Shared Map

Discussion for Level editing, modeling, programming, or any of the other technical aspects of Quake
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by wattro »

Silicone_Milk wrote:How is the 45 degree rotation working out?
quite badly, as expected! in one word: don't ever ever ever rotate a significant portion of a map. i wasn't surprised by the results.... but i did briefly fantasize that things may stay close to grid and be salvageble. nope!

i guess i could probably do some export/import model-fu, if i was so inclined to deal with models ;)

i think i'll give the level a rebuild anyways and try to keep it cleaner.

the other strat is to chop out the extra layer that ix-r mentioned. it should be fairly easy to work that part out of the equation and i'll probably try that first.
Silicone_Milk
Posts: 2237
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:49 pm

Re: Shared Map

Post by Silicone_Milk »

You could export the brushwork to .ase and import into blender. Rotate, save, and load as a model (or a few model sections since the size might be too big).

In fact, I'd do it but I wouldnt get it done until... saturday.
maz0r
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 7:00 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by maz0r »

How about rotating the midfield in contrast to the base?

Great version btw wattro. Much better than the previous one. But as mentioned before the mid-section is still too large and confusing. Also I dislike the new lower entrance to the center under the higher platform. But I'm not quite sure about the rotating thingy. Could work out but I fear that the parts laying on the other side of the base (where the rail is) become abandoned since they are just off the beaten track.
a13n
Posts: 1672
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:08 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by a13n »

@Magnus
1st of all, thank you to integrate my tiny idea!
But as you've already mentioned yourself, the layout is now a bit lengthy.
Bots played the level fairly well, but there always accompanied some kind of emptiness here and there on the battle.
Quad and Regen seemed to be too close to each other.
I think we could expect more to your next brand-new version. :)

@wattro
As some people have already mentioned west and center area is a bit confusing.
Sometimes I came to loose the direction where I was going on.
The battle around the base was really fun, even against bots!
I think we should use your base layout.
Jumppads at midfield seemed to be better than the previous version.
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by wattro »

maz0r wrote:1) rotating the midfield in contrast to the base?
2) the mid-section is still too large and confusing.
3) dislike the new lower entrance to the center under the higher platform.
4) not quite sure about the rotating thingy. Could work out but I fear that the parts laying on the other side of the base (where the rail is) become abandoned since they are just off the beaten track.
v. cool & thanks =)

1) hadn't thought of that but i see where it could have good results
2) agreed - i'm going to follow ix-ir's advice and cut out a layer - that's probably the quickest and most necessary thing to do
3) i wasn't sure about this when i put it in... it was kinda a whim
4) i figured in this scenario that the powerups (eg: red armor, railgun, regen/haste) would bias towards the unbeaten track
Silicone_Milk
Posts: 2237
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:49 pm

Re: Shared Map

Post by Silicone_Milk »

wattro wrote: 4) i figured in this scenario that the powerups (eg: red armor, railgun, regen/haste) would bias towards the unbeaten track
Yep. That was my assumption too.
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by wattro »

latest/newest version of the map.

-took ix-ir's advice and cut out a layer between each base and midfield and shaved off about 6 seconds worth of travel time running from flag to flag. added bonus is that bots now routinely take two routes
-tomorrow i'll give the items a pass, fix up some jumppad issues, hint the level, maybe add some non-ambient lighting, and maybe some botclipping... and any actionable feedback

questions/comments:
-how is the size and LOS issues now?
-is the overall flow better or worse? what rooms/corridors suck?
-how bad is item placement? too much, too little, doesn't flow?
-i was thinking of adding some cushions in certain places - are these OK when the fall distance is only 256 units or is that completely frowned upon?
a13n
Posts: 1672
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:08 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by a13n »

@wattro
funny domain name :olo:
(You're most likely to be one of the domain abusers on the net. :p)
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by wattro »

newest version the map can be found here.

