, having an underground tunnel system, similar to that of Renegade's "Islands" map. As of my first copy of the map, there are 4 ways of entering and exiting the tunnels. 2 base entrances, and for those who have trouble getting up the hill due to enemy camps, use the handy entrances/exits on top of the mountain to regain control of the hill. (The dots represent the tunnel paths, and they all converge onto eachother)

The less practical route is blocked by tank traps, sandbags, and a large trench near the Allied base. Could provide for some intense firefights if the cover is utilized right.

Edited May 19, 2016 by MPRA2

[Pushwall]

With regards to the "offensive Seamist" idea: Soviet vehicles OP.

 

In order to prevent V2 arc shots from damaging the base, the cliff that the Allied base is positioned on would have to be around 120 metres tall. For reference, the height difference between the Allied and Soviet bases on Ridge War is only 50 metres, and there's a lot of space between them to make the height difference less jarring. A plateau 120m tall would probably look very silly, and it would take a pretty long time for infantry to climb/descend the access tunnel connecting the Allied base to the bottom of the cliff if it was that tall. In fact it would most likely be impossible for Allies to get to the supply trucks first. To prevent MAD tanks from damaging the base, the cliff would have to be 250 metres tall. Volktillery would likely also be able to hit the base if the plateau was too low (think trying to hit the back of the Allied WF on RidgeWar).

 

Pacific Threat's flight ceiling is 50 metres high as well, and the flight ceiling would obviously have to be quite a bit above the plateau for Longbows to actually be able to move around - and then Longbows would likely be able to fly over the Soviet base without getting hit by SAMs because of how high the flight ceiling is.

 

If you make the plateau less tall and add a projectile blocker to blue-ball V2s, you also prevent snipers from shooting into or out of the base, and on the rare occasion that someone steals a Longbow, they'd likely end up hitting the blocker while trying to shoot pillboxes or something. Which is pretty dickish considering they're limited ammo units that the Soviets have no way to refill. (So you might also want to add a refill pad to the Soviet base.) Projectile blockers really only work if they're surrounding something that no unit can stand on.

 

If you get rid of V2s so there's no need for a blocker, and MAD tanks so the cliff doesn't need to be insanely tall, that leaves the Soviets with these WF options:

Supply trucks - instant access to these means the Soviets have an even easier time of rushing to the town, letting each passenger take a neutral truck, and taking them out of Allied reach.

Heavy tanks - fair. Without any buildings or vehicles to shoot, they are pretty much just "faster than sprinting" transports that put some hurt on infantry that are out of cover.

Tesla tanks - sort of bordering fair and unfair; on their own they're fine, and the only base structures they'd be able to hit are the pillboxes, but a whole army of these is going to be a pain to bring down.

Minelayers - well this certainly isn't OP when the Allies' only real offensive force on this map is in their infantry (until the SAMs/power is down) and the only way out of their base that doesn't involve buying a $1200 unit is going through a tiny chokepoint. What tech level is the map? If it's 5 I can definitely understand needing a Tanya deterrent, if it's lower then these are OP.

Ore trucks - fair. Well, until someone parks their ass in front of the Allied tunnel and delays the shit out of them.

Mammoth tanks - Soviets can probably just sit in their base until they get the money for these, then sit in their base some more until the time runs out. While that's obviously what you're supposed to do on defense missions, the Allies don't really have many ways of attacking a base that's full of mammoths without vehicles, especially if it's mined up to deny Tanyas.

Demo trucks - in the rare instance that Allies actually get into one of your buildings, you can just get one of these and solve the problem immediately. Boo.

Rangers - since Allies have no tanks, RPG rangers are basically longbows that also decimate infantry, have unlimited ammo, don't draw the ire of redeyes, and cost less, but can't attack the base cause they can't scale the cliffs. So everyone will probably get them because while they have less firepower than mammoths, they can easily move to counter any air/inf rush anywhere.

 

As you can see, for most of the armed vehicles, the main argument is that too many make it too easy to defend. Look at how well Allies do on Seamist with their only replenishable vehicles being longbows, which can't even be bought that frequently due to silo income. So you might as well just go the Seamist route of giving the Soviets a limited supply of vehicles and ditching the WF - and having them only come in after the first 2-3 minutes so the competition for the neutral supply trucks is a bit less one-sided.

 

I like the map idea itself, so thumbs up for that, but giving infinite vehicles to the defender when they have a higher income than Seamist Allies and better infinitely-buyable defensive options than longbows probably won't end well.

[MPRA2]

With regards to the "offensive Seamist" idea: Soviet vehicles OP.

