MTM2.com

Here's one that has a ways to go before it's done. Texture types are not set, models are all on sparse, and some models are drive through. So, I'm looking for a few specific things. The track looks loaded and cluttered with big models but it only gets minor lag on my system (the vert and texture counts are reasonable, all things considered). Of particular note is the stretch between cp6 and cp7, especially when a train is going by. That's where I get the stutter. Also, the big oil drums are a problem for driving around. They either have invisible corners you run into, or it takes several object boxes to shape the collision parts.. and still only does a mediocre job of it and which wastes boxes that could be put to better use (there's no weeds planted yet). The bots can't handle the skinny course, so they're only good for the laugh. To this point, most things have been done out of necessity (I now understand why Mal steered clear of this one). Floating models were a nightmare, but I think I got most of them. And there's two or three telephone poles near cp3 that are no collide (trust me, it's better this way). Anyway, what I need to know is

- how does it run on your system?
- would you recommend full or partial use of the scenery levels for models?
- given the choice, are the drums best left drive through, should boxes be used even tho they don't provide first rate collision boundaries, or do invisible walls matter, especially in the off track areas?
- do you see anything drastic I've missed?
- any suggestions for improvement?
- any clue what tonight's winning lottery numbers will be?

Note. For the sake of the beta, place it at the top of the list, even above any fix pods you may have. I tried to make the oil spills look real-ish and if I do say so myself they look pretty slick :rolleyes: But you have to mount it at the extreme very top to see it... and unfortunately, while it's mounted like that, it'll look like a tanker spilled on your other tracks. I don't think I'll keep it like this, but it was fun to try and make happen.

For a real laugh, take a few laps in the oil delivery truck you'll see parked around.

And, of course, thanks if you have the time.

Download (1425k)


<font size=1>Edited by Phineus (07-04-2003)</font>

>>- how does it run on your system?
Runs fine. I didn't notice any slow ups or anything. But I was only racing with 3 bots.


>>- would you recommend full or partial use of the scenery levels for models?
I would go ahead with full use.

>>- given the choice, are the drums best left drive through, should boxes be used even tho they don't provide first rate collision boundaries, or do invisible walls matter, especially in the off track areas?
I really think they shouldn't be drive through. Off the track really doesn't matter. But for the ones that are on or near the track it would be better to have them collidable. In my opinion.


>>- do you see anything drastic I've missed?
Actually nothing that stands out after a couple quick runs. I hopped a couple of the Oil Towers.. But I don't think that is what you mean, heh.

- any suggestions for improvement?
Maybe smooth a couple of the corners a bit more. Unless that is the effect you wanted. Otherwise, looks good. Impressive so far.

Oh...btw. I don't see why you set those Poles to non-collidable. I don't see how they would effect things being movable like the others.


- any clue what tonight's winning lottery numbers will be?
8,15,19,21,32,38

------------------
I'm not a maniac, I just portray one on the track.

<font size=1>Edited by Demigod1 (02-04-2003)</font>

I just drove it, for over 20 laps, and all I gotta say is... Harumph!

I like the layout, and on my first few passes, I kept hitting the checkpoint markers. After awhile, I started to get the hang of it, and was power sliding thru them like Mickey Thompson.

But I do feel that the road is too rough. Especially right before the checks. There's nothing I hate worse than excessive braking, to make a turn, but they are a little too bumpy that if you don't get into the corners just right, the tires leave the ground.

But on the other hand, it does make you have to try to be fast, but you definately have to use some finesse. My best lap so far is a "56.15" 1100/Med/Soft. That might have been what you were after, I dunno. But I do like it, alot! Checkpoint 6 is the one I seem to have the most trouble with. Seems no matter what I did, after all those laps, I still never hit that turn exactly the same way twice.

Bots do give you some trouble, cuz they bash into you immediately, as you aproach the first check, but with some cool Hockey Style moves, they aren't a problem after that, not your fault Phin. they are just stupid and it can't be helped.

In summary, I'd like to see the checks at least widened a hair, but I'd leave em' Collideable [is that a word?] and just smooth out a couple of the rougher [is THAT a word?] parts before the checks.

Great detail, the towers look great, and all the scenery looks great. When I first started the race, I sat there for a second, and said... "Uh oh, this is gonna CHUG the framerate!" But I was pleasantly surprised, I got no lag at all. I was running 3 Dummies too, but no problems.

Great job Phineus!

------------------
Replica Fan's Garage

Demi, what do you mean you hopped a couple towers?

re: smoothing.

