The damn trees

[SkyChimp]

well I've lost about 25kills because of the damn trees I doubt that the trees were 200ft tall. So why so tall make them 70ft or so.

[culero]

~S~ Trees!

culero (hey, give credit where credit's due!)

[SkyChimp]

rofl

[Edbert1]

I could go with them being a little shorter, and I'd like to see the trees at the end of the runways cut down too. But overall I love the trees, an opinion I am well aware places me into the minority.

[Kegger26]

The real problem I have with the trees isnt so much that there there. It is how they are placed. There is nowhere on the maps anymore where you have large clearings. It is all just thick forest. A jungle more like it.
 
 Second the trees are around two hundred feet tall. The grouping they are in makes the whole thing look like a tree building around the length of a football feild.

 Third they are sitting right on the end of the runway. On some maps they even are sitting on the taxi way to the re-arming pads. They need to be pushed back away from the feilds to some of our heavier aircraft can safely take off.

 Forth there ugly as sin. I know there has to be a way to model a tree without making it look like they currently do. The frame hits on my system are around 10-15FPS less than before. I fly a P-51 so I am up there, but I do notice it on approach to land and on take offs.

 What really gets me is hitech is a fellow pilot in real life, he knows better than this. He knows trees are not two hundred feet tall and they are not sitting on the very end of a runway. I have to almost think that it is a matter of not caring so much as a matter of knowlege. I say remove the trees untill they can get them 100% right.

-Wells

[TequilaChaser]

Originally posted by Kegger26

 
 Third they are sitting right on the end of the runway. On some maps they even are sitting on the taxi way to the re-arming pads. They need to be pushed back away from the feilds to some of our heavier aircraft can safely take off.

 Forth there ugly as sin. I know there has to be a way to model a tree without making it look like they currently do. The frame hits on my system are around 10-15FPS less than before. I fly a P-51 so I am up there, but I do notice it on approach to land and on take offs.

 What really gets me is hitech is a fellow pilot in real life, he knows better than this. He knows trees are not two hundred feet tall and they are not sitting on the very end of a runway. I have to almost think that it is a matter of not caring so much as a matter of knowlege.  

my opinion for your 3rd is, if you see a tree or object on a runway or  rearm pad, post a thread in the bug forum, listing terrain name and field #, so Skuzzy & /or HTC staff can find the problem faster with out reading thru all the blab.

my opinion for the rest of all the trees are, they look better now than what we had to start with, and we just did get the object editor not to long ago, so patience is of  the essence, things get better it just takes a little time.......

TC

[vorticon]

Originally posted by SkyChimp
well I've lost about 25kills because of the damn trees I doubt that the trees were 200ft tall. So why so tall make them 70ft or so.

they look about the right height to me, not nearly 200ft tall. maybe the trees where you live are just gimpy midgets.

[TequilaChaser]

hey culero, I thought Texas just outlawed cheerleaders doing that stuff?

[TequilaChaser]

Originally posted by SkyChimp
well I've lost about 25kills because of the damn trees I doubt that the trees were 200ft tall. So why so tall make them 70ft or so.

how did you lose 25 kills? because a weedwhacking pile-it flying thru the trees cost you to clip a wing and auger, while they got away or you had the kills you just was not able to land them, because again you was chasing some weedwhacking pile-it thru the trees and he got away or you was chased and you ran into the trees?  or you was coming into land and was to low on approach and clipped the trees?  (think bbqribs )

TC

[Widewing]

Originally posted by vorticon
they look about the right height to me, not nearly 200ft tall. maybe the trees where you live are just gimpy midgets.

They look right to you??!!

Here's a P-38 parked right next to a tree. The P-38 has a 52 ft wing span... That makes this tree at least 300 feet tall, or 3 times the height of a 50 year-old oak.

Face facts, the trees are poorly proportioned and indiscriminately placed. They do not contribute to the extent that they inhibit.



My regards,

Widewing

[lambo31]

Hey, I've been looking for one of those for my kid. Where'd you find that one?

[doobs]

Mando posted this pic on Moph's thread on this subject.

[Mime]

its the knights of ni!

[vorticon]

Originally posted by Widewing
They look right to you??!!

Here's a P-38 parked right next to a tree. The P-38 has a 52 ft wing span... That makes this tree at least 300 feet tall, or 3 times the height of a 50 year-old oak.

My regards,

Widewing

 that makes that tree 104 ft tall, less actually because the perspective showing the wingspan is wonky, or by stacking the planes tip to tail, 111 ft (3x p38 length) tall, and again, the perspective isnt directly horizontal.

walk a bailed pilot to the base of a tree,go into 3rd person veiw and see how many men make a tree, its 12, making the tree 24 meters tall.

also, when you look to the top of the tree, to me, who grew up within 100 meters of  a ****ing forest (and the relativly small treed boreal forest at that) from directly under the tree, it looks basicly right to me, maybe a little high, but nowhere near the crazy height people are claiming.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by vorticon
 that makes that tree 104 ft tall, less actually because the perspective showing the wingspan is wonky, or by stacking the planes tip to tail, 111 ft (3x p38 length) tall, and again, the perspective isnt directly horizontal.
 

Three words: Betty Ford Clinic.

My regards,

Widewing