 

In order to prevent V2 arc shots from damaging the base, the cliff that the Allied base is positioned on would have to be around 120 metres tall. For reference, the height difference between the Allied and Soviet bases on Ridge War is only 50 metres, and there's a lot of space between them to make the height difference less jarring. A plateau 120m tall would probably look very silly, and it would take a pretty long time for infantry to climb/descend the access tunnel connecting the Allied base to the bottom of the cliff if it was that tall. In fact it would most likely be impossible for Allies to get to the supply trucks first. To prevent MAD tanks from damaging the base, the cliff would have to be 250 metres tall. Volktillery would likely also be able to hit the base if the plateau was too low (think trying to hit the back of the Allied War Factory on RidgeWar).

 

Pacific Threat's flight ceiling is 50 metres high as well, and the flight ceiling would obviously have to be quite a bit above the plateau for Longbows to actually be able to move around - and then Longbows would likely be able to fly over the Soviet base without getting hit by SAMs because of how high the flight ceiling is.

 

If you make the plateau less tall and add a projectile blocker to blue-ball V2s, you also prevent snipers from shooting into or out of the base, and on the rare occasion that someone steals a Longbow, they'd likely end up hitting the blocker while trying to shoot pillboxes or something. Which is pretty dickish considering they're limited ammo units that the Soviets have no way to refill. (So you might also want to add a refill pad to the Soviet base.) Projectile blockers really only work if they're surrounding something that no unit can stand on.

 

If you get rid of V2s so there's no need for a blocker, and MAD tanks so the cliff doesn't need to be insanely tall, that leaves the Soviets with these War Factory options:

Supply trucks - instant access to these means the Soviets have an even easier time of rushing to the town, letting each passenger take a neutral truck, and taking them out of Allied reach.

Heavy tanks - fair. Without any buildings or vehicles to shoot, they are pretty much just "faster than sprinting" transports that put some hurt on infantry that are out of cover.

Tesla tanks - sort of bordering fair and unfair; on their own they're fine, and the only base structures they'd be able to hit are the pillboxes, but a whole army of these is going to be a pain to bring down.

Minelayers - well this certainly isn't OP when the Allies' only real offensive force on this map is in their infantry (until the SAMs/power is down) and the only way out of their base that doesn't involve buying a $1200 unit is going through a tiny chokepoint. What tech level is the map? If it's 5 I can definitely understand needing a Tanya deterrent, if it's lower then these are OP.

Ore trucks - fair. Well, until someone parks their ass in front of the Allied tunnel and delays the shit out of them.

Mammoth tanks - Soviets can probably just sit in their base until they get the money for these, then sit in their base some more until the time runs out. While that's obviously what you're supposed to do on defense missions, the Allies don't really have many ways of attacking a base that's full of mammoths without vehicles, especially if it's mined up to deny Tanyas.

Demo trucks - in the rare instance that Allies actually get into one of your buildings, you can just get one of these and solve the problem immediately. Boo.

Rangers - since Allies have no tanks, RPG rangers are basically longbows that also decimate infantry, have unlimited ammo, don't draw the ire of redeyes, and cost less, but can't attack the base cause they can't scale the cliffs. So everyone will probably get them because while they have less firepower than mammoths, they can easily move to counter any air/inf rush anywhere.

 

As you can see, for most of the armed vehicles, the main argument is that too many make it too easy to defend. Look at how well Allies do on Seamist with their only replenishable vehicles being longbows, which can't even be bought that frequently due to silo income. So you might as well just go the Seamist route of giving the Soviets a limited supply of vehicles and ditching the War Factory - and having them only come in after the first 2-3 minutes so the competition for the neutral supply trucks is a bit less one-sided.

 

I like the map idea itself, so thumbs up for that, but giving infinite vehicles to the defender when they have a higher income than Seamist Allies and better infinitely-buyable defensive options than longbows probably won't end well.

I was coming up with these ideas thinking that you couldnt just "pop" take out any unit from a faction without taking away a tech level. Now that I know that, I probably might change the map so that soviets could either buy heavy tanks and minelayers, or do what you suggest and just go the seamist route for the soviets.

Thanks for the input and thumbs up Push, really made my day.

[Pushwall]

As for Camos Crossing:

I feel the defenses could be spaced a bit further apart from each other, so they don't cover each other as well and are harder to repair.

I like how the barracks are facing away from the field, sniper camping should be much less of a concern now.

The resource field being gems might be a tad much. One dump is enough for the entire team to get Tanyas or Volkovs and still have all their previous silo income to spare.

I figure the original map was based on the bottom-right section of RA's Camos Crossing, so I'm not sure where that river below the Soviets is coming from

Then again, Camos Canyon doesn't look anything like the "real thing" either, so whatever.