Yes, it's been a concern. The trouble has been that this track is very full with models, and the original design has things crowding the road. In trying to preserve as much of the layout as possible, the mtm2 terrain hasn't got the flexibility to easily accommodate skinny roads and cramped space. So, we're forced to make choices that demand trade offs. This is what I meant by things being done of necessity.

In order to do major smoothing we have to lose models - lots of them - models, I might add, that are very much part of the course. If we keep models, then road conditions become a challenge. My approach, so far, has been to treat the models as part of the course - very much in the same way as something like Buzzard Country. The difference here is that because they don't look natural we assume they are unnecessary or optional. But take them away and the course becomes short and without interest. In sum, the cramped environment is by and large what makes this track.

That's not to say nothing can be done. Widening the checkpoints isn't something I was thinking but cps 1, 4, and 6 certainly have room for that. I thought the hill to cp 3 was pretty good, but I know the bots always have trouble with cp4 (they have trouble with everything but you know what I mean)... a little extra width may help there. But even so, number 5 will always be like threading a needle because of the bridge that follows. I had noticed the blind element to cp6 and I'll fix it... even if I have to relocate the tower before and to the right of it. The following descent, on the other hand, will probably have to remain close to the same. The hill, the train, the bridge, the narrow road don't leave much for it. All that said, there is a wicked power slide across the tracks after cp7 ;-)

re: poles. The popping was driving me nuts, lol. Models that pop up as you near them is not one of my favorite things. So it was either make them no collide or take them out.

re: chugging. The whole track was originally created with an eye for efficiency - there's no way it would've worked without it - and my conversion kept that in mind. Believe it or not but there's only 36 models (including the cps) in this thing and a couple of those could be removed if needed.

re: excessive brakes. I wouldn't call this a finesse track, but it sure isn't High Speed Marathon Rally. In evo, the class 1 trucks can't handle much but they can do this track. Our monsters over power it with ease. I think if I had to compare this to an mtm stock track, then it would be to Scrapyard Run. You have to drive with attitude or you just won't get a good lap. 56 is a good time. I haven't geared down to 1100 but maybe I'll try it.

re: the words. Yes, those do nicely

Thanks fellas. I'll fix up those points as best I can.

Whoa!! Hehe don't fix too much yet!!.

Narrowness - yes, the models do in fact become part of the track, and as such, dictate what you can and can't do. I call that "character" lol.

CPs - Widening them is an option I suppose. Demi, Raz, and myself beta tested it it, and I compared it to Quid Pro Quo in the sense that cp's set to no-collide would afford racers more flexibility and options. There are MANY other things about this track that can trip you up, so having to give a little at the cp's wouldn't hurt this track. Conversely, Raz liked it as is: no smoothing, no cp adjustment - nothing. After thinking it over and running it a few more times, I agree with Demi - leave cps set to collide.

Smoothing - Personally, I agree with Raz. There are no "jump before turn" bumps that pop you 8ft up in the air going into a corner. Yep, they're a little bumpy, but accelerator control, a downshift, and attitude will get you throught that lol (rarely do I brake). I say don't smooth any of it.

CP 6. I don't know Phin...it seems to be fine to me. I start a little wide left on the approach, let of gas, turn the wheel and mash the gas simultaneously, drop to 2nd, and then once I'm thru the turn, up it to 3rd and I'm gone. It's kinda like that first turn on Sidewinder Canyon, cept BG has a few bumps in it.

If u widen a few cp's, that's cool. Hehe and in my opinion this is a finesse track, especially with it being a bit on the rough side.

Poles - yep, those caught my eye too. U could do what u did with Barnyard - set them to collide and put em in Complex scenery.

A few thoughts for now. Sorry I didn't get to this earlier, but I'll be back with more.


Edit - ran a :56.02 with several mistakes. You'll see this one hit 53s & 54s - no doubt.

Edit - Oh, and it ran well - no lag.

Edit - Just ran a :57.34 first lap, so that's proof positive it'll go :54 easy and lower. My guess now is high :52s. Changed my mind on the poles - leave em as is; more character lol.

<font size=1>Edited by SLO_COPE (02-04-2003)</font>

How many people are you? it's simply not humanly possible to get this far in so little time.

>>> ...I now understand why Mal steered clear of this one.

haven't intentionaly steered clear, the name just hadn't come up yet on my bingo-master evo name picker gizmo yet

I'll try to get back later with some pertinent feedback, been busy and just now got a chance to run a lap.



