Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: USRanger on March 25, 2010, 08:47:19 PM
-
I'm planning on submitting a terrain for the WW1 arena soon. I don't know if HTC will weigh in here or not, but what does the community think? With about 50 people in the arena in U.S. primetime now, would a terrain with only one base per side work better? It was the discussion on 200 in the arena a minute ago & got me wondering. I have some excellent textures & a good layout planned, I just need to know how many fields per side to place (plus a new terrain editor version with the WW1 field :pray). Thoughts?
-
Wise man once say: "You can't fix stupid!"
Give it a shot though :aok
-
Go for it!
Who knows maybe we can get it up in WWI #2 and have a choice.
-
I saw submit it. The worse they can say is "no." Although, something about a 3 base terrain seems to remind me of the DA furball lake. But, who knows how it will turn out.
-
YES YES YES!!!!!!
-
I would like to see some ground structures to fly through...bridges to fly under under. bombed out towns to fly through... power poles, church towers...barns to fly through...headge rows...taller trees etc...
Something to make flying on deck more interesting and dangerous....
Scenes from "The Blue Max"
(http://dasmuppets.com/agent360/ww1/bridge_1.jpg)
Notice the sheep and cows...hehehe
(http://dasmuppets.com/agent360/ww1/bridge_2.jpg)
(http://dasmuppets.com/agent360/ww1/bridge_3.jpg)
(http://dasmuppets.com/agent360/ww1/town_1.jpg)
(http://dasmuppets.com/agent360/ww1/town_2.jpg)
-
dogfighting thru what you described would be great and more realistic IMO
-
Come on brother, make my day!
That looks awesome!
-
not sure why we need 3 countries
I had a thought that if you had 2 countries facing each other (as it was) over the front line
they could have 3 bases each
the center ones you could pick any plane
the outta bases only allied or German depending on which side you where on
then if your up for manic furbal, anything goes, you up centre field
but if your interested in more of a historical match up , up at outer bases
just a thought ...
-
Interesting idea. I kind of like it.
not sure why we need 3 countries
I had a thought that if you had 2 countries facing each other (as it was) over the front line
they could have 3 bases each
the center ones you could pick any plane
the outta bases only allied or German depending on which side you where on
then if your up for manic furbal, anything goes, you up centre field
but if your interested in more of a historical match up , up at outer bases
just a thought ...
-
dogfighting thru what you described would be great and more realistic IMO
Shhh...someone might object to the use of that world...nothing is allowed to be realistic, it's a game. :airplane:
-
I tend to dislike playing in a crowd. I prefer 2 on 2, 3 on 3, various combinations like that. Not these 10 v 10 furballs where everyone is just flying around in circles taking potshots at whoever flys in front of their guns. Having the other fields available and having three countries allows for some flexibility today. A two country - two field set up is the obvious conclusion for the suggestion here. Not what I would prefer.
-
Would really help to hear from HTC on this. Can't do anything until the newest version of the terrain editor comes out anyway. I can do all the terrain work, just need those new airfields.
-
(http://www.saveourlittlevillage.org/files/shared/bigstockphoto_Check_Yes_431128.jpg)
-
you mean this one?
March 19, 2010
Aces High: Mission Editor/Skin Viewer Released
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New versions of the Mission Editor and Skin Viewer are now available.
-
you mean this one?
March 19, 2010
Aces High: Mission Editor/Skin Viewer Released
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New versions of the Mission Editor and Skin Viewer are now available.
um I think he means the terrain editor not the mission editor or the skin viewer. :D
In answer to the idea of a 3 base WWI map, I would say that I would not really go less than 3 countries and 3 bases. For the simple reason that it is nice to have the option to go to a part of the map that no one is fighting and starting a small fight rather than get involved in the horde vs horde.
In my honest opinion, I think the 3 country 6 base idea that HT implemented works very well and I would love to see furball lake done the same was in the DA. There is the center for the ones that like the 3 way furball and would seperate the 3 countries enough to permit the smaller fights as well.
The above are just my thoughts but USRanger is the one doing the work and I hope he does not take this as me telling him his idea is bad or tell him how he should do things. Good luck on your build ranger and thanks for your efforts.
-
I'd be in favor of a 3 country/ 1 base each setup with some detailed terrain (bridges, taller trees, buildings, hills, valleys, rivers, lakes).
I also think the previously mentioned 2 countries, 3 base idea with all planes in the middle and A v A in the outer bases. As the plane set expands, you could put EW planes on one end and LW planes far away on the other.
I personally don't think the 3 country / 6 base setup we have works that well for 40-50 players. What I saw last night was Rooks v bish at the lower two bases, almost no knights and nothing going on anywhere else. EBM switched to Knights and it was almost exactly even in the arena but the fight stayed mostly rook v bish at the lower base. We ended up switching some of the squad to bish to get a bish/knight fight going. It picked up a bit after that.
