Author Topic: basic layout  (Read 4844 times)

Offline Chris79

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1123
basic layout
« on: April 16, 2017, 07:52:43 PM »


Chuikov

Offline Kanth

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2462
Re: basic layout
« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2017, 08:13:25 PM »
I don't know what the rules are for the MA but that looks like it needs to be played.  :aok
Gone from the game. Please see Spikes or Nefarious for any Ahevents.net admin needs.

Offline Devil 505

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8998
Re: basic layout
« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2017, 09:59:14 PM »
It looks like a mini Trinity based on it's shape. But that does present one of the problems from that map - too much open ocean.

I think you should add more islands with airfields to the open sea areas on the outside. And maybe adjust the land portions to move the ports closer to the center of each sea as well to reduce the transit time of a fleet to a combat zone.
Kommando Nowotny

FlyKommando.com

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: basic layout
« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2017, 10:31:24 PM »
Did you opt for only a map room object on each airfield? At 20% of a country's feilds for a reset and 22 fields per country, this may be doing good lasting two days. Do have about 4 more to submit with this one? The action will be very fast, so having a few more waiting in rotation will offset the sudden, dang it's over so quick feelings. Looks like you discovered the quick and dirty of laying land mass, then finger painting with the raise hill and smooth with high foot per second settings. If you are not too interested in how realistic the land mass looks and painting large areas with a single tile, you can pump these out in 256x256 with 20-22 feilds one a month.

If you just want to get everything with a tile color painted in a few seconds. Us the elevation tool where you pick a minimum then a maximum and it will make all of the terrain in that alt band the tile you choose.

You have become a hero to the strat runners.
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline Chris79

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1123
Re: basic layout
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2017, 11:42:38 PM »
1. When task groups are added I think the total bases per country will be 28.
2. The spawns when fully thought out and intialized will make taking bases farther along each respective front progressively more difficult.
3. Other then the center area, I just drew the basic outline of the map and threw in some terrain for experimentation purposes. I have spent little time fine tuning anything beyond A1-A3. In the center area, the tiles change from grass land in the center, broad leaf Forrest from 1.5k to 4K, evergreen Forrest from 4K to 10k, and tundra above that. I also tried to recreate natural erosion processes from water drainage to glacial cuts into the mountains. If I continue with this task, I intend to create all the terrain in which I think a great deal of fighting will occur in a unique fashion. I.e between A4 and A5 I recreated the cliffs of Dover. It would nice if I could replicate certain areas of historical battle fields into certain map areas.
4. As for strats, I am not to married to any particular set up. The original intent was to create an environment that would be conducive for large strat raids.


Chuikov

Offline Volron

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5805
Re: basic layout
« Reply #5 on: April 17, 2017, 12:09:19 AM »
May want to make the strats more "uniform".  Example:  I noticed that blue has ammo in front, green has it in back and red has it in the middle.  Have each strat match locations on all sides. :)  This way you won't hear someone grip: X has it better because Y strat is in back, ours is in front. :aok
Quote from: hitech
Wow I find it hard to believe it has been almost 38 days since our last path. We should have release another 38 versions by now  :bhead
HiTech
Quote from: Pyro
Quote from: Jolly
What on Earth makes you think that i said that sir?!
My guess would be scotch.

Offline DmonSlyr

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6666
Re: basic layout
« Reply #6 on: April 17, 2017, 12:30:47 AM »
I actually like the layout. I agree with Volron also. Maps work a lot better with symmetry and bases that aren't overly seperated. While I think one base in the middle and a 3 way fight for one base in the middle is a better "middle" idea. The furball area will be alright in this case. I say give it a try after a few layout adjustments!
The Damned(est. 1988)
-=Army of Muppets=-
2014 & 2018 KoTH ToC Champion

Offline Bizman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9606
Re: basic layout
« Reply #7 on: April 17, 2017, 03:52:40 AM »
I know absolutely nothing about strategic layout or playability or anything like that.

What I know something about is whether I like or dislike what I see. This one definitely is in the "like" category. Unlike the maps based on grocery or tools, this is a pleasure to view even as a whole.

As a book and movie reviewer once told me, even an imaginary world is fully acceptable if it's coherent. Like WW2 propeller planes flying over terrestrial landscapes.

Quote from: BaldEagl, applies to myself, too
I've got an older system by today's standards that still runs the game well by my standards.

Kotisivuni

Offline Bruv119

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15667
      • http://www.thefewsquadron.co.uk
Re: basic layout
« Reply #8 on: April 17, 2017, 08:05:36 AM »
I think it looks great for a small map.   

Don't ruin it by putting GV spawns to and from every single base. 

Have some spawns out to help re-claim fields if needed.
The Few ***
F.P.H

Offline Chris79

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1123
Re: basic layout
« Reply #9 on: April 17, 2017, 09:54:04 AM »
I think it looks great for a small map.   

Don't ruin it by putting GV spawns to and from every single base. 

Have some spawns out to help re-claim fields if needed.

The first series of front line based have dual spawns, after that a rear echelon base would need to be taken to have vehicle spawns to the remaining front line base's


Chuikov

Offline JunkyII

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8428
Re: basic layout
« Reply #10 on: April 17, 2017, 11:35:48 AM »
I suggest GV spawns into the rear of the center airfields to help with retake and defense if some nerds try to take them....

HTC I still think it's a huge mistake not make center fields uncapturable, just watch ndisles die when one of the teams takes one of the center airfields....its crazy.
DFC Member
Proud Member of Pigs on the Wing
"Yikes"

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23888
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: basic layout
« Reply #11 on: April 17, 2017, 11:41:23 AM »
Komet galore   :old:
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline SFRT - Frenchy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5420
      • http://home.CFL.rr.com/rauns/menu.htm
Re: basic layout
« Reply #12 on: April 17, 2017, 12:27:53 PM »
No fly zone with all that 88 in each country's mainland.  :joystick:
Dat jugs bro.

