I intend to make a map with tree medium sized waterfalls, a small one and like 3-4 lakes...

Is that fps counterproductive?

uhh everything is FPs counter productive. But saying "ok, in my map, there will be buidling sized trees, with 3 of 4 buildings" doesnt help much. It depends on how many brushes you use and such. A drawing would help..but it'd be easier just to make the map, then fix it from there.

And its r_speeds that are the problem, not FPS(everyone has different hardware, so FPs will be different for everyone). r_speeds are a better measurement.(r_speeds 1).

To give some reference the one in dod_forest whould be small. My question is...

Too much water, scrolling entities and such... is it a big problem? Is it a biggie on the speed of the game to the point of dislike?

yeah r_speeds are the best one to use. type these into your console

r_speeds 1
developer 1

the first give yous and r_speed reade out, the second make it visible in game not just console.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by fierro1816
To give some reference the one in dod_forest whould be small.

I dont understand this. what "one thing in forest", and what would be small?

Again, it matters how much you have of it combined with other details. We cant give you an estimate on 'about' how much stuff you will have'.

Something like "I will have an area, the size of the middle forest battle ground. It will have 2 tanks, and will be about as hilly as forest, but with more brushes. It will also have a lake about the size of the bridge in forest" Would be much...much....more helpfull(oh, and the thing i just told you would have hi r_speeds.

To give some reference the one in dod_forest whould be small.

read again.... slowly


THE.... ONE.... IN.... DOD_FOREST

he means the waterfall in dod_forest (near axis first flag) would be a small waterfall in respect to his.