Ruud033

Found the issue.. Set this to 1. If you really want to have very crisp details in your landscape (RenX is not worth it with the current graphics trust me) you could set this to 2. Also, check your world settings. You need to set Rx_Game as a gametype and also as MapInfo. The little things like the ship on the desk, the MKII on the desk and the light tanks on the desk also cast shadows, remember that! To track where the expensive things are, use the "primitive stats" browser. It provides you with a list of things in your level and provides information about them. Most important here is that the 'cost' is determined by the amount*weight. So if you have 2 or 3 objects with a 1024 lightmapres it's not important. If you have 100001 trees with a lightmapres of 64 THAT is a thing what matters. You have a dark level so the shadows don't need to be that crisp. I think you can get away with 32 on every tree and maybe 64 on some spots.. depends on what you like as a result. Just try. Remember; the bigger the lightmapres*amount-of-meshes, the bigger your map file size in MB. What grey area? I only see water

Some still were at 64 and all background trees casted a shadow.. even the skeletal meshes casted a shadow (not needed). I still had the error while rebuilding though. I'll look into it.

Getting there! I think that at this point, its better to write the storyline first and then continue work on the map, as the map will eventually take shape accordingly.

No. Once you hit 10.000+ it might be a question but 250 is nothing. Thats the error right there. Try running the 64 bit version of the SDK. Also be sure to use the latest one. Check how many light bounces you have in the world settings, set it to 3. Check the trees and their lightmapresolution. I wouldnt be suprised if they're set to 64 or 128, hence the memory issue. Make sure you have enough space on your hard drive.

It'd be better to post a script instead to discuss what lines to use where before you start recording. If you start recording straight away that'll get messy very fast. @j0g32 I can help you setup this if you like. I already have some idea's on how to do stuff, as already has been said.. we have to tweak the level to match the Renegade-X gameplay a bit more. We also might incorporate vehicle training.. how that'll be implemented is something to discuss before we begin doing it. The AI kismet is going to be the tricky part

@Henk can you export the mesh from this level as a baseline?

When's episode 5? I really miss these, they're awesome

Great ideas! But why wait on other people or developers to implement these? You can make your own models or search people who can make these for you and implement this stuff via mutators.

Ah ok, thats probably because you have not assigned a source to it for it to record. You can search the web for tuts on this.

Oh, i thought you had an AMD card. For Nvidia cards, use NVENC https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=EgIIBQ%3D%3D&q=nvenc+obs I'm sorry I don't quite understand this sentence..

Yes it is throttling here, you can see it going from load to idle very fast. Fraps is based upon the CPU, not the GPU. By lowering the settings in RenX you mostly unstress the CPU as the UE3 also leans heavily on the CPU.. You're best of using OBS (Open broadcaster software) because it has AMD VCE Support, this is similair to Nvidia's shadowplay. Link: https://obsproject.com/ It takes away the CPU overhead and is completely open source and 100% free! It's awesome. Check out this video;

Time is indeed the factor.. ive spent a crazy amount of hours diggin the UDK.. I'd keep the map anyway, I'd ask ffreak to add it to the server, see if people will vote it or not.. its not a bad map, but i don't think its worth patching this officially.

I think the lag is just packet loss, now that the 10kbps limit is gone this might be fixed.

There's a good chance that this will be fixed next up. Check again after the next patch

Under has been fixed and is ready to ship.

New complex has been built and is ready to ship.

Working on it.. be patient ;p

I agree on this. Ok I can understand this

This. @Agent could you work this out? The only reason why I still make these .ini's is because I have to reference the map preview image here. Furthermore it's there for the skirimish stuff as @ShrewdTactician said. As far as I'm concerned I'd rather have these ini's removed. Just add the settings to the world info here. Putting a video file into a .udk or .upk file is easy. Reading that would be the trick I think. Only if you cook the map, which we don't do

I don't even have air units on this map? And yeah the bots have troubles piloting the titan because they're not used to driving walkers. This is on any map tho.

Yes this is correct

Yes soon

I disagree, here is why: I do not wish to build a giant Yosh-like wall to -only- prevent vehicle spawn exploits. Yes the airstrip is a huge flat piece of building, yes it is hard to balance it out with the GDI buildings since they resemble more to cubes than the Nod ones. Compensating for each building flaw would make the odds for every team even eventually but would also take out all of the risk of the game and the difference in teams. Remember that Nod has different tactics than GDI and that always will be. The units are not equal, they all have their special abilities. I do not intend to completely block-off the vehicle spawn area, if you look at the GDI spawn area it's also quite open, there is not so much space to hide except for behind the ref and WF (and that easily get cluttered) I've made these changes to give people more time to dodge the incoming fire with a decent time window, even with siege of 8 mediums pounding. Exactly. If GDI is under fire they cannot fully retreat either. I believe that this situation will even the odds. Here's some screens to show that you've got plenty of time to get out of the heat zone: Siege spot 1, silo: Siege spot 2, middle: Siege spot 3, middle-low: Siege spot 4, end of strip: Remember, it is not impossible to kill vehicles but it makes it significantly harder now. I believe Nod and GDI have equal chances now. I see it this way: either Nod or GDI will siege a base and now have equal opportunities. The defending team, whether that'd be GDI or Nod have the same amount of choices they can make to counter attack. I made the Nod base favor Nod slightly now because they can use their up-close tacs (flamers/stanks) since their only mid-range vehicle is the scary light tank and only long-range is the arty.

Those scenes.. exactly what I had in mind creating Crash Site.. what a lovely atmosphere. Amazing how that music brings back CNC3 memories.. love it!

So Ive changed the Nod base a bit, I also kind of liked the way you moved the airstrip tower to act as a first-defence. BUT moving this has one big disadvantage, Nod players will spawn much closer to the silo to capture the silo than GDI players. The GDI base is positioned much further back. (Note that this Nod advantage was in this map from the very start too) I moved the WF a bit closer to the middle too. Not sure if this will cause huge problems. And for anyone wondering about the building double-nuke, no worries I got it covered. Please post your thoughts. Personally im thinking about moving the strip tower back again and placing something else there