Quake3World

Hi.

Today when I was pedaling a bike, I was struck by a thought of making a basic layout with small scale then scale it up to a playable one. [in radiant]

This is not the 1st time for me to be struck by this thought but I always forgot to try it.

I guess not a few people take this approach at initial stage, don't they?

It makes layout planning and adjustment easier because you don't have to move around far further, doesn't it?

So I want to ask here about the tips on this approach. [How much do you scale? etc...]

its such an open ended question... all i can say is make it work as you envisage it... we cant tell you how to make what it is you see... imagine the action and build it to fit. sorry, i hope that helps

It seems to me that you're very urge to conclude?

I've always wanted to discuss this[fundamental mapping approach behind/beyond tools] kind of thing in this forum.

When I walked through some of the most famous ctf maps, I noticed that it was impossible to build such a large geometry comfortably in default scale.

In other words it was built in a smaller size then scaled up afterward.

I should have imitated that approach earlier but I've always been too urge to build something, effectively forgetting about it, resulting in:

"He can't see the forest for the trees."

lol

This is impossible when you want brushes to be snapped to grid after scaling. Only thing you can do is using brushes with specific size and after that, when you will upscale/downscale them, they will be snapped to smaller gridpoints. But this need paper, claculator and basic math

Because using a small gridsize can cause subsequent errors in gridsnapping.

Thats what people in here learned me First of all, build only very easy geometry of your idea, try it, than add details.

I don't think it's so overwhelming an approach as you explain.

You make something basic in a bit smaller scale(1/2 or 1/4),

then upscale greatly(x8, x16 or whatever friendly value),

lastly add detail.

I guess this can be very effective an approach for speed mapping.

Why would making something small and scaling it up be any quicker than making it on a larger scale in the first place? If it takes 20 mins to make a 100 brush speed map, it doesn't matter whether those are 64 unit brushes or 256 unit brushes. It's still gonna take the same time. If anything going from a larger grid to a small grid would be faster. Smaller grid sizes tend to be much for fiddlesome.

Hi a13n!