Beta Map Hubes Breakout Beta 1

[Mike_Nomad]

I'll wait and see what the final release is like before offering any further opinions. We have the AB mutator that gives us true ballistics, that's all that really matters. As you said, as Admins the choice is ours. But in reality, its entirely up to our players. What they want is key to the future. Not what I, mappers, scripters, etc., want. The players call the shots. The "powers that be", whomever that might be, can be as stubborn as they wish. The players are the real boss. In end, the players will make the ultimate decision. The maps, mods and mutators they enjoy and want to enjoy repeat play with, will prevail.

Exactly. The AB mutator offers you real ballistics. I am not arguing that. You are arguing from a player view and I from a developer.

Please, re-read exactly what I posted....

I... am not arguing at all.

Just offering a multi-server Admin's opinion and conclusions.

 

[Reservoir Dog]

File conflicts

File conflicts

I don't integrate because then you have to re-release the entire map to upgrade the gun files and it eliminates a lot of file-conflict risk. Right now, as an example, whatever is in your /system folder overrides anything in your /cache. I always have to move the lastest ROGuns/AHzVehicle files to connect to a game server. Damn annoying when you forget and have to exti out and rejoin. The .u file is the driver file, yes.

I say go for it for mappers now. But realize that in a couple weeks, the final code will be released and it will force mappers, including myself, to go back and replace each existing factory with a new one. There will be some other settings to adjust as well. Price of progress. That is why I wouldn't integrate. Trust me.

I don't want to sound like I am questioning everything but am really just curious. If the developer renames all packages in their mods, wouldn't this eliminate all file-conflict risk? When I used .u**, I meant it as a wildcard, .utx, .uta. etc. If each package (animation, textures, sounds, etc) had a version number or "final" attached to its filename, it would first eliminate any "file mismatch" errors caused by people pulling resources out of their cache, and would make it very easy for mappers (and server admins) to upgrade to the newest version by using all new files and not worrying about overlapping ones. The map would also "unattach" any packages its not using so once the old actors are gone, no more dependency on old files.

This was a major problem with the UT2004 game for a while, until modders started using version numbers in their filenames. It caused alot less issues for mappers, players, and servers and no more jumping out of the game to go to your system folder (I've done that way too many times....lol).

I have a work in progress map that I will hold on releasing the beta until the final version of the AT gun is out. I'm not going to ask an eta, or "how's it coming along" question. I will be patient like the mappers for Hubes Breakout on the release.

Reservoir Dog

 

[Slyk]

Now that the map pack is announced, I'll answer differently. The AT guns and BT7 will now be part of the stock game content and will be treated just like any other vehicles. So problem solved. Integrating, in my opinion is still not a good thing with models/code/etc that may change due to tweaks and fixes. I don't know for sure if a new download or server-side /system file such as a vehicle.u file overrides an integrated map file.

We are still going to release another AHz pack of the pak40, Zis3 and a *surprise* which will most likely be treated as the current weapons only we anticipate them being released as a 'final' from the start (some type of AHz_Vehicles.u package). Too early to promise that but now that Ramm has had a chance to proof and tweak the AT gun class and fully integrate it into the base game, we should be in good shape. We will provide instructions on implementing these into maps etc. If guys want to integrate, they can, just saying I dont' know what happens with revised files.

Short of TWI absorbing all content and distributing it via Steam, there is no way to make sure every mapper and server admin runs the most current file package, regardless of what it is. Some people decide they like beta1 better than beta2 of a map and never upgrade etc. You can't mandate that they do upgrade and plenty of folks are just too lazy so you live with it. Steam distribution is the best way to manage consistant content, but that is a whole other ball of legal hurdles and such that is a rather big pain in the a$$ in my opinion. It is never as easy as people think...and most often, those that think they know all the facts, dont.

 

[ViViD]

Good on Tripwire, but they should of listen to me (and others) in the first place long ago when I said AT guns, mortars are important adds, they left it to the community to prove it.

But it does mean rejigging every map, when tripwire has a play around perhaps.

I just wished they would just intergrate the AB Mod and admit their half arse attempt in realistic armour was flawed and add from there.

The problem is the default armour model is flawed so the AT guns will be flawed. I hope amizaur then works on modding the ballistics when tripwire releases the AT Guns.

Either way congrates on you guys for getting content into a default engine. Well Done.

---------------------------------

Anyway back to Hubes all <smile>

 

[smokeythebear]

Got a chance to play it a couple days back. Not bad, but a lot of problems cripple it.

