Evil_bOb1Join Date: 2002-07-13Member: 938Members, Squad Five Blue
I attempted to do the same with my working version of turtle. What I figured out was that the loop way and the barrier way are in fact pretty different, even if essentially they look at the same thing. I found it difficult giving a hierarchy to the loops in turtle.
Here is the loops analysis in turtle (the north/NE area is what I am still working on and so is a bit void):
Hmm... I have to say the more I use complex splines to accurately trace the physical shape of the 'loops' the more I become convinced that basic eclipses are the best method.
The speed at which they can be produced is quite important and for me they also offer superior readability. I think for my personal experiments I'm going to return to just using eclipse's.
I've tried adding a 'value' colour map overlayed the loops- the basic idea was to convey the strategic value of any particular point/s of a loop. The value was determined by placing small dots for rt's and large ones for TP's, blurring the hell out of it and masking it with the existing loops.
I've abandoned secondary loop colours for this method instead I defined smaller loops (a loop contained within a single room) with thinner, smaller loops.
Moving onto designing maps using this method, I feel keeping them loose and abstract will provide the most fertile grounds for inspiration and idea generation.
I think the next step for me is inventing a way of randomly generating loop maps with some variation of the value map. Contextfree is probably the most suitable tool I can think of for doing this. Has anyone else got any other suggestions for ways or software we use to(with some basic constraints) randomly generate maps of this nature?
Has anyone tried inspecting level design through sloops?
Me and another level designer at work have been idly pondering them. There is definitely something to be read from them. But we haven't quite decided whether creating sloop diagrams is worthwhile.
A couple of things:
N.B.: I don't think loop diagrams can give you any precise information. At best, they can give you "insights" and "rough ideas"
The size of a loop gives you a rough idea of relative travel time
The number of loops in a map is proportional to its complexity
The number of features (tech points, resource nodes) along a loop suggests its importance
Building off the last two points; if a decent portion of the loops in a map are featureless (or almost featureless), you could say that the map is unnecessarily complex
However with that said, most of the information you can get from sloop diagrams you can get from simple layouts (that is, the simple point-to-point layouts that get drawn as you design the map, not detailed minimaps). However it could be said that it's easier to read this information from a sloop diagram.
MouseThe Lighter Side of PessimismJoin Date: 2002-03-02Member: 263Members, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
When my map drydosity came out the other side of the custom map cup, the general consensus was that it was too complicated and had too many redundant pathways.
Looking at it with loops on, you can see what they were talking about:
Although NS mapping is somehow more complex than normal multiplayer maps for FPS-only, it isnt such a difficult thing. I agree the loops help in seeing quickly the complexity/Navigation of a level, but when designing on paper you do it anyways when checking which room goes where.
For example, to start a basic map, you need at least 4 big loops between TP to TP running through a Resource, then the small loops inside the big ones gives you the navigational diversity.
I think the best is to start with big loops to create the TP to TP navigation, then start looking at the small ones and how easy/quick is to use the big loops.
In the image below (as an example) the top-half looks pretty cool, big loop from Underground to Tailwater and some small loops in the TP areas. In contrast, the left-down area from Headwater to Central Waterways has too many connections, there's 3 or 4 ways to go from one another so controlling the areas is pretty difficult for any team. Im using the rule of 2 different ways to the same area as a maximum.
Im also seeing some new levels which dont use a central area connecting with the rest, so they loop like a circle. I dont know how they play but i think they lack a big loop of connectivity and travelling looks boring.
Anyways, its great to discuss these things with other mappers, im re-learning NS mapping so quickly!
To be fair mouse, when looking at dry's overview didn't jump out as overly complex, its interesting to see how loops just highlight these issues. And thats it; The loop diagrams were never going provide any 'new' Information over traditional layouts but provide a simplified- and in turn- easily readable diagram to illustrate connectivity and complexity.