<font size=1>Edited by Malibu350 (02-04-2003)</font>

- how does it run on your system?
<font size=+1>
<pre>
In the cockpit, with no AI:
At the starting line: 32fps and 3300vp
^ (more like 18-20 w/7 bots)
Approaching cp1: ................65fps and 1400vp
Going through cp1: 33fps and 3300vp
Under the bridge on the way to cp2: 40fps and 2200vp
Passing through cp2: 85fps and 820vp
Passing through cp3: 85fps and 533vp
Approaching the bridge after cp3: 58fps and 1400vp
Past the bridge: 85fps and 620vp
Passing through cp4: ...............43fps and 2100vp
Halfway to cp5: 25fps and 5200vp
Passing through cp5: 37fps and 2800vp
On the bridge past cp5: 50fps and 1500vp
Approaching cp6: ................85fps and 1000vp
Rounding the bend past cp6: 31fps and 4100vp
Heading downhill past cp6: 20fps and 6200vp
On the bridge before cp7: 18fps and 6800vp
^ (dips to 12 w/7 bots)
Passing through cp7: ...............42fps and 2100vp
Crossing the tracks: 62fps and 1400vp
Approaching the finish line: 32fps and 3500vp
</pre></font>

Running with 7 stock trucks (and a few helicopters) the fps frequently dips to 18-22, sometimes as low as 15, but runs at 25 or above a good deal of the time. Dipping below 25 becomes fairly laggy, and below 20 quite difficult to control.


- would you recommend full or partial use of the scenery levels for models?

Yep. Probably starting with pumps, vehicles and power lines. I note the high and low detail fuel trucks are in the pod, and I note the high detail one is triple the complexity.


- given the choice, are the drums best left drive through, should boxes be used even tho they don't provide first rate collision boundaries, or do invisible walls matter, especially in the off track areas?

Back when this track was a newborn it was my favorite, at the time I complained about the big tanks being left with big solid invisible corners, but I was ignored. It's my feeling that things with such gross collision issues like this should be left non-collide. Trackside however, you should do your best to use a bunch of collision boxes to make it solid where it should be, off track and on the backsides - forget about it.


- do you see anything drastic I've missed?

Not yet, apart from the track pallete, which upon inspection looks like you haven't yet generated a custom one. At first i was thinking you might have, in which case I'd have suggested trying to make one to better suit the terrain textures, which look quite washed out on the roadway.


- any suggestions for improvement?

Yep. Widen the bridges so they are even wider than the roads, they're far too narrow for bigfeet. Widening the checkpoints, where appropriate, couldn't hurt.


- any clue what tonight's winning lottery numbers will be?

8,15,19,21,32,38


Nice work, I like the secondary name! hehe.

<font size=1>Edited by Winterkill (03-04-2003)</font>

Back, and now I'll kind of piggy back on Wint's post and threw in a few other additional viewpoints.

• Full/partial use of scenery levels
Agree with Wint there. As for the pumps my guess is you're refering to setting some, not all to complex, correct?

• Checkpoint drums: collide or no-collide
Yep, also agree, and that's a good point about making every effort to make the "track side" collide while disregarding what rear of the drum. Never thought of that hehe

• Improvement suggestions/recommendations
I think we already settled on the smoothing issue and how it would come at a price. As is it's very driveable and the roughness of the road doesn't impair a racers ability to control his/her truck.

Bridges - I like em as is. They represent an element of uncertainty, of surprise sometimes, and it's one of several characteristics about this track that can trip you up. For example...in a tourney some time ago we ran Cross TraphiX - 8 laps per round. As most know, it's paved road with no real surprises, nothing to really catch a racer off-guard. I ran with AlG, and SLO_NANOO - both could turn faster laps than me on that track. I got pole position at the start, kept my wits about me and held on tight; not much to it. On this track...a guy could have a pretty sizeable lead, start day dreaming about his win, fail to adjust for the bridge, and all of a sudden the complexion of the race has drastically changed. That's what I love about tracks like this - they force the racer to think, to be constantly aware of the track all spots that can trip you up. Makes for great fun, unpredictable outcomes and some really cool crashes lol.

• Drastic Oversights
Nope, nothing that I can see. I did note that the area was free of any oil spills whatsoever, and with as many pumps as you have running out there, that's somewhat hard to believe lol.

• Framerate
On a track like this my feelings are that if you can run 4 trucks on it without lag it's good to go. This isn't the kind of track where you're going to find 6 and 7 ppl racing it. Still, if it's possible to have minimal lag with those numbers, sure...but I don't think it's critical. Tomorrow I'm going to test it with four players...five if possible and see how it fares.


