From PFE and CW3 I remember the map limits being 256x256 - if you left these limits (or similar) it'd be cool to allow XL maps which have a warning before you download it saying something like *this is laggy* *XL map* *proceed with caution* and etc. so that ideas which require a large map (e.g. things orbiting things orbiting more things, or 4 maps at once via microrift) can still function, just with a WARNING built-in.
Thoughts?
CW3 originally had larger maps during the alpha like if you look at Madmag's map. It was laggy at times but it did run. I think part of the reason for smaller maps could be an issue with servers having to hold massive maps that people submit.
As far as I can tell ... the largest maps tend to be the least interesting, and the most built.
How many maps in CS are 256x256, and scattered with 2K Emitters?
Most good maps tend to be substantially smaller than the upper limits, and "four maps in one" generally translates, to my mind, into "you should make four maps, not one".
Smaller maps can become a slog - how much more so will it be for large maps?
Quote from: GoodMorning on August 10, 2018, 10:25:35 PM
As far as I can tell ... the largest maps tend to be the least interesting, and the most built.
I agree with this. Protect the player from themselves.
Inexperienced mappers tend to be inclined to do max size maps thinking that bigger is better, and it happens a lot in CW3's Colonial Space. The result is large uninteresting maps that take a long time to complete.
Can you point to a single 256x256 Colonial Space map that doesn't become a slog as soon as you establish a base?
In my opinion, the max map limit should first be whatever still runs well on targetted CPU/GPU's, followed by wherever Knuckle Cracker draws the line of fun. Allowing maps that you know will be laggy is not a good look for your game, even if you put warnings on it.