Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Terrain Editor => Topic started by: oboe on June 29, 2017, 05:24:38 PM
-
Can you guys comment on whether this terrain would be workable for the MA? Its a 10x10, 250 sq mi terrain, but its not real world scale. In actual fact its closer to 1/5th scale.
I've built a couple giant real world maps by piecing together screenshots of Google maps; one covering Western Europe through Russia and Eastern Med, and another Australia and the SW Pacific up through Japan and China. I built a see-through colored pie chart with 3 sectors, and use this to overlay sections of the Earth at different scales to try to find an area that make work for an MA map. I'm looking for a mix of water and land, with roughly the same land area and coastline length between the 3 countries. Each country must be able to attack the other two countries both by land and by sea. I've found something close with the Black Sea area, and just wondering if you guys think this real-life terrain can be adapted to work for the MA. Unlike a fictional terrain, I can't make everything equal between the 3 sides, but I can try to adjust things to make it as equitable as possible.
(http://i.imgur.com/4l6JFzz.jpg)
I've only included the strats and ports for now, thinking if I can't make it work at this level there's no point in adding fields and bases. Its really interesting to me to think about what strategies might be offered by the asymmetric geography. I'm thinking I might be able to use the Crimean Peninsula as the center of map three way VBase tank battle area, but I don't know how to protect the VBases from capture or destruction by marauding CVs patrolling the Black Sea. There are some interesting mismatches in naval strength in the Med vs the Black Sea, but I'm unsure how this would play out in the MA.
-
First thought off the top of my head is you have placed some fleets in areas that won't work since they can't be to close to land or have way points within a certain distance of land. The fleet by Istanbul won't work in that small body of water. Also the fleet to the NE of Crimea, the farthest to the NE, might not work in that position.
Other thought is the ammo factors (and some other strats) might be to close to the front line. They are only 1 sector away from start positions and could end up quickly by enemy lines and pounded continuously. I probable have them 2 - 2.5 sectors back from the starting front lines.
-
OK, so no passage from the Black Sea to the Med even if I widen the channels beyond there actual scale width?
-
I would have to go back and check what the min distance if but I know the TE can be really, really touchy. I usually place fleets several miles off shore. So, nope unless you want to make that passage somewhere 1/4 to 1/2 sector wide to be safe. Anything less you could place them but players could get a this way point is to close to land message when trying to navigating.
-
Oh and as for making the three sides equal what you really need to focus on is that each side has the same number of bases / type of bases. Then follow the other rules for base placement. Remember if you look at mindano the land size was not equal but the amount of bases were. Plus, you want to make sure that each have a couple avenue of attack. Otherwise one country might have a defensive advantage but even that is doable as long as not to extreme (again look at Mindano).
This is the best way to approach this to since if you are thinking of using this for a MA map you will need to show it to HTC at some point to see if they are good with the concept. If it is custom's arena map then you don't have to worry about side balancing.
-
You have a scale problem, the country Georgia is 26,911 sq mi. Your country of Georgia is only 2.5 sectors wide. A 10x10 sector terrain is 62,500 sq mi. If you scale this to a 20x20, and use the center in the sea. You will be able to clip out the center 10x10 which will be just about the land mass and water described by the 2nd ring out from the center. As for real world scale, the 10x10 will still be too small, but the clip out will sort of fit. The more real world you try to do a terrain for the Melee arena, the more unfair at least one of your three countries will be. Look at mindnao.
-
Its about 1/5 scale to the real world. That's intentional to get enough of the right shaped land mass into 10x10. If I go much bigger, then the Mediterranean starts to dominate the SW quadrant, and it becomes a very different war for the two countries that border there vs the third, landlocked country. Also had to do this to try to keep the length of the land borders close between the three countries.
I think changing the Turkish straits between Black Sea and Aegean to 1/4 to 1/2 sector wide might be too big a change from reality though. I wonder about navigation difficulties among the Greek isles, too.
-
Yes navigating the Greek islands could be a problem. You could either wipe out the small islands to make the area navigable OR move the fleet and port over to Crete. I would think of your terrain as pseudo real since players won't really be complaining that "hey there is Mykonos on this terrain!" Plus, at 1/5 size most of the small greek islands will just be specks in the sea.