have a playthrough please and let me know the good, the bad, and the ugly

summary:
- items rearranged/added, maybe too many
- geo/layout tweaks
- routes more balanced (i think!)
- new rock textures
- bots coincidentally play alot better and use just about everything in the level now... though they are still retarded

[lvlshot]http://www.robotrenegade.com/q3wptmctf1/source/wattro/q3ctfptmwattro.jpg[/lvlshot]
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by wattro »

a13n wrote:@wattro
funny domain name :olo:
(You're most likely to be one of the domain abusers on the net. :p)
it's obsidian's... he's the renegade. ;)

my internet abusing days are long gone (there was hardly any semblence of a net back when i abused stuff, it was modems and BBS' and i was a courier) =)
Silicone_Milk
Posts: 2237
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:49 pm

Re: Shared Map

Post by Silicone_Milk »

the latest layout looks kinda similar to Q3CTF2
dichtfux
Posts: 571
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:51 pm

Re: Shared Map

Post by dichtfux »

I like it. Many improvements, better layout, not confusing anymore. :up:
[color=#FFFFFF][url=http://maps.rcmd.org]my FPS maps[/url][/color]
a13n
Posts: 1672
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:08 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by a13n »

wattro wrote:it's obsidian's... he's the renegade. ;)
So you and q3map2 manual are hosted by obsidian like before?
wattro wrote:my internet abusing days are long gone (there was hardly any semblence of a net back when i abused stuff, it was modems and BBS' and i was a courier) =)
Sorry, I don't get it.
Please don't use a complicated word like "semblence". (something quite similar with a person who likes to use this kind of complicated word...)
Magnus
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:38 pm

Re: Shared Map

Post by Magnus »

Silicone_Milk wrote:the latest layout looks kinda similar to Q3CTF2
Heh, funny you should mention that. That is exactly what I was talking about when I said that rear areas behind the flag should offer a suprise entry into the flag room and should have an entrance somewhere close to midfeild and exit in the flag room where the FC can access the flag quickly or exit in an area behind the flag.
Q3CTF2 shows this fairly well with the underwhatwe tunnels that you can enter at midfeild and exit behind closed doors right next to the flag room.
It is a slower path and you are kind of traped for a few portions of the path, but you for the most part have a bit of suprise and often have a bit of solitude by using this path to and from the enemy flag.

@ wattro
1. Nice layout modifications. Still feels a bit like a FFA just due to flow. FFA and CTF flow very differently. I may not be a renound mapping king or a CTF, FFA expert, but I sure do know how a CTF shoud feel and flow.
2. The vert play in your flag room modification is very nice. Bots need to be controlled a bit more to prevent stupid decisions(a lot of backflips into the lava and cratering going on there...lol), but we are not really building this for the bots; we are building it for the players. Although I would like to see some excelent bot support and bot use of the map on this one.
3. I like the more rounded look to many areas, but again I had intended for us to just go for a pre alpha rough layout at this stage. Letting it be so rough alows us to pump out ideas faster so we can come to a final pre alpha that we all agree on. If you are more comfortable working in a bit more detail at this stage then go for it though. That will save time on detailing and cleanup to your areas in the alpha stage.
4. Some of the LPs fall short (mostly in the midfeild) you really have to push youself hard in the air to make the jump across(and even then you don't always make it.) and some of the JPs slam you against the underside of the platform it is inteneded to place you on top of. It is generally a bad idea to place a JP that has a path that is tilted in the opposite direction from what you are going to approach it from unless you have a large open area that the JP path travels through. JPs should move you up and forward a bit, but some are moving you up and back. Otherwise you end up riding the underside of the JP path and smacking into something causeing you to fall short of being able to get to the intended destination.
5. I had placed a few lava hazards in my first version and got a lot of feedback from serious CTF players that all said the really get pissed at the idea of dieing due to lava, slime fog of death, ect... That is why I placed the puzzle blocks and grates over most of the lava in my early versions and just kept with that idea. I think it would be best if we keept to a standard of making a hazzard "feel" dangerous, but offer no real threat of death. I like the way you spaced out the puzzle blocks more than what I had them spaced out. This gives that "feel" of danger, but since it is covered in full clip there is no real danger for the most part of a lava death. :up: Good one!
6. I noticed you have no weponclip on those puzzle block areas. Would it be a good idea to place some there to prevent odd RL explosions and grenade drops? Just a though that was mentioned to me way back in this thread.
7. I like the blocking in the flag rooms. It offers the FC a chance to get closer to the enemy flag killing LOS issues in a large flag room where people like me that are fairly good snipers and are able to judge where an enemy will be so I can lead out with a rocket causeing their path to meet up with my rocket path. Good job. :up:
8. I like the texturing you used. Did you create those? They are a fair bit better for this kind of map than those three I created. I think we sould try to loose that Gothic style block I created as a texture and replace it with something else more appropriate for a cave style map. I guess that will be something to consider in the actuall alpha stage.
9. The entire map seems a bit dim. I know it is supposed to be a cave, but it seems dark cloudy day dim rather than cave dim for some reason. Perhaps some wall torches will fix it. :confused: Of course again that is a lighting issue and would most likely be best dealt with in the alpha stage.

