navboy
13th Nov 2001, 10:40 AM
General mapping philosophy question:
It seems like i've noticed less "weird stuff" happening the fewer subtractive brushes i use in a map.
However, it seems like i can usually construct some given architecture with less nodes using mainly subtractive brushes as opposed to building the same thing using mainly additive brushes. Which approach is better? Am i just seeing a pattern that isn't there when i'm thinking subtractive brushes tend to cause more problems than additive brushes, even though you end up with less nodes?
(Finally just recovering from a nasty head/chest cold, argh, what a pain. Trying to get caught up the latest betas and all)
It seems like i've noticed less "weird stuff" happening the fewer subtractive brushes i use in a map.
However, it seems like i can usually construct some given architecture with less nodes using mainly subtractive brushes as opposed to building the same thing using mainly additive brushes. Which approach is better? Am i just seeing a pattern that isn't there when i'm thinking subtractive brushes tend to cause more problems than additive brushes, even though you end up with less nodes?
(Finally just recovering from a nasty head/chest cold, argh, what a pain. Trying to get caught up the latest betas and all)