(05-07-2019, 05:25 PM)Coffee Wrote: Ranox has no grassy field area, or anywhere that compares in size.

(05-07-2019, 05:27 PM)Pollux Wrote:

(05-07-2019, 05:25 PM)Coffee Wrote: Ranox has no grassy field area, or anywhere that compares in size.

The lake and farm areas are perfectly flat and fine to build on. You can also build on top of buildings due to the skybox being very high (eg, make a skyscraper ontop of one of the flat industrial buildings).

(05-07-2019, 05:29 PM)Arny Wrote:

(05-07-2019, 05:27 PM)Pollux Wrote:

(05-07-2019, 05:25 PM)Coffee Wrote: Ranox has no grassy field area, or anywhere that compares in size.

The lake and farm areas are perfectly flat and fine to build on. You can also build on top of buildings due to the skybox being very high (eg, make a skyscraper ontop of one of the flat industrial buildings).

Man I love building a hotel on top of a roof.

(05-07-2019, 05:30 PM)Pollux Wrote:

(05-07-2019, 05:29 PM)Arny Wrote:

(05-07-2019, 05:27 PM)Pollux Wrote:

(05-07-2019, 05:25 PM)Coffee Wrote: Ranox has no grassy field area, or anywhere that compares in size.

The lake and farm areas are perfectly flat and fine to build on. You can also build on top of buildings due to the skybox being very high (eg, make a skyscraper ontop of one of the flat industrial buildings).

Man I love building a hotel on top of a roof.

Your hotel on V4B1 is across the lake anyway, you can do the same on Ranox?

(05-07-2019, 05:27 PM)Pollux Wrote:

(05-07-2019, 05:25 PM)Coffee Wrote: Ranox has no grassy field area, or anywhere that compares in size.

The lake and farm areas are perfectly flat and fine to build on. You can also build on top of buildings due to the skybox being very high (eg, make a skyscraper ontop of one of the flat industrial buildings).

(05-07-2019, 05:59 PM)Nephew Wrote: Lets go boys #Ranox

(05-07-2019, 12:56 PM)Pollux Wrote:

(05-07-2019, 10:21 AM)SoulRipper Wrote: If we get a map which we have not run on the server before, we will test the map on the beta server very systematically. The last thing we want is spending much time setting up CityRP (spawnpoints, doors, locations, NPCs, etc) and then realize the map crashes/FPS drops.

Our main server should not be an experimental server. Once we have decided and tested the map we should stay with it for a long period, and not keep cycling between other maps.

I personally vote to keep V4B1, but at the end the players will decide.

As much as I also like V4B1 (I voted for it during the last vote), performance on it is terrible compared to Ranox, Chaoscity and V5P. Testing on Beta won't really show anything useful as it'll be very subjective and vary a lot per system, the best way to test is by looking at how the map is optimised and then conducting an analysis per area. The gamemode doesn't need to be taken into account as that's something that is always changing, one thing we can't really change is how a map is optimised.

Source provides a bunch of tools to help test maps, I tested and analysed some of them already but anyone can do the same, I'm happy to write a guide explaining how if you want.

Here's a link to the tests I did on V4B1, Ranox and Chaoscity

V4B1 performance: https://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=92673&pid=815692#pid815692
Ranox performance: https://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=92673&pid=815718#pid815718
Chaos performance: https://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=92673&pid=815724#pid815724

(05-07-2019, 08:28 PM)SoulRipper Wrote:

(05-07-2019, 12:56 PM)Pollux Wrote:

(05-07-2019, 10:21 AM)SoulRipper Wrote: If we get a map which we have not run on the server before, we will test the map on the beta server very systematically. The last thing we want is spending much time setting up CityRP (spawnpoints, doors, locations, NPCs, etc) and then realize the map crashes/FPS drops.

Our main server should not be an experimental server. Once we have decided and tested the map we should stay with it for a long period, and not keep cycling between other maps.

I personally vote to keep V4B1, but at the end the players will decide.

As much as I also like V4B1 (I voted for it during the last vote), performance on it is terrible compared to Ranox, Chaoscity and V5P. Testing on Beta won't really show anything useful as it'll be very subjective and vary a lot per system, the best way to test is by looking at how the map is optimised and then conducting an analysis per area. The gamemode doesn't need to be taken into account as that's something that is always changing, one thing we can't really change is how a map is optimised.

Source provides a bunch of tools to help test maps, I tested and analysed some of them already but anyone can do the same, I'm happy to write a guide explaining how if you want.

Here's a link to the tests I did on V4B1, Ranox and Chaoscity

V4B1 performance: https://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=92673&pid=815692#pid815692
Ranox performance: https://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=92673&pid=815718#pid815718
Chaos performance: https://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=92673&pid=815724#pid815724

That is a very impressive benchmark, you've put a lot of effort into that! Interesting to see the differences between the maps. I was aware of the fact that V4B1 and similar maps were built at the HL2 engine's limits.

It would be good for the gameplay if we get a better optimized map. Not only would it run better on older PCs, also new computers would profit from it.

The gamemode itself has a lot scripts that could be improved and run more efficient.

You can gain some extra FPS by disabling the licenses plates and weather effects. And use gmod_mcore_test 1



PS. I have removed the meme posts, let's keep this thread readable. You can use the offtopic section for those posts.