Hope the feedback helps man :)

Now I have some questions for all of you.

1. Would anyone be opposed to or have any reason that it would be a bad idea for me to create a suprise path that is a tunnel requireing that you swim through the lava and enter close to midfeild or so and exiting behind the flag area? My idea is to create a path that will be timed in distance so a player could pick up a battlesuit and then swim through the lava and the battle suit would wear off just after you exit the path behind the flag area offering a suprise rear attack. I think it would offer a nice addition to possible stratagies.
2. I am working on a major modification to the layout using some of the areas/rooms we have all created and then building new areas/rooms for conecting our origonal rooms up. So far it looks like it is going to be way smaller than the versions so far and only around 6000 to 7000 units from one end to the other with fast and well flowing play. My question here is before I get too far into it what is the proper size for width and hight on paths and room connections in your opinions? I figure 256 units wide and 256 uits high should be the minimum or norm to alow for all styles of movement, but I am seeing in several versions with sizes like 128 and 384 wide and 128 to 256 high.

Well that is about it for now. Back to work. :)
Uh, well....good luck with that. :shrug:

[img]http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g228/Magnus3204/forumheader.jpg[/img]
a13n
Posts: 1672
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:08 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by a13n »

Magnus wrote:Now I have some questions for all of you.
1. Would anyone be opposed to or have any reason that it would be a bad idea for me to create a suprise path that is a tunnel requireing that you swim through the lava and enter close to midfeild or so and exiting behind the flag area?
Damn!
I was planing the same thing.
You're a bit earlier. :)
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by wattro »