Nice thing is we have 4 arenas. It would be easy to simultaneously try out a few options.
-
I'd be in favor of a 3 country/ 1 base each setup with some detailed terrain (bridges, taller trees, buildings, hills, valleys, rivers, lakes).
I also think the previously mentioned 2 countries, 3 base idea with all planes in the middle and A v A in the outer bases. As the plane set expands, you could put EW planes on one end and LW planes far away on the other.
I personally don't think the 3 country / 6 base setup we have works that well for 40-50 players. What I saw last night was Rooks v bish at the lower two bases, almost no knights and nothing going on anywhere else. EBM switched to Knights and it was almost exactly even in the arena but the fight stayed mostly rook v bish at the lower base. We ended up switching some of the squad to bish to get a bish/knight fight going. It picked up a bit after that.
Nice thing is we have 4 arenas. It would be easy to simultaneously try out a few options.
I agree. What we have now creates a series of isolated 2 country wars. I think a 3 field configurations would make the distribution of fights much less linear and add more variety. The 2 straight-line conveyor belts feeding into a meat grinder gets a little predictable.
I wouldn’t go with just one 3 field set. I’d have 3 or 4 of these 3 field triads distributed across a small map.
Oh, and puffy white clouds too please. ;)
Wab
-
What about having the airfields up on hills at say, 2k or so above the surrounding area? As of right now 95% of the fighting is taking place below treetop level, which I don't quite understand, except for the extra time it takes these birds to climb out. I'd personally like to see the fights start out at 4-5k to add some more wiggle room during a dogfight.
-
Any WW1 dogfight is likely going to be a constantly descending fight as these planes aren't real strong on climb.
I wouldn't want to see 2k fields at all. At most, put the field about 200 feet above surrounding terrain to get above trees and buildings from the start.
Just my .02.
-
What about having the airfields up on hills at say, 2k or so above the surrounding area? As of right now 95% of the fighting is taking place below treetop level, which I don't quite understand, except for the extra time it takes these birds to climb out. I'd personally like to see the fights start out at 4-5k to add some more wiggle room during a dogfight.
I agree
-
The first map that we saw when AH was released used an alternating field setup. Bish, knight, rook bish knight rook
So the 2 knight bases were across from each other.
They didn't work that great for the first week of AH because the numbers were high.
But now I'd love to see it make a comeback.
Afternoons I've been finding 10-15 bish and rooks on and perhaps 2 -3 knights.
As a result there is a huge furball south on the map and virtually no action for the knights.
-
Afternoons I've been finding 10-15 bish and rooks on and perhaps 2 -3 knights.
As a result there is a huge furball south on the map and virtually no action for the knights.
I know where it seems like this on the surface but it has been my experience that it gives an opportuntiy to start a much smaller fight. Usually when I log into one of the WWI arenas I find the same as you so I usually up from one of those knight bases and fly over to one of the bish or rook bases. After circling around one of those bases for a little while you will usually see 1-2 people up to meet you. Now this fight doesn't stay small forever and usually leads to a gang from one side and so far it usually evens out only the fight is larger than I was hoping for in the first place.
The nice thing about how the bases are laid out now is that it seperates the 3rd country from the other 2 enough to discorage them from interfering and creating the 3 party furball that many people don't enjoy and I also am not always looking for.
As an answer to your other question USRanger, I would not mind seeing the bases located with a little higher alt but I would say that 500-1000 would be a nice medium alt to have them at.
-
Ok, lets go back to the top. What is so wrong with it the way it is and, what will anything that has so far been proposed imrpove in any way?
With this crowd there will ALWAYS be something wrong with ANYTHING and EVERYTHING. But like digestive gas, its coming out sooner or later so might as well just FART and get it over with.
-
Yeager, from my POV the current setup coupled with routine arena numbers leads to 1 two country fight with the thrid country pretty much out of it. It's too far to fly from the odd-man-out country down to the fight between the other two countries.
I think we'd be better served with a 1 base /three country setup like Furball Lake only without the instant-altitude-for-cherry-pickers base elevations and some interesting terrain rather than a flat blue lake.
But that's just my .02 and I am not unhappy with what we have now.
-
Yeager, from my POV the current setup coupled with routine arena numbers leads to 1 two country fight with the thrid country pretty much out of it. It's too far to fly from the odd-man-out country down to the fight between the other two countries.
I think we'd be better served with a 1 base /three country setup like Furball Lake only without the instant-altitude-for-cherry-pickers base elevations and some interesting terrain rather than a flat blue lake.
But that's just my .02 and I am not unhappy with what we have now.
