Mearth_v4 map - Zero-K

Back to List

Mearth_v4

By JRRT

Rating:

Mearth v4, for 16 players free for all. Flagships and subs can pass shallows, made by [teh]Beherith (mysterme[at]gmail.com) concept by JRRT

Size:

20 x 30

PLAY ON THIS MAP

Downloads: 13907

Manual downloads:
http://api.springfiles.com/files/maps/mearth_v4.sd7
https://zero-k.info/content/maps/Mearth_v4.sd7
http://zero-k.info/content/maps/Mearth_v4.sd7
http://spring1.admin-box.com/downloads/spring/spring-maps/Mearth_v4.sd7

Last battles

B681232 2 on Mearth_v4

B680518 2 on Mearth_v4

B680066 1 on Mearth_v4

B679330 1 on Mearth_v4

B672971 3 on Mearth_v4

B672020 4 on Mearth_v4

B668758 2 on Mearth_v4

B662902 3 on Mearth_v4

B662057 3 on Mearth_v4

B659879 6 on Mearth_v4

Filter: Player:

Page of 2 (26 records)

sort

TheMooseIsLoose
5 years ago

A version of this without wierd unit speed hax would be so much better.

+0 / -0

Anarchid
5 years ago

Speedhax? Doesn't ZK ruthlessly exterminate typemaps?

+0 / -0

Rafalpluk
5 years ago

ZK only eliminates typemaps that give unequal bonuses to unit classes (for example 150% speed bonus only to vehicles). If it is 150% for all units, then ZK keeps it.

+0 / -0

Anarchid
5 years ago

That sounds like "worst of both worlds" :(

+0 / -0

sprang
5 years ago

quote:
A version of this without wierd unit speed hax would be so much better.

Or maybe a version of ZK that disables all the typemaps on all maps!

+0 / -0

TheMooseIsLoose
5 years ago

I didn't know that actually, that also explains why the typemap in Albion (also by beherith) is still applied, which keeps all units from traversing the mountains.

Units move at 1.6x speed on the roads in this map.

+0 / -0

GoogleFrog
5 years ago

You can change all typemaps to be disabled through modoptions. We could even change the default settings to remove all typemaps if there isn't any objection.

+0 / -0

Saktoth
5 years ago

Only movement typemaps should be removed, but yeah they're never used well.

+0 / -0

Anarchid
5 years ago
(edited 5 years ago)

quote:
but yeah they're never used well

Some fail-deadly backdoor should be left to allow "legit" maps to use those maybe?

I'm semi-itching to make an "integrated land/water river-type map", which would need typemaps (or bridges, but you get the idea) for allowing land units to cross a few special "fords".

+0 / -0

Saktoth
5 years ago

Use the heightmap to create fords. Using typemaps to do this is totally wrong. If you're trying to speed units up in the rivers, then your fords are too long, scatter them with sand bars at least. Look at Aquarius Crossing and Scorpio Battleground. Yes, a ford will slow down units and create a chokepoint, but just incorporate this into your design. Even Tropical demonstrates some good design herfe, though it's shallow regions are much too large.

If we really think this is a problem with the design on fords and crossings, that they slow units down too much, we should address this modside, never mapside. I think it's fine though.

+0 / -0

Anarchid
5 years ago
(edited 5 years ago)

By saying "ford" i use the wesnoth parlance here. In wesnoth, there are four basic types of water tiles:

- deep water - impassable by anything that can't swim
- shallow water - impassable by heavy land units, but passable by the rest at cost of significant defense and speed penalty. without typemaps, this is what you can get in zk.
- swamp - passable by all, slowdown for all, defense malus for most. I think this is what your 'interleave' suggestion could achieve.
- ford/bridge - allows units to use best of both worlds, so both land and sea units move at full speed, and fight on almost equal terms. This allows for some pretty interesting interactions i think.

Removing depthmod for all units except amphs would be better somewhat, but it's an either-or solution that exclusively removes one's ability to differ between "ford" and "shallow" type terrain, which i find useful.

Bridges would be best of course, but they're nowhere on horizon really, especially if you count in ease-of-use.

The approach that you suggested - interleaving water with land - might work to some extent, but i don't feel that it is capable of creating the passable-by-all type of terrain that i crave - mostly because of required resoluton of the alternated tiles, which will likely, at current state of the engine, cause ships to get stuck (as it would with drylanders, if they weren't capable of tolerating water a bit).

Your examples - Scorpio, Tropical, Aquarius - go around the resolution issue simply by being large teamgame maps. I wanna duelmap or small-teams map.

+0 / -0

Saktoth
5 years ago

It is not through virtue of being large team game maps that they get around these issues, you can use these features just as easily in a smaller map. The major trick is to follow the resolution of the large-scale pathfinder. If your rivers are along the paths the large-scale pathfinder takes, your ships won't get stuck. The paths on Aquarius are quite narrow and can easily be fit into a 1v1 map.

The small slowdown from shallow water you get in zk is really nothing like the huge penalties to defense and movement you get in wesnoth.

+0 / -0

Anarchid
5 years ago
(edited 5 years ago)

quote:
The small slowdown from shallow water you get in zk is really nothing like the huge penalties to defense and movement you get in wesnoth.

but it's enough to make thugs hit glaives 100% of time mostly. But i guess at this stage it's time to experiment.

How would i go around making nonterraformable areas?

+0 / -0

Rafalpluk
5 years ago

By setting Hardness of the specific type of terrain to 0.

+0 / -0

Anarchid
5 years ago
(edited 5 years ago)

Hardness doesn't prevent terraforming, it only prevents weapon-based cratering AFAIK.

Example: Castles. You can sketch with starlight on sand, you can't scratch the castle terrain; but you can terraform both freely.

Completely forbidding map deforms via cratering and terraforming (there's a modoption, so i assume a map can force it) would work, but that removes a whole layer from the game.

+0 / -0