Silicone_Milk wrote:the latest layout looks kinda similar to Q3CTF2
Pure coincidence ;)
Magnus wrote:1. Still feels a bit like a FFA just due to flow. FFA and CTF flow very differently. I may not be a renound mapping king or a CTF, FFA expert, but I sure do know how a CTF shoud feel and flow.
Details on CTF flow, please!!
2. Bots... making... stupid... decisions
8. texturing... Did you create those?
9. The entire map seems a bit dim.
Check the readme. The only condition on using the textures is that I show the dude some screenies of the map when we are all done (assuming it still has the textures - though I'll probably give him an update anyways since he is a nice fellow).
3. I like the more rounded look to many areas, but again I had intended for us to just go for a pre alpha rough layout at this stage...
4. Some LPs fall short...
5. ... I think it would be best if we keept to a standard of making a hazzard "feel" dangerous, but offer no real threat of death. I like the way you spaced out the puzzle blocks more... This gives that "feel" of danger, but since it is covered in full clip there is no real danger for the most part of a lava death. :up: Good one!
6. no weponclip on those puzzle block areas...
3. It's my brainstorm. Part of why I wanted to hit some details is that they have an impact on overall gameplay. I didn't go too far on details and they are easy to do (plus it's easy enough to make a selection of brushes and hit delete if something should be changed).
4. I think most LPs are pretty good but yes, they do still need some work. I know the one that takes you from ground level to the top room with the RL needs to be fixed up. What other one's bump you around awkwardly or don't land you where they should?
5. Thanks & damn those blocks were ugly! There is now some real danger because I left some open parts to lava. I don't feel they dominate but will result in death for those who lose/don't have control. If the general feedback is there is too much (which there may be), then it's not hard to close it up, lessen the danger, or find alternatives.
6. Thanks for pointing that out - they are full-clipped and I didn't realize that I still needed to added weaponclip. I was wondering why I could shoot through some parts of the lava and the grating!
Hope the feedback helps man :)
Absolutely! Thank you! Hope you (and others) don't mind me paraphrasing your replies.
1. Would anyone be opposed to or have any reason that it would be a bad idea for me to create a suprise path that is a tunnel requireing that you swim through the lava and enter close to midfeild or so and exiting behind the flag area?
2. My question here is before I get too far into it what is the proper size for width and hight on paths and room connections in your opinions? I figure 256 units wide and 256 uits high should be the minimum or norm to alow for all styles of movement, but I am seeing in several versions with sizes like 128 and 384 wide and 128 to 256 high.
1. No objection, but I always thought that was gimmicky. If it plays well, then great!
2. My hallways and platforms were originally 256 wide & 256 high. The results were hallways that dwarfed the player. Also, working with 256 units means that vis blocking corridors will be larger than if they were 192. I ended up shrinking most of it down to 192, particularly when trying to deal with LOS issues. Overall I am pretty happy with going from 256 to 192 - that's kinda why I built 256 first as it's much easier to shrink something than to grow it. Plus it helps a lot of hallways not feel so carbon copy if there are a few parts where it's wider or narrower. and who knows, maybe 128 would be better in some places. I think even with 192 and the layout that there are still some LOS issues, but these mainly cause a second of boredom instead of serious gameplay issues.
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by wattro »

dichtfux wrote:I like it. Many improvements, better layout, not confusing anymore. :up:
Thanks man! You're feedback helped a lot!
a13n wrote: Sorry, I don't get it.
Please don't use a complicated word like "semblence". (something quite similar with a person who likes to use this kind of complicated word...)
Ooops, that should have said semblance. Anyways, I don't get your reply. What's not to get about mine? :)
a13n
Posts: 1672
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:08 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by a13n »

wattro wrote:Ooops, that should have said semblance. Anyways, I don't get your reply. What's not to get about mine? :)
O.K.
I've got it.
You are a hardcore or veteran!

By the way, this launch pad looks like a lightning gun in an open space map like q3dm17.
Image
Magnus
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:38 pm

Re: Shared Map

Post by Magnus »

OK here it is guys.

A complete wepositioning of the map and it's areas. I re-rotated obsidians rework of our middlefeild back to the way he had origonally intended.
I used wattro's ramp/rg room and surrounding halls. I used a13n's spiral stair/big pillar room and lava spout room.
I completely redone the flag room to be smaller; and I based it on wattro's rework of our flag room.
Basically there is a bit of work that has been done from everyone on the team in this version.
I reworked some of my textures and some of the others we were using.
We still need to do some item and botroam placement to get the bots to use more areas of the map more often, but they use it fairly well as it is. Also we still need someone to do trim and detailed work and someone to do the lighting and some fine tuning, but all in all at least it can be said it is very different from the way it was arranged. :P
I also quit this selecting the entire map and textureing all the brushes and all of their sides stuff we have been doing. It now only has brush faces that would be visible inside the map textured and all other brush faces caulk as it should be...lol; and I made many of the brushes that should be into detail.

I only compiled it with meta so the lighting is crappy.

Oh one big thing. I need you guys to let me know if that lava spout coming out of the wall face has an animated texture. It should look like it is actually pouring out of the face's mouth.
I ask this because I tested it a bit by sending the .pk3 to my wife's system and having her play around a bit in it and I noticed in her system that spout is not animated. It just looks like a arch with a blury texture that is not moving at all, but in my system it works great. :confused:

Well here it is.

magnus_ctfptm7

I put the .map in the .pk3 like wattro has been doing.