I agree with each of these statements.
Including living with what we got if thats all we'll get.
:salute,
Wab
-
Ok, lets go back to the top. What is so wrong with it the way it is and, what will anything that has so far been proposed imrpove in any way?
With this crowd there will ALWAYS be something wrong with ANYTHING and EVERYTHING. But like digestive gas, its coming out sooner or later so might as well just FART and get it over with.
I never said there was anything wrong with the current terrain/setup. I merely wanted to add a second WW1 terrain for people to play on, and was looking for the best setup based on opinions of those that fly there. That ok? Without having to worry about strats, spawn points, etc., I can concentrate on a immersive terrain than we currently have. There is nothing wrong with the current terrain. I just wanted to add some variety for the community to enjoy.
-
I agree with each of these statements.
Including living with what we got if thats all we'll get.
:salute,
Wab
Oh, except if I read correct I wouldn't suggest just one 3 field cluster. I'd have a small map with several 3 field cluster spaced away from each other. That way there might be one big furball at one cluster , but maybe some 3-4 plane fights at one of the others.
See, I always have to find something to disagree with. :)
Wab
-
Actually thats a good idea Wab.
Considering the terrain flown over in WWI we could even desert terrain for one cluster.
-
Rough test:
(http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/6304/74997911.jpg) (http://img260.imageshack.us/i/74997911.jpg/)
(http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/6572/71769888.jpg) (http://img716.imageshack.us/i/71769888.jpg/)
(http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/9229/74094069.jpg) (http://img28.imageshack.us/i/74094069.jpg/)
(http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/8246/18236518.jpg) (http://img402.imageshack.us/i/18236518.jpg/)
-
:O :O :O
:airplane: :joystick:
-
Cool. Spikey likey. ;)
-
Like your rough test shots ranger,
some hills and more life like terrain would be cool.
I must say i am not so hip on the ww1 thing in it's current state but but would love to see a few changes.
by the way sir i would love to see a winter map in ww2 ma, would be a nice change.
Great work Ranger :aok
:salute froger
-
:O :aok
-
Same terrain, different look/season:
(http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/9057/30862427.jpg) (http://img237.imageshack.us/i/30862427.jpg/)
(http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/1710/44593171.jpg) (http://img171.imageshack.us/i/44593171.jpg/)
(http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/1707/23317915.jpg) (http://img249.imageshack.us/i/23317915.jpg/)
-
Same terrain, different look/season:
I like that look a lot better.
But....uhhhhh....I'm still not seeing any puffy white clouds. :D
:salute,
Wab
-
Cool. Spikey likey. ;)
Spikey lovey (I did get the rhyme, though :P )
Can't wait to see it in game! :)
-
I'm hesitant to be critical of the terrains because you obviously put a lot of hard work into creating them, the winter one I really like but the deserty one not so much, because WW1 was fought over a more hmm countryside? is that the word? terrain.
-
I'm hesitant to be critical of the terrains because you obviously put a lot of hard work into creating them, the winter one I really like but the deserty one not so much, because WW1 was fought over a more hmm countryside? is that the word? terrain.
Got a couple more looks to show you later tonight. :aok
I like that look a lot better.
But....uhhhhh....I'm still not seeing any puffy white clouds. :D
:salute,
Wab
Clouds come last. :) This is just a test run to see what people like. I can't make the actual terrain until they release a new terrain editor with the WW1 field/objects. :pray
-
I'm hesitant to be critical of the terrains because you obviously put a lot of hard work into creating them, the winter one I really like but the deserty one not so much, because WW1 was fought over a more hmm countryside? is that the word? terrain.
There were significant air operations over the middle east, especially over the northern Israel, southern lebanon and syria area in summer 1918.
-
I thought there was some middle east action.
-
Variation #3. I'll do one more tomorrow and then we'll make a community decision which to go with.
(http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/5062/61944398.jpg) (http://img7.imageshack.us/i/61944398.jpg/)
(http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/2037/81820864.jpg) (http://img138.imageshack.us/i/81820864.jpg/)
(http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/3007/49414281.jpg) (http://img151.imageshack.us/i/49414281.jpg/)
(http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/4425/49505449.jpg) (http://img522.imageshack.us/i/49505449.jpg/)
-
#3 :aok
-
I love the added hills and valleys ranger.
as of right now I think #3 is the best with #1 as a distant second
-
Final type. Let the voting begin. :aok
(http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/3858/73394013.jpg) (http://img94.imageshack.us/i/73394013.jpg/)
(http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/9641/67757212.jpg) (http://img717.imageshack.us/i/67757212.jpg/)
(http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/1820/38212570.jpg) (http://img715.imageshack.us/i/38212570.jpg/)
(http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/9530/34777425.jpg) (http://img180.imageshack.us/i/34777425.jpg/)
-
Nice job Ranger. I vote #3 but would like to see
the other ones as well at some point in time.
