[Maisth]

Which is the one i should use? Polymost is the one i have been using until now but i recently tried Polymer and i found it pretty good and less limitating

That is because its a more modern option while Polymost is more outdated

But my question is

Should i make maps with Polymost or Polymer in mind?

[Phredreeke]

I tend to play with Polymost as Polymer sometimes fails at rendering part of a level (for example the cave with the hidden medkit in E1M5)

[MusicallyInspired]

I've never used polymost since polymer came out. It's either that or 8-bit for me.

[OpenMaw]

MusicallyInspired, on 23 August 2017 - 12:08 PM, said:

I've never used polymost since polymer came out. It's either that or 8-bit for me.

This.

My personal suggestion would be to build maps in 8bit first and then step up to Polymer after that, and make any tweaks. That way you're guaranteed the map functions properly in standard, no bells mode.

[Maisth]

So i should start buidling my maps with Classic mode in mind and then step it up to Polymer?

[Hendricks266]

Yes. Build your maps with Classic in mind, and test in the other renderers. Obviously Polymer lights are an exception; you can only test them in Polymer.

I would even say build your maps with the DOS version in mind, unless you are using the expanded size limits or specifically using EDuke32-only features, because otherwise if we broke something that affects the original game but user maps were built to expect, making the original game work right wins every time.

[Mark]

I started mapping in 2009 and used Polymost, HRP and custom assets in my first map ever. I was tired of the classic look already. In 2010 when Polymer was more stable I switched to that and have mapped with only that ever since. With the large open maps I tend to build it can sometimes be a problem with frame rates. But if you are building smaller maps or have lots of indoors compared to outdoors, Polymer should be fine. I love the lighting and TROR of Polymer so I stick with it.

A good thing about Polymost is you get a chance to sharpen your skills with sector based lighting and shading. There is a certain appeal to that.

[Micky C]

Technically speaking polymer isn't actually complete. It can't render multiple skies in the same map. It also doesn't do the con showview command which breaks some important visual features of a few mods.

Polymer also has a draw distance, which can be quite distracting and atmosphere-breaking in maps with large areas.

[Maisth]

It seems that every renderer has his own's Pros and Cons, in this discussion it seems that Polymer its the most used with Classic

But okay im fine with Using Polymer, though in my second map i will start with Classic in mind and then move up to Polymost and Polymer.

[MusicallyInspired]

One big con for polymost is that it doesn't support TROR. Like at all. (unless that has since changed? I don't think so..)

[Micky C]

Maisth, on 23 August 2017 - 04:28 PM, said:

in this discussion it seems that Polymer its the most used with Classic

The problem is this thread may not be representative of the full community. I'm sure there are plenty of people who use polymost due to it being the fastest.

MusicallyInspired, on 23 August 2017 - 05:11 PM, said:

One big con for polymost is that it doesn't support TROR. Like at all. (unless that has since changed? I don't think so..)

It has very slight support, you certainly can't do much with it. If polymost was on par with classic then it'd probably become the renderer of choice for the AMC TC, as the classic renderer has trouble rendering some of the more detailed maps at a reasonable framerate.

[Paul B]

As a kid playing with the build editor I always found build too limited with what I wanted to do. But those limitations definitely inspired more creativity. One of those big limitations was the ability of not being able to do Room over Room realistically. I remember saying to myself, the day build supports true ROR I will never lose interest in mapping for Duke. Well. that day has come and now I find it hard to go back to anything less than Poylmer. I map because I appreciate the freedom of being able to re-create realistic environments. Hence, my renderer of choice is Polymer and I'll take the performance hit for as long as it takes to get an optimized version of polymer.

However, if I really want to challenge myself I will go back to mapping in classic just as a challenge to see how far I can push the original limits and style. There is something really awe inspiring about a really kick ass classic map.

[PsychoGoatee]

Polymost is still the best for me, or my fav anyway, only downside being the TROR thing.

[Newken]

Polymost, as it's the fastest one. I hate those broken skyboxes, though.

[Mark]

Yeah, that is so annoying. So if I ever run something in Polymost I make sure I'm using the HRP to avoid that.

I wonder if its worth the trouble to create an HRP that contains all the 8 bit tiles but has the high res skybox textures. That way you keep the 8 bit look in Polymost without the crappy sky rendering. The idea just popped in my head. I didn't think it through, there may be a snag.

[Phredreeke]

something like the skyboxes in BloodGDX?

[Micky C]

Fox's skyboxes for DNHTTK would be a good solution. It doesn't help mods that use custom textures though.

[Newken]

Yes, no Nuclear Winter in Fox's skyboxes.

And there's some stuttering.

[Fox]

While Nuclear Winter contains some (crappy) tiles for parallaxed skies, they aren't used in any map.

[Phredreeke]

Skyboxes are the least of Nuclear Winter's problems if you ask me

[Maisth]

This discussion is making me moist now...

[Newken]

Fox, on 24 August 2017 - 03:36 PM, said:

While Nuclear Winter contains some (crappy) tiles for parallaxed skies, they aren't used in any map.

Does it use 0079? It doesn't work here.