I was coming up with these ideas thinking that you couldnt just "pop" take out any unit from a faction without taking away a tech level.

 

Yeah, you can add/remove units independently of tech levels (see also: how any map that doesn't have a radar dome doesn't have MRJs, and Hostile Waters previously didn't have shock troopers despite being above their tech level) Problem is that involves making a custom "temporary" purchase list, so any time a patch alters the default purchase list, you have to manually go through and update the list on any map that doesn't use the default list. Or else you get stuff like Hostile Waters a few versions ago where Grenadiers still costed 160 credits when they were 500 on all other maps.

[MPRA2]

Right.. Got all my work shit done before lunch.... now I can spend an hour looking for sheets of paper to make a more detailed map.... I swear, this shipyard doesnt want anyonr touching paper, as the only place you can find actual "printing paper" is only inside printers.... they dont keep any paper in supply closets... -_-"

We also have a sterile glove shortage...... This place is so derped on all of the imaginable levels.... its not even funny.

[Pushwall]

I've added a link in the OP to an album of Red Alert 1 map screenshots; this should be a handy reference for anyone wanting to recreate maps from RA1.

[MPRA2]

Pushwall, I'l have the elevation of the Allied outpost be the same as RidgWar's, but it will be moved back and covered by a Gap Generator to deter Soviets from actively trying to attack it. Probably botched the tunnel placements, but I added some Hedgehog Tank Blockers, and more cover for Allied infantry. I also spaced out the power plant section and added a silo for soviets and a refill pad. I was also thinking that soviets should start with an AI ore truck, and get a player controlled at 10 minutes before endgame along with a Tesla tank and an additional minelayer. Soviets will start with 2 Mammoths, a minelayer,and a V2. The V2 might be added to first wave reinforcements at 30 minutes. (45 minutes timer for the map).

I tried making the power plant side poorly defended, so that Soviets would be forced to pay attention to it so they dont lose power to samsites and Tesla Coil. Spies and Engineers will be the Allies best friend on this map. (I added a small village where the allied only tunnels exit at to give them some cover from tank fire.)

Update to Camos Crossing:

Finished a more APBish layout of camos crossing, spread the defenses out more, gave soviet flame tower on East end a sandbag cover, also removed the service depots as they would probably clutter the map, and it would have never been practical in the map to begin with. (The thick shaded lines are sandbag segments). Also moved around the tunnels and added lines showing how each tunnel path connects to the other. Removed the aesthetic bridge, and remade it to be on the original Beta's version.

Edited May 20, 2016 by MPRA2

[Raap]

Small update: As a mid-term solution to Fjord not being ready for a while, I have decided to delve back into Siege and finish it up.

 

Two hints of what to expect:

 

1- Two possible victory conditions.

A: Base destruction victory condition.

B: A to be determined victory condition where the castle plays a primary role. (Unfortunately, Dominion mode had to be excluded due to technical limitations with scoring in a traditional map.)

 

2- A very heavy air combat focus, as well as the first Delta map to feature both aircraft and Missile Silo's (worry not, the bases will be designed with it in mind).

Edited May 20, 2016 by Raap

[MPRA2]

Small update: As a mid-term solution to Fjord not being ready for a while, I have decided to delve back into Siege and finish it up.

 

Two hints of what to expect:

 

1- Two possible victory conditions.

A: Base destruction victory condition.

B: A to be determined victory condition where the castle plays a primary role. (Unfortunately, Dominion mode had to be excluded due to technical limitations with scoring in a traditional map.)

 

2- A very heavy air combat focus, as well as the first Delta map to feature both aircraft and Missile Silo's (worry not, the bases will be designed with it in mind).

Nice... cant wait to see how the map plays. I always loved Fjords, even when the V2/arty spam across the map was real as fuck...

[Raap]

 

Small update: As a mid-term solution to Fjord not being ready for a while, I have decided to delve back into Siege and finish it up.

 

Two hints of what to expect:

 

1- Two possible victory conditions.

A: Base destruction victory condition.

B: A to be determined victory condition where the castle plays a primary role. (Unfortunately, Dominion mode had to be excluded due to technical limitations with scoring in a traditional map.)

 

2- A very heavy air combat focus, as well as the first Delta map to feature both aircraft and Missile Silo's (worry not, the bases will be designed with it in mind).

Nice... cant wait to see how the map plays. I always loved Fjords, even when the V2/arty spam across the map was real as fuck...

 

 

Just to be clear, this will not be Fjord. I need more time for Fjord, so I'm finishing up Siege as a mid-term solution... The alternative would have been nothing at all.

