Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Axis vs Allies => Topic started by: Ripsnort on December 11, 2001, 08:24:00 AM
-
Currently, the uterus map is active...I personally find it hard to recruit anyone into an arena that has historical planesets, reduced icons, etc. with an non-historical map.
Any chance of making the CT historical maps only?
-
A uterus only belongs in the MA or a woman, not in the CT. ;)
-
I tend to agree. The Europe, Afrika, Baltic, Norway, Mindanao, Stalingrad.... etc etc all have a far richer flavour than man-made geography. I think HTC has a lot on thier plate but I also think updating the terrains is on it.
Westy
-
They may have alot on their plate but seems to me that their commitment to a historical arena is questionable. It isnt like the whole ct/historical arena thing just started yesterday. They could have spent some time updating the historical maps. Instead, they just threw a lake uterous map in there and moved on leaving it to the players to figure out. With more support like this the ct is sure to fail then the neysayers can yet again claim the idea doesnt have any mass apeal.......sigh.
Originally posted by O'Westy:
I tend to agree. The Europe, Afrika, Baltic, Norway, Mindanao, Stalingrad.... etc etc all have a far richer flavour than man-made geography. I think HTC has a lot on thier plate but I also think updating the terrains is on it.
Westy
-
HTC,or terrain builders... correct me if I am wrong, but here is what I think may be the problem...
We have alot of talent on the terrain team..however, I think what they lack is the ability to strategically link the strat model with the spawn points and associated fields.
In other words, almost anyone can produce a decent map, but to do so with a logical strat system imbedded within the map along with spawn points that actually "work" is tough to do. I've seen alot of beautiful maps that had pointless spawn points for GV's, let alone bugs that would crash you back to desk top if you attempted to use the said spawn points.
-
Actually Rip the Balck Sea map has been done with that exact thing in mind.
The problem is that many of our historical maps are not updated with the new strat such as depots, trains, trucks etc.
These things are being done and then must go to HTC for approaval. All of this takes time and that is why you are seeing the uterus in the CT.
-
Yeah, I figured with the new terrain editor out that alot of that was "in work"...I'd love to play with terrains, that's right up my alley for expertise, however, its too much like real life work, and I wouldn't get paid for it! :p Too little time...if I hadn't had children, you can bet I'd be there having fun with the terrain team, seems like we got a great bunch of guys for both the terrain team and the CM's involved.
-
Actually Rip, I am currently updating the Black Sea map with the new strat features. I use as many 'historical' maps as I can, including references for railway placement and highway placement.
Unfortunately, one of the problems I have found with Eastern front battles, is that the combatants typically used grass airfields (See IL-2 the sim ;) -) and it is very difficult to get accurate data regarding their placement.
Also, the terrain team is beginning to work on smaller historical terrains. We will have to see what the CT comes up with.
<S!>
[ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: Sundog ]
-
Lets wait and see what the CT arena team come up with, then if its not.......eh up to scratch, which iam sure it will be looking at the quality of the people involved, then we can suggest things to them.
Oh forgot to add IMHO in case i put someones nose outa joint!!
Marcof.
(winding up MA arena players since 1999!)
-
Crash, the current setup in the Combat Theater is a temporary placeholder while we hash out the best setup.
-
I agree. How long have we had a temporary place holder in place? How long has the ct not had even the same level of features as the ma?
Originally posted by hblair:
Crash, the current setup in the Combat Theater is a temporary placeholder while we hash out the best setup.
-
lighten up. yeesh
-
Historical maps are a great 'Sweetner' to bring new recruits to CT as well as satisfying it's current user base. But... it would be better to get a few terrains with good gameplay/strat embedded to get the CT team and support staff going.
Ramjet
-
Exactly on why the user created terrains aren't being used for the CT. they don't have the depots, etc. However, the Baltic terrain from the MA does have all that good stuff, so why can't we use that one instead of Uterus? That's my point. :)
-
Unless we get a 1:1 scale map, I fail to see how any of our terrains are more "historical" than Lake Uterus and the like.
-
because it actually resembles (albeit not to scale) an area that WWII took place in?
-
Jeez, Funked.
We ALL want total realism, right?
As long as we get to "select" the parts we want and ignore the ones we don't, eh?
:D
-
Nifty that's like saying the pedal powered Jaguar XK-E I had as a toddler was more like a real Jaguar XK-E than was my old beat up Honda Civic. The pedal car sure "resembles" the Jag in shape, but functionally I'd say the Civic is a bit closer. :)
What makes a terrain unique in terms of real world war-making is the x and y distances between features (mountains, lakes, cities, strategic sites) and the dimensions of those features. If you scale it down you lose all of that. It is no longer a historical terrain in a functional sense.
If we had 1/4 scale airplanes flying at 1/4 of real speed maybe it could be "historical". But the only historical thing about any of our maps is their appearance in the clipboard view. Surely the "hardcore" "grognard" set can see right through something so superficial?
[ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]
-
I like the Uterus map in there, we actually had some PLAYERS in there the other night, 20 if I recall! I could actually FIND the bases on the map and thanks to others in there, told me where the fight was. Had a good time and I think everyone was exchanging <S>'s to one another.
I dunno, Rip. I'd love to see some new maps too, but hate all you like, the CT actually had PLAYERS for once. Nice start, don't you think? :D
-
It's coming...really it is. We're right now laying out the ground rules for how often we'll reset the map (in the absence of a "winner"), what settings to use, scoring issues, etc. We want to have a plan worked out for the next two months, so as to keep the interest high.
As for historical vs. non-historical terrains, we'll likely try both. There seems to be mixed opinions regarding which will attract more players. The important thing is to have maps that allow good gameplay (strategic as well as tactical) while still maintaining the kind of combat-like environment you're looking for.
Sundog, I wouldn't worry as much about exact historical placement of those grass strips (love that idea, BTW). Along the Eastern front, there were plenty of "air bases" that appeared and dissappeared as the war ebbed and flowed. The more important issues is to lay them down logically, in such a way as to produce an exciting and challenging map. Place know major bases in their historical locations, of course.
-
Good news to hear Sabre. Hopefully I'll get a chance to log on soon and see how things are in there. Add another number to the entry screen counter :)
I really like the discussions I've been reading. Just about everyone has a good grip on what they want. Realistic expectations seem to be the norm.
Good to see folks excited about the new CT and her recently appointed caretakers.
Westy
-
I like glazed doughnuts.
You guys are welcome to fly in there with us in the interum. I've been in there every night this week, been having a really good time. We had 27 a couple nights ago. It's gonna get much better fellas, trust us. :)
[ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: hblair ]
-
hehe, as long as sfma is out, I might come in, I might not. I hate that map as much as some people hate Mindanao. ;)
-
LOL HB :D
[ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]