Btw, are those hi-res pics ?
Tokenjo
-
I do use hi-res graphics, but I believe that only affects skins. The terrain should look the same for everyone unless the they run the low,all-graphic-options-turned-off settings.
-
Like 1 and 4 Ranger, very very nice work bud.
Cant wait to fly over some of these terrains,
:salute
Wurzel
-
I still like 3 the best but 4 is a very close 2nd.
Very nice job ranger. :aok
-
Definitely #4 excellent looking wee number that one :aok
-
Terrains do look good <S> but I worry about those hills and low mountains. These airplanes have tended to barely manage on the flat terrain of current map. Start adding in hills and mountains and the majority of kills will be ditch awards due to people bellying in trying to avoid sloping terrain.
Just a thought.
-
I like #1 the best followed by #2. I've seen enough green terrain. Time for a change.
-
Nice work Ranger. I like #2, closely followed by #1 and #3
-
Lowering the hills wouldn't be a problem. Maybe half the size they are now?
-
3 or 4.
As for the hills. Strategically placed they may help funnel the fight to where you want it.
-
Ya know, I was thinking. Since the actual fighting area for WW1 planes is fairly small, with HTC's approval, I could easily put 3 different environments on one terrain, separating them with a tri-spoke mountain range so each environment could not see the others. This would give the players the ability to choose which environment they like to fly in and eliminate the need for separate terrains which Skuzzy would have to rotate. I'd really like HT's input on this. It would save everyone time, give the most options to the players, and only require the terrain to be downloaded once, instead of 3 different terrains. Opinions? Especially HTC's?
(http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/747/mapon.jpg) (http://img85.imageshack.us/i/mapon.jpg/)
-
Brilliant!!!
-
Excellent idea Ranger - as long as the 3 area's are distinct and separated from each other, that's a winner in my book.
Wurzel
-
I've actually made a terrain like this before for offline missions and it worked out very well. With the mountain ranges separating the environments, one side cannot see another, so there is no loss of immersion. Also, with no strat & such to worry about, I could spend that time adding goodies like towns, villages, etc., making it as lifelike as possible.
:salute
-
Thats the stuff right there!
Brilliant!
Be nice to see a village, or factory's, or rail center, or something similar in the middle to dogfight over.
Or maybe all 3 each one in a different area! :)
One of the 3 sets of fields will always be unused enough to be able to do a 1v1 or 2v2.
-
I sent a PM to HT asking him to check out this thread & weigh in. If we get the go-ahead, I'll start on it immediately. :cheers:
-
I sent a PM to HT asking him to check out this thread & weigh in. If we get the go-ahead, I'll start on it immediately. :cheers:
I think that would be a great layout Ranger.
But puffy white clouds please. Don't forget the clouds. :D Staggered around 3-4k I think.
Oh, and maybe a tri-spoke line of trenches dividing the three fields?
Regards,
Wab
-
The problem would be that if you wish them to look different, you will not be able to have different tile sets. The other thing that would happen is 2 of the sets would not be used. Also you would need 6 fields not 3. And finally there really is no advantage to doing it on 1 terrain that I can think of.
The thing you mentioned about choice, would actually make less because everyone would pretty much fight the same spot.
As far as having to rotate the terrains, we have settings that can do that automatically over a period of time.
HiTech
-
I like the winter Terrain. Good job Ranger
-
The problem would be that if you wish them to look different, you will not be able to have different tile sets. The other thing that would happen is 2 of the sets would not be used. Also you would need 6 fields not 3. And finally there really is no advantage to doing it on 1 terrain that I can think of.
The thing you mentioned about choice, would actually make less because everyone would pretty much fight the same spot.
As far as having to rotate the terrains, we have settings that can do that automatically over a period of time.
HiTech
Thank you for replying HT. When you say each area would require different tile sets, were you referring to the clutter sets? If so, I was going to use the European set all around, so that part would be no problem. Also, it would be no problem having 6 fields per environment as opposed to just 3. That was actually my plan. I just had 3 fields per area in my pic just as an example. It would be no sweat on a 128x128 terrain. From already building a terrain like this for offline missions, I know this would be easily doable, but I can see which way you are leaning with it, so I'll hang it up. If separate terrains is what the man wants, then that's the way it has to go. Thanks all for your opinions in this thread. I can see that there are fans of each of the environments, so it looks as though I'll be working on 3 or 4 WW1 terrains. My goal is to keep interest in the WW1 arena, while taking advantage of the simplicity of the WW1 terrain (no strats & such). I'll get to work now & hopefully have something to show off in the near future.
:salute all