Turkey will definitely have a defensive advantage with two short land fronts. Just not sure how much. Mindano's western noodleula has a huge advantage but in the Baltic terrain the defensive advantage is not as much for the country that has the smaller front. You might also be able to even out the advantage Turkey advantage by putting in some not historical islands with bases on them to widen the front on both sides.
-
Thanks for your helpful comments, guys. I'm in no rush and I have so much to learn, I'll just keep plugging away and post changes here. Right now simply developing the overall design/concept. My goal is to create a balanced, playable MA terrain based on real world geography as much as possible, and in locations not too far removed from where real world combat in WWII took place (so no Antarctic or North/South America terrains).
Here is Rev 1 of the BlackSea:
(http://i.imgur.com/xf1N47F.jpg)
I've widen the Bosphorus and Dardanelles, and the strait into the Sea of Azov in the Black Sea. A design principle I have in mind here is that fleets from every country should theoretically be able to navigate through all open water on the map. I don't mind if the Turkish Straits are a navigational challenge, or near suicide after I get the shore batteries installed, but it must be possible in theory for the Russian (Yellow) fleets to reach the Mediterranean Sea.
I've altered fleet starting locations to give them more room, and moved a Turkish CV from the Eastern Med back into the Black Sea. With Russia's fleet concentrated inthe Black Sea, and Green's swing CV in Istanbul able to move either to the Med or stay in the Black Sea there are opportunities to create mismatches. I'm not sure how that would play out.
I've also rotated the shaded territory pie chart CCW a few degrees, to create a longer land borer between Green and Orange. This also gives Green half of Crete, which maybe OK as a constant point of friction between the two? I would envision a green VBase on the western end of Crete. Crimea will be a natural point of friction between Green and Yellow, and Georgia between Yellow and Orange, as well as the Eastern Black Sea.
I've moved the strats further back from the lines, although again Turkey is a challenge because of the Eastern Med and the ability for Green to get a CV fleet pretty far into Orange's backyard. But it seems odd to have almost no strats in most of Turkey.
Thanks help, <S>
EDIT: Coupla other items - Bustr talked about doubling the size of the region to 20x20, but its my understanding that smaller maps work better for the current population (<200) in the MA. Is that correct? There are a number of 512mi/side maps but they seem to be special events or AvA maps?
Also, is it possible to create rivers wide enough for PT boat traffic? I'd like the Dneipr and the Don Rivers to support spawning of PT boats and be passable by boat for long reaches. But that might mean bridges are necessary, and they must be crossable. I know they are in towns, but can you span rivers with crossable bridges outside of towns, in the hinterlands?
-
Yes, with the lower numbers in the MA these days you should do a 256x256. You could also do a 128x128 map for the MA possibly. It would further condense the fighting. The 512x512 maps are for Special Events and the AvA. I create 512x512 for the Special Events because the fighting will not be over the map but simulating real campaigns and such. Thus the larger map gives the CMs more options of what campaigns they can simulate. When we were maxing the MA then there was a reason for the 512 maps but these days it is just to much empty space for the MA. It diffuses fighting instead of promoting it.
I still might recommend getting rid of all the small islands in the Aegean to help with fleets navigation. Or maybe keep one or two and have base on them.
-
Thanks GD, I plan to remove some islands in the Aegean, but probably will hold off until I have a better understanding of ships and navigation in the terrains. I hop I can leave enough to keep the character of the Aegean.
SO a 10x10 square map, each square is 25.6 mi per side?
My next step is the introduction of major airfields. I realized its not so much the distance between the strats, its the distance to the strats from the enemy airfields that is important.
With each step I have to be willing to go back and change the layout based on new information and advice I get.
I hope to have spectacular mountains like the ones Bustr makes in the Caucasus region.
-
Do yourself a favor and play with scale for a bit on your terrain. Pull a line of the raise hill 2000ft\sec tool about 8 miles long up to 5000ft in the center tapering at the ends. Set your brush to say 3-4 miles diameter. Give it rock color to make looking at it easier by pulling the line of your mountain on level ground painting a line of rock. Then raise the spine down the center of what you just flat painted and shape it into a mountain.