<font size=1>Edited by SLO_COPE (03-04-2003)</font>

The above link has been updated.

re: tower hopping. I have to assume Demi put frogs in his gas tank to gain that extra giddyup ;-)

re: corners. If you read the book, you'll love the movie. Four substantial updates. As a result, the fastlap will come down quite a few seconds.

re: smoothing. She ain't no baby's bottom.

re: checkpoint placement. Widened a few, moved a few back a tad. Both have a nice effect.

re: narrow roads. We haven't lost any character. The edits seem small, the improvement is large.

re: finesse. That sidewinder first cp haunts this track. It's a good thing those cps aren't movable.

re: How many people? There's just us.

re: fps & vps. Thanks. Confirms what I suspected. I've thinned out the scenery levels drastically. Sparse should run problem free on any system now. That includes the debris models and one train are off sparse, making it the online racing level.

re: the drums. Close to the track has six sided object boxes, further from the track has smaller fitting four sided boxes. The result is no invisible walls but nothing to be taken for granted.

re: track palette. Groan. The custom palette turned the backdrop redish, like tumbleweed. That's why I left it with farmroad default (others were worse), planning to return later. Anyway, the short story is I recreated the texture with a new palette taken from a terrain texture. Generating a custom then worked fine. The long story is it took a long time to get right. I tried several other backdrops hoping for better results but nada. But I'm satisfied with this now.

re: bridge width. Not as wide as wk suggested, but not as skinny as they were. It's theoretically possible for a computer truck to finish a race without the helicopter now. Bot times: 1:20. Nifty model texture effects.

re: 8,15,19,21,32,38

You guys are no help at all :rolleyes:

re: oil spills. There's two pseudo spills. Our terrain won't allow much else near the track.

Thanks all. You helped make short work of this.

Release candidate: Download (1456k)



<font size=1>Edited by Phineus (07-04-2003)</font>

Ran the 2nd version this morning with scrooch_dog and SCAT. Performance was great with respect to lag...but I didn't have a prob with the 1st version either lol. Still, it was clean as a whistle.

The changes you made are definitely noticeable, and have a big impact on the track. As it stands now it's much more agreeable to rookies and intermediates. Wider cp's, smoothed/gradual banked turn into cp 6...and it looks as tho you speeded up the train a tad for the first lap, too. I like it--lots in fact, but the first version was much tougher, and THAT's what makes it appealing to pros - there are things you have figure out and work on, and pay attention to. On a track like...say "Brobälläri", you can have 3 different interpretations on how to execute one particular section, and they'll all work pretty much the same. Each racer comes up with his/her way to overcome an obstacle or rough spot, and it's a lot of fun.

Countering that, however, before I graduated to the "Pro" level, I hated tracks like "Valley of the Kings", "Rock Ridge" (lol I did, Mal...cursed it into the ground lol), "Pinsane", "Sandstone Mountain", "Big Dipper", "Lakebed Extreme" and the like. Now I love every one of them...every one. What made the first version of BG fun was it forced the racer to overcome a few things, and that's where the appeal lies. It wasn't the kind of track that jumped on and automatically pulled respectable laps lol. But those same traits often times make lesser skilled racers avoid tracks like that.

This one still strikes a happy medium, however, which means it'll draw lots of d/ls because although it has a few tricky spots, it's now very driveable for all levels...and it'll still give pro's a heck of a run in a tough, hard-fought race!

I still haven't walked thru it looking at everything, but I will tonight.

Looks good to go Phineus. Very nicely done!

Cope had a good point about the bridges but the end result seems very good, I hope we didn't ruin his fun, hehe. Myself, due to lag and sloppy driving I kept falling off, thus my suggestion.

re: earl spills

Phin's crews are fastidious and neat and always carry plenty of rags, or else.

>> object boxes..... The result is no invisible walls but nothing to be taken for granted.

Well said and well done (though I must admit I didn't ram into things to test them out).

>> track palette. Groan.

Palettes do make one groan! I'm glad you went the extra miles, looks great.

>> Sparse should run problem free on any system now. That includes the debris models and one train are off sparse, making it the online racing level.

