Well the response is rather late, buuuuutt......
The fps has always been an issue and, at its heart it goes back to the basic design.
When I started making this map I didn't even know what an fps was
I wanted to make a big, open map with lots of detail. I had no idea that there is a trade-off that needs to be made between big areas and detail. It wasn't an issue for me personally because I have got a pretty good rig. It was only when I started beta-ing it that other people told me what it was doing to their fps.
By this time I was too far committed to the layout as it was/is to make any major changes - just removing some meshes where possible. My only hope is that, as people get better computers and video cards generally get better, more people will play this map. I am gradually seeing signs of this, or maybe it's just that word is filtering out.
Similarly, previously I never played with bloom on and this map was released long before Ramm's excellent tute on the matter. So, I had no idea how to adjust the settings. Therefore they (the bloom settings) weren't even looked at.
Finally, the station is based on Gumrak station and is, if anything, toned down from the original, which you can see here:
As a final note, I am pleased that my map is gradually gaining popularity and I am well aware of its shortcomings - (especially how 3 rounds of 30 minute infantry-only play can draaaaaag on).
The time may be approaching for a re-release with proper bloom, an attempt at bot-pathing, slightly more optimisation (inasmuch as a basically flat map will allow) and finally, more detail in the church; anybody who knows about these things can look at this map and say, "Yeah, he ran out of steam by the time he started mapping the third objective."
However, it will be a while yet as I am heavily involved in Carpathian Crosses at the moment, mapping and doing the sounds.
![Makhno [Anarchist]](/data/avatars/s/7/7653.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