Randomly generating them seems like an interesting experiment if nothing else. My reasoning is that the abstract, lose nature of loop diagrams leave them wide open to interpretation. Randomly generating loop and 'value' maps with a click of a button might create happy-accidents for anyone stuck making wagon wheels. Obviously you'd have to heavily modify the outcomes but perhaps after a 100 clicks you might see something that gives a spark of inspiration. Even with such a basic breakdown of the design of a NS2 levels, we can see there's a massive amount of variation in.
In digital painting I use happy accidents a lot, if they have half the value for inspiration in layouts I'll be happy and surprised.
I'm going to try emulate this kind style with the random generation:
MouseThe Lighter Side of PessimismJoin Date: 2002-03-02Member: 263Members, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
On a side note, I don't think it'd be too hard to auto-generate loop diagrams by drawing the edges of the nav mesh onto the mini-map.
It's beyond me, as I'm completely unfamiliar with modding NS2, but conceptually it would be pretty straight forward.
Comments
Here is the loops analysis in turtle (the north/NE area is what I am still working on and so is a bit void):
And here is the barrier analysis:
The speed at which they can be produced is quite important and for me they also offer superior readability. I think for my personal experiments I'm going to return to just using eclipse's.
I've tried adding a 'value' colour map overlayed the loops- the basic idea was to convey the strategic value of any particular point/s of a loop. The value was determined by placing small dots for rt's and large ones for TP's, blurring the hell out of it and masking it with the existing loops.
I've abandoned secondary loop colours for this method instead I defined smaller loops (a loop contained within a single room) with thinner, smaller loops.
Moving onto designing maps using this method, I feel keeping them loose and abstract will provide the most fertile grounds for inspiration and idea generation.
I think the next step for me is inventing a way of randomly generating loop maps with some variation of the value map. Contextfree is probably the most suitable tool I can think of for doing this. Has anyone else got any other suggestions for ways or software we use to(with some basic constraints) randomly generate maps of this nature?
A couple of things:
N.B.: I don't think loop diagrams can give you any precise information. At best, they can give you "insights" and "rough ideas"
However with that said, most of the information you can get from sloop diagrams you can get from simple layouts (that is, the simple point-to-point layouts that get drawn as you design the map, not detailed minimaps). However it could be said that it's easier to read this information from a sloop diagram.
Looking at it with loops on, you can see what they were talking about:
Although NS mapping is somehow more complex than normal multiplayer maps for FPS-only, it isnt such a difficult thing. I agree the loops help in seeing quickly the complexity/Navigation of a level, but when designing on paper you do it anyways when checking which room goes where.
For example, to start a basic map, you need at least 4 big loops between TP to TP running through a Resource, then the small loops inside the big ones gives you the navigational diversity.
I think the best is to start with big loops to create the TP to TP navigation, then start looking at the small ones and how easy/quick is to use the big loops.
In the image below (as an example) the top-half looks pretty cool, big loop from Underground to Tailwater and some small loops in the TP areas. In contrast, the left-down area from Headwater to Central Waterways has too many connections, there's 3 or 4 ways to go from one another so controlling the areas is pretty difficult for any team. Im using the rule of 2 different ways to the same area as a maximum.
Im also seeing some new levels which dont use a central area connecting with the rest, so they loop like a circle. I dont know how they play but i think they lack a big loop of connectivity and travelling looks boring.
Anyways, its great to discuss these things with other mappers, im re-learning NS mapping so quickly!
Randomly generating them seems like an interesting experiment if nothing else. My reasoning is that the abstract, lose nature of loop diagrams leave them wide open to interpretation. Randomly generating loop and 'value' maps with a click of a button might create happy-accidents for anyone stuck making wagon wheels. Obviously you'd have to heavily modify the outcomes but perhaps after a 100 clicks you might see something that gives a spark of inspiration. Even with such a basic breakdown of the design of a NS2 levels, we can see there's a massive amount of variation in.
In digital painting I use happy accidents a lot, if they have half the value for inspiration in layouts I'll be happy and surprised.
I'm going to try emulate this kind style with the random generation:
It's beyond me, as I'm completely unfamiliar with modding NS2, but conceptually it would be pretty straight forward.