-Bad lighting. The ground is very light which contrasts with the dark skybox which makes everything look a bit off. Either darken the map or change skybox.

-I think you should leave AB mod up to game admins. Some like it, most do not.

-Some objectives are kind of akward to defend, for example that little crate that needs to be blown up in the pillbox. Just make a capzone.

 

[Luther]

Lighting is being worked on.

AB is must for this map, no 2 ways about it

There are trench systems on both sides of the pillbox and the pillbox is a good defense in its self. Could have even an mg set up behind it to deny the enemy time to blow it up. We have done it so you must take most of the positions in order to blow it up as I am sure not to many jihad's get through.

 

[Mike_Nomad]

Lighting is being worked on.

AB is must for this map, no 2 ways about it

There are trench systems on both sides of the pillbox and the pillbox is a good defense in its self. Could have even an mg set up behind it to deny the enemy time to blow it up. We have done it so you must take most of the positions in order to blow it up as I am sure not to many jihad's get through.

The map desperately needs optimization or changes. The laggyness around the bunker and its trenches is severe when there are vehicles (UPC's) sitting there smoking but not burning along with people in and around the trenches and tanks in the area. It gets rough.

Distance view is terrible...

 

[Luther]

Well removing all the sandbags it only adds 4 more FPS, and deleting all static meshes add another 10, though it would be no fun attacking a pill of dirt. From the view with the players that play on the server that I visit on a reg basis there is some lag, but only selected people have it. People with Nvida don't suffer as much as other brands, got me buggered. Again Vivid can fill you in with the details . I will have a mess around with the trench system and see what I can do but at the most as I said you could save 4FPS.

The actual map is made of two seperate 512x512 terrains and we combined them together. We did this so the level of terrain detail would be supperior to what is on the market. By chance were these join is at the trench sytem at the Pillbox and go in line with the length of the trench, but were we fudged it in was near the AT gun near the Farmhouse. Could this have anything to do with the lag?

 

[Slyk]

You guys should consider a couple things. First, the AB mutator is not the 'end all' mod. Some will like it, some not, that doesn't mean it is what the entire community should embrace and least of all TWI. Secondly, I would wager that it runs the risk of breaking as many things as it fixes. And most importantly, belittling the developers is not a good way to get them to listent to you and potentially help you. Some of them have years of experience in the UT environment and I would guess that they did and did not do certain things because of engine limitations and in the interest of making playable maps. Everything is a trade off and everyone has to make concessions. And maybe most importantly, any development team has to consider what their resources are and what they can release to what degree of quality. The more quality you want, the less quantity you get. It is simple mathematics. A small team can never do it all and they have plainly said that they looked to the community to create more content. Now TWI has stepped forward to help get that content integrated into the base game code. That's a great step.

It might enlighten some people to actually ask "why did you do this..." or "why did you not do this..." instead of chucking ridicule at the devs and expecting them to take time to reply.

Regardless of viewpoint, maps, models, code, and mods are just the creator's vision of what is good/bad and how they think things 'should' be. None of that makes their work what IS right or wrong. It is all opinion, just like forum posts. Take it or leave it, you get what you are given and if you have the time and talent to try and change it you do. If not you deal with it or walk away. The ever present component in most communities is that the members take on some childish sense of entitlement. No one owes anyone anything, professional developer or private member.

 

[Lex]

Have you tried the map without the AB mutator to see if fps and performance is increased? Maybe if the mutator was running ontop of the map instead of embedded in the map ( not sure how you have it) the performance may get better. You may have to make the decision to run the AB mutator on top of the map to get better performance out of the map. Again I don't know how you have it integrated into the map but it may be worth a try to see what happens with the performance.

Lex

 

[Mike_Nomad]

Surprise, surprise. I agree, please remove the AB mutator. Let it run on its own for those Admins using it. If every map has a "version' of AB embedded and running and the Server is running a "version" also, where are we going with this venue?

Let AB run as a true mutator, don't integrate it in the maps at all. Before long, its a strong possibility it'll create headaches and version incompatibilities of some sort. Not to mention possibly using extra system resources due to duplicity.

As for the take it or leave it, I ain't walking away. I may not run troublesome maps that a mapper either cannot or will not fix. But I'll keep our servers and a few NEW ones running until the cows come home. There are far too many good points about RO that easily overcome the few animosities and sour grapes out there. Too many good people have worked far to hard for anyone to encourage others to dejectedly "walk away" for any reason... its simply not a justifiable suggestion as it can hurt TW. Its true nobody owes anyone a thing but I like to hope that with the outstanding support and communication we enjoy with Tripwire, that the majority of us feel we owe some level of loyalty to TW.

