Announcement for mappers, related default map requirements (properties).

[Suowarrior]

Q: What are map requirements for default map (properties)?
A: Only bmp scenery is allowed. Transparency with bmp scenery isn't completely denied but consider when using it. Polygon count must be less than 700. Semi-transparent polygons are denied, however you can use completely transparent polygons with bridges for example. The map must be waypointed.

This is related especially with 1.5.1 new maps and remakes and for future. These requirements are made to keep Soldat friendly for slow computers also.

Any map that do not qualify these requirements will not be added into default list. No matter how good map is otherwise.

So if your map is in maplist for getting default or it's expectable that your map goes default, check and fix it to qualify these requirements.

[VirtualTT]

A:

• Dementions of all gfx should be below 640*480.
• New sceneries and textures should be png only.
• Working waypoints for both teams (even in DM maps).

[As de Espada]

The main problem to me will be the waypoints, but that can be arranged with someone else.

ps.: I think that VirtualTT is pretty doomed now 

[VirtualTT]

In general all te FPS issues are Soldat issues, not maps. If you can read this web page in your browser and it's not causing 100% system load you should be able to run soldat-level graphics with comfortable FPS. So blame soldat developers...

[Dusty]

VTT you can play your own shiny maps on your own public/private server. There is a reason why your maps don't run well on older computers in general. Seen that.

[VirtualTT]

There is a reason why your maps don't run well on older computers in general.

Yes, there is. And this reason is ugly Soldat code... Since the beginning of Soldat development no serious visual improvements were made. And i don't expect this to change since it's using 10 years outdated libraries. (read this lol)

ps.: I think that VirtualTT is pretty doomed now 

It's not like i was expecting any of my maps to get into defaults
If any of you ever visited Soldat homepage you saw some screenshots of the maps that will never be the part of Soldat. I guess quite a lot of new players were so disappointed after seeing some shity Arenas or Voland...

[zakath]

While png scenery and semi transparent polygons and such offer possibilities for makeing better looking maps, they unfortunaly affect fps negatively meaning that ppl with lower end systems will have problems playing such maps. Therefor the clarification of these policies for the default maps.

[VirtualTT]

Note that it is scenery with semi-transparency that are being rendered slower, not "png scenery".

[Wraithlike]

Request: Allow .png in sceneries set to 'back' so players can disable them with no problem.

[Blue-ninja]

What about animated .gifs? This hasn't really been addressed before.

Actually, a lot of things concerning what makes a map a default map hasn't been addressed.

[zakath]

Request: Allow .png in sceneries set to 'back' so players can disable them with no problem.

while that might be true, ppl with lowerend systems should as long as possible be able to see and play maps as they are supposed to be so atm we will stick to .bmp

What about animated .gifs? This hasn't really been addressed before.

Actually, a lot of things concerning what makes a map a default map hasn't been addressed.

animated gifs do unfortunaly dont work well for ppl with ati card as well as causing access violations for some ppl. so they are no go atm.

well this are more technical requirements for a default map. if you wonder about something else just ask.

[biohazard]

In general all te FPS issues are Soldat issues, not maps. If you can read this web page in your browser and it's not causing 100% system load you should be able to run soldat-level graphics with comfortable FPS. So blame soldat developers...

Very true, i can run normaly some beta maps in 1.5. Its just the client eating 50% of my current FPS.

[jrgp]

well this are more technical requirements for a default map. if you wonder about something else just ask.

What about non-animated gif's for sceneries/textures? They're much smaller than bmp's, and if one does not need the huge color palette of bmp or alpha transparency of png, why not use them instead?

[VirtualTT]

gif should be banned completely since it's not suitable for colour rich images and causes crushes in client...

both png and bmp support alpha transparency, however png is compressed

[Quantifier]

both png and bmp support alpha transparency

Alpha transparency in bmp has virtually no support at all.

however png is compressed

That means bmp can be directly copied to memory, but png needs to be decompressed first. Smaller doesn't mean better.

[VirtualTT]

both png and bmp support alpha transparency

Alpha transparency in bmp has virtually no support at all.

There is no problems with creating bmp with alpha channel...

however png is compressed

That means bmp can be directly copied to memory, but png needs to be decompressed first. Smaller doesn't mean better.

Soldat loads all the sceneries/textures only once - when map is being loaded. So png scenery decompression doesn't effect performance anyhow.

The difference in performance appears between rendering masked images and images with semitransparency.  This is not being effected by the format of the source images.

[jrgp]

I obviously wouldn't recommend the GIF format for all of your shiny high color and complex images you use VTT, I meant for really simple sceneries like bunker.bmp and all the other default ones that only use a few colors.

[VirtualTT]

well... Using gifs makes soldat kinda unstable... so i can't recomment it at all...
Also after some testing i figured out that soldat can't load bmp with alpha channel... what a disappointment...

btw Soldat also supports .tga and .tiff images ( and .dds probably, however i haven't try this one...)

[jrgp]

btw Soldat also supports .tga and .tiff images ( and .dds probably, however i haven't try this one...)

Has there been any testing or popular maps that make use of those formats?

[VirtualTT]

btw Soldat also supports .tga and .tiff images ( and .dds probably, however i haven't try this one...)

Has there been any testing or popular maps that make use of those formats?

Nope... i guess nobody even tried using them... And i'm not sure whether download from server code supports them...

[Snow]

Hmm, though I guess a lot of VTT's masterpiece's will never make default status due to poly count or sceneries, I still can't play Soldat without at least playing on one of VTT's maps (Trenchwars FTW).

Though I'm not much of a mapper by any consideration - I still make stuff in PW anyway (since I still want to make some cool maps and actually release something final and public one day), but didn't do much testing with animated .gifs as I wanted to. That sucks if .gif's make Soldat unstable. I wouldn't mind seeing maps with some cool *undistracting* things going on, such as something as simple as a few fireflies flying around, to flickering lights in buildings, to muzzle flashes, fires, random background explosions - or even distant vehicles going by. I wanted to do one map, where in the distant background, you could see a train go by. Not really interesting, but still kinda neat.

[Blue-ninja]

.tga and .tiff filetypes are rather uncommon filetypes, so nobody even bothers to use them as .gif .bmp .png and .jpg are the defacto standard of image and animated images sharing.

[Wraithlike]

And even then, .bmp is oversized shit, and .jpg is blurry shit, unless you want to make it not blurry shit, and it that case it simply becomes oversized shit.

[Eagles_Arrows]

Just wondering: Is Conflict still under consideration for default?  If so, I already got a "fixed" version that meets the requirements that's ready to be uploaded.

[Suowarrior]

Just wondering: Is Conflict still under consideration for default?  If so, I already got a "fixed" version that meets the requirements that's ready to be uploaded.

It isn't under consideration. In ctf case only the maps that have topics at default map discussions.

[Eagles_Arrows]

I saw it was mentioned in the sticky, but oh well.  I already got used to the notion that you guys will never consider anything I make a long time ago.

[Suowarrior]

Sorry for missunderstanding, WL quoted there zakath's very original suggestion in beta team. Updated it now.

In ctf_Conflict case, it changes Kampf's gameplay too radically that it couldn't have been considered as Kampf replacement but as new map. As new map it's okay map but at least I didn't find any hook that wants me to play that map. I don't like the top route that leads safely to flag and safely out (pretty much same thing as in Jungul).

[Dusty]

Oh but the borders look good now don't --------- no. Nuubia is ok, other maps not.

[p0ppin]

I thought most people just used black colored blank.bmp scenery to make those borders... it wouldn't show up on the minimap

[Blue-ninja]

I have a habit of making borders like that