Then look at it from 30,000ft which is about normal for viewing something 8miles long and you will feel like the scale is too small. Except if you had a field a few miles from it and you F3 from the tower, it will look enormous. Decide on scale early and stick to it across the board as your standard on the whole work space. My current terrain I'm not allowing mountains on the islands to be higher than 7K without a really good reason. Very few islands say 60Miles long have mountains much over 6,000ft. New Guinea is several hundred miles long with it's highest peaks at 16,000ft. But, it is 3-4 times larger than other islands in the Solomons region. On main lands when you have mountain ranges with mountains say 12,000-15,000, that's measured relative to sea level. The rocks you are looking at pointing up into the sky may be sitting on 5000ft of land already.
-
Isn't there already a Black Sea terrain? Not trying to say that oboe is wasting his time, the name of the terrain just sounded familiar.
-
Yes there is blksea and blkseaw by me but they are built for Historical game play and are 512x512 maps. They can't be used for MA play since they don't meet the requirements for the MA at all (bases between 16 miles to 25 miles apart, equal amount of bases and strats between three countries, etc.). So a blkseama or mablksea is a worthwhile en devour.
-
Yes there is blksea and blkseaw but they are built for Historical game play and are 512x512 maps. They can't be used for MA play since they don't meet the requirements for the MA at all (bases between 16 miles to 25 miles apart, equal amount of bases and strats between three countries, etc.). So a blkseama or mablksea is a worthwhile en devour.
Though I remembered one. Anyways, back at it oboe! :aok
-
Bustr, you're just talking about the vertical scale, correct? Are you Ok with a 256 mi/sq MA that is not real world scale, but only 1/5 scale? The height of the highest peak in the Caucasus Mountains is 18,000+ ft, with most other peaks in the 12-15,000 ft range. I'd want to stay as close to real as I can, unless I have to make game-play concessions.
I have virtually no experience with the terrain editor, so most of what you said I could barely follow at this point. But, I'll get there, assuming the overall design makes sense and is worth doing.
BowHTR, there are a couple of Black Sea terrains (one summer, one winter) but they seem to be special event terrains. Nothing for the MA.
If this one doesn't work out, I can try another land area. And at the very least I'll learn something about making terrains...
Thanks guys
EDIT @Bustr: I guess if the range is around 15,000 ft give or take some, and my scale is 1/5 real world, my Caucasus Mtns would be around 3,000 ft, with the highest around 3700 ft. That may end up working, except - the altimeters in the aircraft are real world, so maybe my vertical scale should be real and only the horizontal 1/5?
-
Play with it and find a happy medium. Until you build some mountains, and think looking at them in the terrain editor, wow they look proportionally great. Then place an airfield near them and up from that field offline, you will not know what your proportions really look like. You may be surprised at what a 12,000ft mountain looks like offline.
-
I like the idea, my terrain is the great lakes divided 3 ways. :aok opening up the strait is a fantastic idea to keep all boats on the same field. you can try to ask about cv limitations but i did not get a answer. logically you will be responsible for learning where cvs can go (then tell me :)).
First, you need approval from HTC before you do much more beyond novelty. Then go at it. from my experience playing withe the terrain is a dicey situation. save before practice because youll never get it back the way it was.
:salute
-
Technically you can attach 3 fleets per port. We do that all the time in the SEA terrains. For the MA though it is one fleet per port.
I don't think it ever has come up if there is a limit to how many fleets you can actually have in a terrain. The most I have ever placed is 28 fleets over on the SEA marianas terrain.
-
Hitech had me attach a BB fleet to each CV port on my last Melee arena terrain. I'm doing that again with my new terrain and 3 ports per country. It is a 10x10 terrain with a water theme, so 6 fleets per country will give the bomber guys targets. With the current Melee numbers, you can't go wrong putting alot of things in a 10x10 arena to get in trouble with if you balance the distance between airfields to allow a rapid response. On my new terrain I've focused on placing airfields 3\4 sector apart as much as I can.
My last terrain if you look at the effective combat area, is only a bit bigger than a 10x10 on a 20x20 arena work space. With my second terrain I lost control of my scale and actually built a 20x20 terrain for the Melee arena. That is why I clipped out the center 10x10 and am continuing on as V2.0 on a 10x10 work space. You have to first and foremost gain an understanding of your scale versus what you are trying to provide for your players and what you can really expect your players to put up with.