 

[Reservoir Dog]

You guys should consider a couple things. First, the AB mutator is not the 'end all' mod. Some will like it, some not, that doesn't mean it is what the entire community should embrace and least of all TWI.

Now that the map pack is announced, I'll answer differently. The AT guns and BT7 will now be part of the stock game content and will be treated just like any other vehicles.

Ok, so you are saying that TWI should "embrace" the AT gun and BT7 mods but not look at other mods to improve upon their platform? This is a little disturbing to me. I have yet to see a post complaining about AB2 mod, so where are you drawing your conclusions Slyk? On the contrary, I have seen plenty of posts raving about how much work has gone into it, the enhancements to armor and shell calculations, and the improved game physics. If TWI "embraced" the AB mod, then all of this talk about file conflicts, keeping up with the latest version of mods, and "integrating" issues for mappers would be irrelevant. It would solve alot of issues, and not create as many as you have previously posted. If your comment was referring to the balance of vehicles or having to go in and having to adjust maps to fix gameplay, I'm sure the resources and talent at TWI could accommodate it as they will do with your mods. I am in no way affiliated with either of these two mods and as a completely independent 3rd party, I see a big problem with your statements. This is only my opinion gathered by the previous posts.

Reservoir Dog

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

I really, really did not get that out of reading all that as you did RD, and at the moment I even happen to like AB.

As previously stated, people here can have the endless gameplay/realism debate and how something like AB would fit into it and RO in general and probably get nowhere and change very few minds.

Ultimately it is up to TWI what their vision for the game is (either some realism, ultra realism, or whatever), what they would embrace and what they would rather leave as a mod/mutator. I am sure that even some of what they do is a test in a way for their next game/project.

 

[ViViD]

I am working on this lag issue but it is hard when I don't have the problem myself, that does not mean I don't care, I will continue to tweak and investigate but the problem, IT IS NOT happening to everyone and I am yet to find anyone willing to help me who is having problems. I am starting to believe this issue is to do with emitters or something thats not normally included in maps. But unless a party sticks up their hand to help out and test how they get this issue all your words are nice but don't help me. Or some sort of driver difficulty that has been so obvious in the past.

I need a person who is willing to provide some hard numbers, who is having this problem. So atleast I have a starting point. I can't help what I can't see myself

How I read Slyk post was how RD read it, it all in interpration I guess.

AS for TWI, if they have a faulty part in the game, I will say it is faulty. I not going to play nice, nice like you guys aint playing nice nice about this map, it is all apart of the process. Anyone who announces realism should atleast attempt to make sure it is close, the armour models is no where near close.

 

[Slyk]

The point I have been trying to make is that if you integrate code/models/etc into a map, I do not know how it will be affected if an update goes out to the servers etc. So if someone is going to release non-final content, I would not suggest intergrating it into the map unless TWI says how things will work. Why limit your upgrade path or risk corrupting your own work with future progress?

By nature of the contract all mappers were required to sign, TWI takes ownership of our custom content. Long story. Bottom line is it is now TWI property, 100% and thus it is becoming part of the official game. Without the contract and it's contents, none of the contest materials could be released as they are being. That is no small miracle on TWI's part.

The 'embracing' of any mod could require the developers to change their original vision of the game and in many cases, may jepordize the stability of the game as it is. If anyone knows what is technically best for the game, it would be the guys who created it. Based on that experience and what they want the game to 'be', they add content as they can/want. Simple concept.

 

[Reservoir Dog]

The point I have been trying to make is that if you integrate code/models/etc into a map, I do not know how it will be affected if an update goes out to the servers etc.

Ok, so you don't know. But it seems you are throwing alot of speculation out there that there will be lots of issues. I'm not saying you are using scare tactics, but alot of suspicions that are scaring mappers, mod developers, and server admins. You had completely ignored my previous post "File conflicts" unless the statement,

It is never as easy as people think...and most often, those that think they know all the facts, dont.

was an acknowledgment without a reply. I don't have all of the facts, but have dealt with unreal engine for a while. Since you like simple concepts here is one:

I make a new tank mod and call the file tiger2version1.u (with all of the associated file types having the same file name). I "integrate" it into my new map called RO-TigerHill_beta1.rom . I later create an update to my tank mod called tiger2version2.u . If a server tries to load the map without the mod, it won't work. If the server loads version 2 of the mod and tries to load the map, it won't work. Only when the server loads the version 1, because of the filename attached to the map, it will run on the server. You are trying to make this a very complicated issue. Its not.

