Hi, all. Thank you so much for all your answers to my questions about the game. As always, I've uncovered just one more, lol. You patience and tutelage is appreciated.
Which do you start with; do you start laying holes on a flat surface, or do you shape the terrain first to give yourselves something to work from? What have you found to be the strengths or weaknesses of either approach? I've been doodling, and I'm happy with what I can do on an individual hole, but sometimes get overwhelmed thinking of a whole course.
Thanks,
Ten
Chicken or the Egg? "Land" or "Holes?"
Re: Chicken or the Egg? "Land" or "Holes?"
I typically lay down a hole then do terrain, though I typically have the type of terrain I will introduce in mind beforehand.
Re: Chicken or the Egg? "Land" or "Holes?"
There used to be some preformed plots available back in the day for design contests, are these still available to download?
You could design your course onto a contoured plot.
You could design your course onto a contoured plot.
Re: Chicken or the Egg? "Land" or "Holes?"
The plots are available at the bottom of the "Utilities" page.
Re: Chicken or the Egg? "Land" or "Holes?"
Thanks. I have the Deadman's Bluff contest plot. Do you think it's worth laying a route, and then do all major landforms before drawing the holes?
Re: Chicken or the Egg? "Land" or "Holes?"
I used to have 2 approaches back in the day.
1. Layout all your hole shapes then build the major elevation changes, then add local elevations around a 2 or 3 hole area (or more) so they interact and you don't end up with 18 separate holes, they feel connected.
2. I also enjoyed studying a preformed plot and how to route the course through the plot using the elevations that already exist.
Either way is fun.
Just go with what ever way you enjoy.
1. Layout all your hole shapes then build the major elevation changes, then add local elevations around a 2 or 3 hole area (or more) so they interact and you don't end up with 18 separate holes, they feel connected.
2. I also enjoyed studying a preformed plot and how to route the course through the plot using the elevations that already exist.
Either way is fun.
Just go with what ever way you enjoy.
Re: Chicken or the Egg? "Land" or "Holes?"
I always prefer to start with a pre made plot. Thats what a real life designer would have right? Then I would probably build hole to hole from there. Kinda measure elevations etc, to get an idea where to put what. And if I didnt use a pre made plot I would kinda make my own,just start with the flat layout then before any holes just start adding in hills,valleys,water even forresting trees etc, then build holes from there. I just think it looks better. Its pretty easy to tell if a designer started with a flat plot and just started building holes. Looking forward to see what ya come up with.
Re: Chicken or the Egg? "Land" or "Holes?"
Thanks! I have started building a course on the old Deadman's Bluff contest plot. Still testing a few ideas for it. I do agree that it's easier to start with a land form in mind, it's just...a matter of what you can tweak the designer to give you.
Re: Chicken or the Egg? "Land" or "Holes?"
Well, back in our CC days, Robert was our most prolific designer and could seemingly release a new, quality course every month. Though, I can't confirm that he ever built from a pre-set terrain: for Robert I believe, often awoke besotted by some new design eureka which meant he'd not settle until it was uploaded out of his system, obviously to make room for winging along on his next inspiration.
He expressed through many a CC design discussion, a preferred method of building each hole to completion before moving on to the next - including all textures, objects, fauna and finished elevations. Robert was never guilty of overworking a course: he could well have invented the phrase 'less is more". His philosophy was best revealed when developing our 'compilation' course designs. Here, shackled by a pre-set terrain, Robert could easily and suddenly unravel as he scrutinized the latest, less-than-Robert, uploaded contribution as reason to threaten disassociation with the project.
I write, personally.
But, I enjoy engaging the Architect most when following Polslad's way of working a small group of holes around a particular feature - I'd say that Augusta's Amen Corner has a lot to answer for here, but perhaps it's magnificence is due purely to familiarity. Reducing the tools to working with only three textures (tee box, one green, and one fairway) and one tee box placing, the full 18 holes can be quickly routed and gets me out there testing the possibilities in full optimistic hopes of maximizing panorama views, shadow enhancements and deciding upon a general course par/yardage.
All the fun stuff, really. The reality of optimizing's constant sorrow ahead can wait.
He expressed through many a CC design discussion, a preferred method of building each hole to completion before moving on to the next - including all textures, objects, fauna and finished elevations. Robert was never guilty of overworking a course: he could well have invented the phrase 'less is more". His philosophy was best revealed when developing our 'compilation' course designs. Here, shackled by a pre-set terrain, Robert could easily and suddenly unravel as he scrutinized the latest, less-than-Robert, uploaded contribution as reason to threaten disassociation with the project.
I write, personally.
But, I enjoy engaging the Architect most when following Polslad's way of working a small group of holes around a particular feature - I'd say that Augusta's Amen Corner has a lot to answer for here, but perhaps it's magnificence is due purely to familiarity. Reducing the tools to working with only three textures (tee box, one green, and one fairway) and one tee box placing, the full 18 holes can be quickly routed and gets me out there testing the possibilities in full optimistic hopes of maximizing panorama views, shadow enhancements and deciding upon a general course par/yardage.
All the fun stuff, really. The reality of optimizing's constant sorrow ahead can wait.