[MPRA2]

 

 

Small update: As a mid-term solution to Fjord not being ready for a while, I have decided to delve back into Siege and finish it up.

 

Two hints of what to expect:

 

1- Two possible victory conditions.

A: Base destruction victory condition.

B: A to be determined victory condition where the castle plays a primary role. (Unfortunately, Dominion mode had to be excluded due to technical limitations with scoring in a traditional map.)

 

2- A very heavy air combat focus, as well as the first Delta map to feature both aircraft and Missile Silo's (worry not, the bases will be designed with it in mind).

 

Nice... cant wait to see how the map plays. I always loved Fjords, even when the V2/arty spam across the map was real as fuck...

Just to be clear, this will not be Fjord. I need more time for Fjord, so I'm finishing up Siege as a mid-term solution... The alternative would have been nothing at all.

Still. When Fhords gets finished, I'd love to play it. Cant remember Seige, but it sounds interesting.

If you or anyone has time, what map creation program do you use for Delta, and could i... uh.... probably get a basic bitch tutorial on how to make a map, and lay down structures? I could probably figure out the rest.

If you could Raap, just do it when you have time.

[ChopBam]

I can also help you learn mapping, MPRA2. Do you have Teamviewer? Send me a PM if you're interested.

[delta]

I've added a link in the OP to an album of Red Alert 1 map screenshots; this should be a handy reference for anyone wanting to recreate maps from RA1.

Oh hey that's pretty interesting and handy. I've been playing a bunch of skirmish games out of boredom and checking out a bunch of the maps I never touched...although there's no way I'd get through them all. But now, I have previews!

 

Funnily enough, I played through a game on Camos Canyon just earlier today before looking at this topic. I fired up my GPS satellite, took a look around, and thought to myself "there's nothing here that looks much like the map in APB". Then of course I come in here, see you saying the same thing and with that screenshot there, and now I've got a sense of deja vu...

Edited May 20, 2016 by delta

[Raap]

Cant remember Seige, but it sounds interesting.

 

Unless you were a Gamma tester, you wouldn't know Siege.

 

Rest assured I will be providing some preview images this weekend.

 

I'm currently in the process of updating the assets to Delta. I'm also re-designing the faction bases from scratch since all the buildings needed to be re-placed anyhow, as well as defenses, walls, scripts, etc. all being placed in 3DS Max these days. The updating process takes some time as I need to be careful no leftover Gamma properties remain on the map. There aren't currently any crashes on map load, so that seems to be all-clear.

 

Next up is re-texturing various parts of the map since Delta doesn't have all the textures that the map used to have. Then there is also another optimization pass (I've already cut draw calls in half by removing poorly optimized detail objects), as well as adding additional foliage around the map... Without going overboard on that.

 

Finally, I'll be adding the map specific gameplay elements, before ultimately shipping it off to testers. Unlike Hostile Waters, testing for Siege will be minimal since it isn't a major departure from core gameplay (air to air balance might come into close view on this map, however).

Edited May 20, 2016 by Raap

[MPRA2]

 

Cant remember Seige, but it sounds interesting.

Unless you were a Gamma tester, you wouldn't know Siege.

 

Rest assured I will be providing some preview images this weekend.

 

I'm currently in the process of updating the assets to Delta. I'm also re-designing the faction bases from scratch since all the buildings needed to be re-placed anyhow, as well as defenses, walls, scripts, etc. all being placed in 3DS Max these days. The updating process takes some time as I need to be careful no leftover Gamma properties remain on the map. There aren't currently any crashes on map load, so that seems to be all-clear.

 

Next up is re-texturing various parts of the map since Delta doesn't have all the textures that the map used to have. Then there is also another optimization pass (I've already cut draw calls in half by removing poorly optimized detail objects), as well as adding additional foliage around the map... Without going overboard on that.

 

Finally, I'll be adding the map specific gameplay elements, before ultimately shipping it off to testers. Unlike Hostile Waters, testing for Siege will be minimal since it isn't a major departure from core gameplay (air to air balance might come into close view on this map, however).

Well, cant wait to test it when the time comes around. Sounds like a really interesting map. I loved Hostile Waters and what you did with it, really brings out Red Alert's Naval combat, since it wasn't getting widespread use in the original Red Alert until 2, 3, and OpenRA came out.

If you wanted to give some constructive (or not) criticism to the map ideas I posted, I'd love to hear it. Goes for everyone else too, I appreciate the support. Hopefully sometime soon Choppy'll teach me the basics of making maps, so I can at least get a map shell made. Might have some trouble placing objects and making tunnels... My only map making experience was on Gmax back in... cold fusion or Nuclear winter I believe..... couldnt figure it out for the life of me.

Keep up the amazing work Raap.