Short of TWI absorbing all content and distributing it via Steam, there is no way to make sure every mapper and server admin runs the most current file package, regardless of what it is. Some people decide they like beta1 better than beta2 of a map and never upgrade etc. You can't mandate that they do upgrade and plenty of folks are just too lazy so you live with it. Steam distribution is the best way to manage consistant content, but that is a whole other ball of legal hurdles and such that is a rather big pain in the a$$ in my opinion.

I beg to differ. If a server can't run a map because it is missing a version of a package, they will either get it, or not run the map. This is cut and dry. This is the best way for a mapper to have consistent content, integrating mods with versions numbers and not relying on Steam with all filenames the same. In the above example, I might not want my map to have the next version of the mod for whatever reason. I wouldn't want steam to update it automatically without consent and checking balance.

Why limit your upgrade path or risk corrupting your own work with future progress?

This would be eliminated with different filenames. If a mapper wants to upgrade with a new version, it should be his choice. This is just more speculation.

You guys should consider a couple things. First, the AB mutator is not the 'end all' mod. Some will like it, some not, that doesn't mean it is what the entire community should embrace and least of all TWI.

If anyone knows what is technically best for the game, it would be the guys who created it

These two statements are polar opposites of each other. I guess you have "answer differently " again.

My biggest issue is that you are not talking about "any" mods, according to your last reply, but AB. You have thrown out your opinion that it will break as many things as it fixes, and the TWI should be the least to embrace it without giving one reason why. I'm am absolutely sure if TWI looks at it, likes it, wants to integrate it, they will make all neccessary adjustments to make the integration stable. To imply otherwise would be considering TWI incompetent. Throwing out insults about a mod without one valid reason seems to bring the words "some childish sense of entitlement" to mind.

Reservoir Dog

PS Most of us in the business community know what a release form is.

 

[ViViD]

I think this comes down to how mappers want their maps to be played. If anyone has a right to how it is played then it is them the ones who put the time in.

I can hear Mike mubbling about the players and their right if it aint good it will not be played. I have someone who is the server admin for the australian server we play on and he says the same things. So I think yes the thought must be there what worth is creating a map without it being played.

I got far more satification in creating Narva17March which if you look on the finnish list it hardly every gets played, but to me I love that map as it is my finest work. It is historical the landscape is accurate and so are the load outs.

But at the core of it the mapper must choose how it gets played and if a Mod is an intergral part of that, then it should be played only with the Mod in it. I think mappers need to bend like a stalk or branch, but not break away from it root.

Either way perhaps these discussion are served better elsewhere then Hubes Beta as I tryin gto gether infomration on lag and stuff..

 

[Slyk]

Dog, I said it a few times. I DO NOT KNOW for a fact, what file takes precedence. I am not trying to incite fear or any other situation. I choose not to integrate files because I was not sure what would happen as we versioned up the AT gun. That is it. Ask TWI what happens. The greatest problem is that server admins do not all keep on top of the latest release of any map, mod, etc. Everyone knows that. Some are very good about it, most are not. The problem comes in with X versions of a map with Y versions of code/models. There is the concern. If guys don't care, let them release what they want how they want. It is their choice. I for one will be issuing seperate vehicle/code packages because in my mind I risk less and the community mappers can more easily pull stuff out and use if for themselves.

That is the simple argument.

As for breaking stuff, yes, I personally believe more people 'think' they know how to do things and what is 'right/better/faster' etc. and in fact they do not. Trial and error is how most people learn anything new but experimenting on the community at large is no way to go about it if it can be helped. I am not picking on any mod, group, or person. Just stating that it is entirely possible to break something unknown until after the fact because as with any mod, it is a modification of the base code etc. And without all the background information, you run risks.

 

[Mike_Nomad]

The greatest problem is that server admins do not all keep on top of the latest release of any map, mod, etc. Everyone knows that.

So, because of some lazy Admins, the diligent Admins and their well kept, updated and maintained servers must suffer? Sorry, that thinking just ain't right. The lame Admins and their servers should NOT, under any circumstances, dictate the "norm". That premise would only serve to denigrate the entire RO platform.

 

[Blablo]

Excellent, Vivid. I've liked all of your maps. I'm pleasantly surprised that someone even took note of this battle as it is not well-known.