Lets hear what you guys think.

Thanks. :sly:

EDIT: Just wanted to let you guys know I noticed a few minuits ago that there are some red spawn points in the blue side of the map and maybe some blue spawns on the red side. BIG Oops! Sorry about that.
I will make a new .pk3 with a fixed version in it tomorrow. and as soon as I am done I will make the link above point to the fixed version. For now you can at least have a look around and play a bit.
Uh, well....good luck with that. :shrug:

[img]http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g228/Magnus3204/forumheader.jpg[/img]
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by wattro »

yeah i like it - lots of fast action =)

-too bad about the lighting. it should be fairly quick to light this map? the version i have been working on takes about 150 seconds to bsp
-i'm not sure about the battlesuit/lava path... the reason for this is that if a team is ahead, then dude can just camp in there and wait it out until he is discovered. since only one person can go in at a time, if he's powered up, he'll face 1-on-1 and likely win, and if he wins, he'll get your battlesuit. plus teammates can pile in there over time.
-i was pretty confused at first on the layout, and i still am a bit confused inside the base as to what leads where
-with the 4th entrance to the midfield, it's pretty easy to sneak in/through the midfield without being exposed - this makes it easy to capture if you take the long route out of the base to midfield and then you are left with the short route
-bots played pretty good, they were pretty surprisingly more intense than expected
-the lava was flowing from the dudes mouth, looked pretty ace, though that room just leads to a teleporter/deadend. why not put the red armor further into the deadend?
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by wattro »

and i got some weird memory allocation crash/error after finishing the round (either by time limit or winning). anyone else see this or is it just me?
Silicone_Milk
Posts: 2237
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:49 pm

Re: Shared Map

Post by Silicone_Milk »

nope just you Wattro ;)

I played through Magnus' latest version.

The connecting area between the bases and the midfield really need work. I was literally lost for 10 minutes before I figured out how to make my way to the midfield. More on this later.
Magnus
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:38 pm

Re: Shared Map

Post by Magnus »

wattro wrote:yeah i like it - lots of fast action =)
Thanks. That was what I was thinking. Smaller map; faster action.
-too bad about the lighting. it should be fairly quick to light this map? the version i have been working on takes about 150 seconds to bsp
Cool. I guess I was more worried about geting a better layout version out as my others were just too big and hallish.
-i'm not sure about the battlesuit/lava path... the reason for this is that if a team is ahead, then dude can just camp in there and wait it out until he is discovered. since only one person can go in at a time, if he's powered up, he'll face 1-on-1 and likely win, and if he wins, he'll get your battlesuit. plus teammates can pile in there over time.
Yea I need to fix that.
The way I envisioned that area working was you jump out there, get the battlesuit, the platforms sink below the lava, you dive in and head for the rear entrance, the battlesuit wears off just as you come out of the lava and you dont need it anymore, you grab the regen to head in to get ahold of the flag and have a chance to get out of there without support.
I had the platforms set as doors that would go down when you jumped to them. That way you are forced to get in the lava and most likely go for that rear entrance area below the lava, but something is wrong with the doors and they just barely bob up and down. I must be missing a parameter or have a bad value in one of the parameters for the door/platforms. I have the battlesuit and path timed so that if you go straight for the secret rear area after getting the battlesuit it will wear off just as you exit the lava behind the flag room.
So basically the idea was that if you tried to hang out in that room too long your battlesuit will wear off because I set the count on it to only 20 seconds. Also what if a member of the opposing team gets the battlesuit after yours has worn off and comes in there after you. If you try to hang out in that room for too long you are screwed. >:D

Although with the platforms not sinking it is all going to go down just as you described.