With a train off sparse it would make that the racing level, hope Jumper is okay with that, as he says he runs normal most of the time. (I can somehow already imagine Cope cracking jokes about excuses and catching trains and all)

Comparing framerates, in the cockpit no AI, as before: the lowest I get now is 33-35 in the worst spot, which is definately good stuff. Nicely done. The earlier fps report was for you, the other numbers were mainly for my own inspection, back when I ran with a Pentium Pro 180, with 32mb ram and a 4meg vid card I was somewhat framerate challenged using heavy model/gb tracks, back then I noticed that framerates always blazed when the "visual polygon" (wish it showed total vertices!) number was 1200 or below - lean 'racing tracks' from the day seemed to always fit in that that window and wouldn't rise above 2000 (a model-less landscape could go as low as 500). Thus, I conclude that if someone wants to build a track that will run well on even the very lowest end systems (not necessary a practical or necessary goal these days) they would do best to keep the "vis poly" (as seen in "z-mode") below 2000 at all times (in the absence of trucks). Back in the day a value of about 4000 could get quite laggy, with jumps to 8000 - 10000 being quite devastating, nearly to the point of a crash. I note that my current maximum framerate (85) correlates with my years old observation about 1200 or less 'vis poly' maximizing the fps. However, I must make note of the fact that it's vertices that really lag the sheer processing power of the game - not polygons, so one has to pay attention to the complexity of the models themselves.


>> the mtm2 terrain hasn't got the flexibility to easily accommodate skinny roads and cramped space. So, we're forced to make choices that demand trade offs. This is what I meant by things being done of necessity.

As a fellow trackie I know what you mean.

>> Models that pop up as you near them is not one of my favorite things.

Mine neither. (one thing that really bugged me about Evo is that the terrain would pop when near, if the maker didn't smooth things out, due to the ol' spline beast).


re: You guys are no help at all

Kinda funny... (blame Demi!) my animation had stopped (from clicking the link i think) with this quite appropriate look on your little face:

<img src=http://mtm2.com/~trackville/tmp/lottonotta.gif>


>> bingo-master evo name picker gizmo

hehehe

Sorry I didn't make it this morning copey; I had an emergency that drew me away. Still is, but I needed a break so here I am.

re: level of difficulty

I hear you and was content to leave it be for the reasons you state, tho I don't think it was as extreme as you're saying. I found it just took a lot of attitude and then there was no stopping you. However, the first two posts cited roughness as a major issue and so I took up the challenge. Believe it or not, but it's not really that much smoother. I just widened the "roads" (not just the cps) in those few spots. The loop from cp6 back to cp1 and through to past the bridge before cp4 hasn't been changed at all. But yes, 4 to 6 is wider and pushing 5 back makes it more forgiving, but the terrain is the same there too. Small things, big results. And of course the bridges keep the choppers in the hanger. And, the train isn't faster, it's shorter. I trashed the caboose; it was too long.

re: framerates. Glad to hear. And yes, who could forget your old comp. LOL, kept us on our toes.

That's it for now. I gotta run.

Hehe no sweat at all, Phin. Just so that there's no misunderstanding, I didn't mean to imply that the level of difficulty of the 1st version was on par with the tracks I mentioned in my previous post - no way, no how. It's just that it required a level of concentration that in my opinion markedly surpassed this new version in order to squeeze out good, crash-free laps. That's not to say this newer version is a cakewalk - not at all. I like it LOTS!! This version definitely has more mass appeal, and that's always a good thing. Yes, racing has picked up quite abit over the past several months, but not so much where track makers should be targeting (or catering to) specific skill levels.

Just a little COPEY philosophy there. Can't write this stuff in our forum; Jump or N8 will delete it every time lol. Very good stuff tho, Phin!!

Edit: Only had one run of 4 laps on it, but thus far 1300 med tires/soft susp puts you in the :52/:53 range.

<font size=1>Edited by SLO_COPE (03-04-2003)</font>

I had a small list of notes for the first beta but have been away and wasn't able to come in and post it, no matter tho since Wint covered what I had to say for the most part, and Cope covered what was left :o).

the palettes can be a pain, but I've learned to to make a series of them as I add models, and save em all, after the tracks done i'll load them one by one and do a test run and keep the one that gives the best color balance.

...I hated tracks like "Valley of the Kings", "Rock Ridge" ...
LOL, thanks Cope! (I know exactly what you mean:)

You did a wonderfull job Phin, the last beta looks good to go to me cept for 'maybe' just one thing, the evo versions have a slanted jump just before the rr crossings where if you take them high (on the outside), with enough speed you can clear the train.. if there is no train you take it low to maintain more speed... I realize that you are very cramped for space with the grid so maybe it's not even possible, but thought i'd mention it anyway in case it was overlooked..

love the water, glad you kept that in.

Much Better Phineus
Shaved 2 seconds off. It's perfect now, in my opinion.

------------------
Replica Fan's Garage

Let's call it done, then.

Black Gold (1456k)
Black Gold Pro (1404k)
Black Gold ST (1456k)

ST = Small Tires version.
Pro = Pre Release cope version with palette fix.

For those who care, all three versions can be mounted without conflicts.