Terror flieger since 1941.
------------------------

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: basic layout
« Reply #13 on: April 17, 2017, 12:52:46 PM »
You need either map rooms on the airfields or a town next to each so fields can be captured.

Map rooms create the big dot on or next to fields when there is one owned by the field. None of your enabled airfield icons from the CBM window show a map room object dot. GV\Flack\Ports have one incorporated, but you will have to add a map room object hidden out of the way for each CV. To have this terrain in the MA, you have to allow all airfields, ports, and vBases to be capture able except for the three you designate uncaptureable including one with 163 available.

If you decide to place one of the uncaptureable fields Gv or airfield anywhere but nearer to the HQ, ask Hitech about the placement. On bowlma I originally made the three tiny GV bases in the center caldera uncaptureable because he posted once it did not matter where they were located. Then after inspecting the terrain for MA approval, he disabled the uncaptureable tag I set for those three GV bases.

You also need to visit every single field and up at it in a plane and test your spawns and inspect the surrounding land for problems. Like exposed object seams, bad terrain transitions in elevation and GV spawns to see if Gv's even have a chance of getting out of the trees. Depending on how you feel about GV's in the game, if you purposely paint dense trees between the spawn and field to defend the furballers, don't put in a GV spawn. It will be more honest and not help drive GVers out of the game. They pay $14.95 and help keep the doors in Texas open so the furballers can shoot at each other.

If you are OK with GV's, use a stop watch and time how long it takes a tank from a spawn to get to the town map room and how long it takes a tank from the airfield to do the same. I set the spawns on my terrain so "airfield tanks" take 5 minutes while "spawn tanks" take 7 minutes. If you opt for only a map room object placed on each airfield for the capture. You may want to put a grass ring around the airfields to have the tree line about 1\4 mile away. The tanks will have to target the airfield with 100% of their attention which will get hard on the furballers who just want to get off the runway. Towns help keep enemy tanks away from the airfield, think about how many have been captured out from under you over the years while you furballed, versus how many times you tried to up a plane and got a multi tank salute as your spawn vulch.

It helps to remember the community is not here for just one biased kind of activity. These days about half the community flys planes and half drives GV's and they are "paying Hitech" for access to that. I chose to balance my terrain to that reality with a single bias against forcing the community to spend the night flying c47's to get radar back up or their resources healthy. Listening to players through the 2 years of the alpha\beta and the time leading up to completing my terrain. Universally they do not want to waste their night at the mercy of their strats any more than they need to. They want quick action in aircraft and to not spend their night caught by trees or lost in dense forests trying to drive forever just to get bombed or sniped.

Looks like you have the begging of a fun terrain.       
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline Chris79

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1123
Re: basic layout
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2017, 01:09:41 PM »
You need either map rooms on the airfields or a town next to each so fields can be captured.

Map rooms create the big dot on or next to fields when there is one owned by the field. None of your enabled airfield icons from the CBM window show a map room object dot. GV\Flack\Ports have one incorporated, but you will have to add a map room object hidden out of the way for each CV. To have this terrain in the MA, you have to allow all airfields, ports, and vBases to be capture able except for the three you designate uncaptureable including one with 163 available.

If you decide to place one of the uncaptureable fields Gv or airfield anywhere but nearer to the HQ, ask Hitech about the placement. On bowlma I originally made the three tiny GV bases in the center caldera uncaptureable because he posted once it did not matter where they were located. Then after inspecting the terrain for MA approval, he disabled the uncaptureable tag I set for those three GV bases.

You also need to visit every single field and up at it in a plane and test your spawns and inspect the surrounding land for problems. Like exposed object seams, bad terrain transitions in elevation and GV spawns to see if Gv's even have a chance of getting out of the trees. Depending on how you feel about GV's in the game, if you purposely paint dense trees between the spawn and field to defend the furballers, don't put in a GV spawn. It will be more honest and not help drive GVers out of the game. They pay $14.95 and help keep the doors in Texas open so the furballers can shoot at each other.

If you are OK with GV's, use a stop watch and time how long it takes a tank from a spawn to get to the town map room and how long it takes a tank from the airfield to do the same. I set the spawns on my terrain so "airfield tanks" take 5 minutes while "spawn tanks" take 7 minutes. If you opt for only a map room object placed on each airfield for the capture. You may want to put a grass ring around the airfields to have the tree line about 1\4 mile away. The tanks will have to target the airfield with 100% of their attention which will get hard on the furballers who just want to get off the runway. Towns help keep enemy tanks away from the airfield, think about how many have been captured out from under you over the years while you furballed, versus how many times you tried to up a plane and got a multi tank salute as your spawn vulch.

It helps to remember the community is not here for just one biased kind of activity. These days about half the community flys planes and half drives GV's and they are "paying Hitech" for access to that. I chose to balance my terrain to that reality with a single bias against forcing the community to spend the night flying c47's to get radar back up or their resources healthy. Listening to players through the 2 years of the alpha\beta and the time leading up to completing my terrain. Universally they do not want to waste their night at the mercy of their strats any more than they need to. They want quick action in aircraft and to not spend their night caught by trees or lost in dense forests trying to drive forever just to get bombed or sniped.

Looks like you have the begging of a fun terrain.       

I like to GV at times too. The center valley tank town's terrain is laid out like Gettysburg, the northern most island tank area is modeled after the little big horn battle, the south West Island I am thinking of Iwo Jima, and the South east island Waterloo maybe. They won't be camp friendly, but they will be slug fest friendly.


Chuikov