I will fix that along with the other stuff I found wrong.
wattro wrote:-i was pretty confused at first on the layout, and i still am a bit confused inside the base as to what leads where
Silicone_Milk wrote:The connecting area between the bases and the midfield really need work. I was literally lost for 10 minutes before I figured out how to make my way to the midfield.
Yea perhaps I should put out an overhead view or drawing of the map layout along with the link to the fixed version.
Also perhaps I should create and place some directional decals or something to help guide the way...lol.
-with the 4th entrance to the midfield, it's pretty easy to sneak in/through the midfield without being exposed - this makes it easy to capture if you take the long route out of the base to midfield and then you are left with the short route
Yea I figured there is a super long way across the midfeild from the top entrances so I decided to attach those entry points to the shortest path from midfeild to base and the super short way across the midfeild from the bottom entrances so I decided to attach those entry points to the longest path from midfeild to base.
I hoped this would create some balance and let player decide what is best for them. "Do I want to be in danger for a longer amount of time time in the midfeild or in the paths from midfeild to base?"
-bots played pretty good, they were pretty surprisingly more intense than expected
Thanks I really like to do a good job on making bot play a lot better.
-the lava was flowing from the dudes mouth, looked pretty ace,
Sweet! Thank goodness. I was not looking forward to tracking down the problem. Glad it works. Thanks.
though that room just leads to a teleporter/deadend. why not put the red armor further into the deadend?
Great idea! I'll do that. Thanks. I hope the teleporters made sense. The idea is to allow quick access to the different areas of your teams side of the map. As you can see all 3 teleporters place you right next to where you can go right into the next.

Oh by the way. I did get that crash also. I think it has something to do with the .aas because it took a really long time to create the .aas.
It usually takes about 25 seconds or less to crate a .aas for a map this size and such, but this time it took 1150 seconds or so.
I noticed there were an unsual amount of splits this time as well.
In my other versions there were like 350,000 splits, but in this version there were like 2,250,000 splits. This give anyone an idea of where the problem is?

Well be back with those fixes in a bit. :) Thanks again!
Uh, well....good luck with that. :shrug:

[img]http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g228/Magnus3204/forumheader.jpg[/img]
Magnus
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:38 pm

Re: Shared Map

Post by Magnus »

OK. I fixed a few problems I found.

Double MH in the same spot just one now. (Oops!)
Platform/doors in battlesuit areas work now.
Directional markers placed on the floors throughout map.
RG placed more centrally between the pillars in quad room.
A few more botroams placed and some botroam weights altered to adjust bot use of the map.(might have worked; might not. havent tested it much yet)
RA placed more towards the rear of it's room.
Alterd the 1 flat bridge and 3 lava pits in midfeild room into one large lava pit and 2 ramp bridges to fix short path with lots of cover across midfeild.
Fixed red_spawn and red_player spawn points on blue's half of the map.
Fixed a brush that had a textured face under the grating near the battlesuit area; now face is caulk.

OK try it out guys and let me know what you think.

magnus_ctfptm7

Thanks.
Uh, well....good luck with that. :shrug:

[img]http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g228/Magnus3204/forumheader.jpg[/img]
wattro
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:12 am

Re: Shared Map

Post by wattro »

Hey I like what you did with the middle room. the speed is great, but i don't find the bots play this version as well as the last version for some reason. The room with the portable medikit doesn't really inspire me very much and it could use a definite re-work. The flag room also seems very symmetrical (in more than one direction) in appearance which also doesn't appeal to me very much (sense of style i guess) though the gameplay is pretty cool. it's pretty quick to drop in, grab the flag, and get out into the fastest path without being overly exposed so maybe it could use a bit more distance or difficulty getting to the fast path.

it would be good if we could get some of the ctf veterans around here to compare the versions posted. that would be a great guide for the next steps. any takers (maz0r, silicone, dichtfux, obsidian, and ix-ir - i'm looking at you!)?

i've been doing a little work on the version i posted - not much, mainly cosmetic (like building rock wall, as per sock's tutorials). i'll post something up over the weekend. it looks not bad for a first attempt. :)
Post Reply