10 years ago we needed 20x20 terrains to slow down the uber hoards with feilds 1 to 1.5 sectors apart. Today 1 sector is really pushing the smaller number of players with their attention span. Small numbers need quicker action.
-
Oh, some HTC now has changed it to one CV and BB is acceptable for port in the MA, good to know.
Yeah 1 sector (25 miles) should be max is still 1/3 sector .. 16 miles roughly the closest between basis for the MA?
-
I'm using 19 miles as 3\4 sector. The 13 miles is a very specific setup I'm emulating on Oceania .v2.0 from the center island of NDisles. Those three airfields are 12 miles and it was an object swap of one 1x1 vBase for 1 1x1 small airfield on NDisles. 13 miles works because I've isolated the island at least 19 miles from the nearest airfield.
I posted about using one off of the objects called factory objects from the object list. Do you know if it is permissible to use a few of them on my central island in the tank furball area to add some places to hide behind and get into close quarters combat? They are the standard factory objects on the TT 2x2 object and strat objects so are in use on any Melee terrain. I just want to create a complex in the center of the tank arena caldera to make it worth running around in it.
If they as standard objects are benign to players FPS placed down on the terrain field, then I'm wondering if I couldn't use them as a cover for GV spawns scattered around to protect GVers from spawn camping.
-
We have placed individual objects before in the SEA terrains from the HTC created objects that come with the TE. There is no technical reason you can't do it and as you said since it is an object created by HTC it should be perfectly safe and need no additional vetting. However, I don't know if they are good with doing so for a MA terrain or not. I don't know why they wouldn't be but I think you would have to shoot them a PM to find out if they are okay with it for the the MA.
All I can say is it is fine for the SEA and works without an issue. So more of a policy decision for the MA.
-
I got a PM back, we don't add the static individual factory objects onto Melee arena terrains.
-
Btw map sizes no longer need to be a power of 2, but now can be any multiple of 32 I.E.
32 64 96 128 160 192 224 256 ......
The editor only lets you select power of 2, but you can edit the xxxxxxx.mdm file. I'ts just a text file.
Also I like you terrain concept so far.
HiTech
-
This is how far I've come. All bases should be between 3/4 and 1 sector from each of their closest neighbors. I got stuck planning the spawn points into other bases, and started studying how other people have set them up. I'm not sure what works best for MA. Some mapmakers chose a very complex network of bases supporting each other within the country's original territory, with just a couple of attack routes into opposing countries. Buster's BowlMA is very interesting with some deep strike spawn points into adjacent islands, and some fields with no support at all.
(http://i.imgur.com/kwacIeV.jpg)
Does this still seem workable and reasonable? I'm trying to keep major airfields on real life locations like Kiev, Ankara, Stalingrad and of course I stuck the refinery complex on Ploesti. No question about that one!
-
Looks good but I am not sure but it looks like from your icons that you might have rotated some bases. If you didn't ignore this if you rotated any bases (outside of ports) don't do so since it can cause issues that the TE test function won't catch. And as for ports have snap on when you rotate them so that they can only 90 degrees. So that they face, up down, left, right.
-
Look at your feilds from the perspective of triangles supporting and attacking each other as your fronts move. The deep strike spawns on bowlma were to give a country being rolled a chance to sneak a Ft. Apache at the worst moment for the country on the roll, or to just get things moving into the heart of Indian country. One late night a squad mate snuck one of those deep bases and we had 2 hours of fun defending it from everything. Both sides otherwise would have had a boring evening with the low numbers.
Airfields without spawns are also 3\4 sector from the nearest airfield promoting more air combat to take it along with requiring c47s. A few brave individuals have driven M3's 19 miles to the town. I listened to the concerns of furballers and GVers while being still PO'd at what happened to the HQ and city with the Fester map in AH2. Still I made three strats available on the main island of each country. From time to time some really fun GV fights happen in the center island because you can capture the tiny vBases with an M3 by de-acking using your 50cal and running in troops.
Pull up bowlma offline and look at it again thinking triangles of attack and defense from every three feilds as you move through a country. At the top of each island the spawns create long battles later at night.
-
Also, is it possible to create rivers wide enough for PT boat traffic? I'd like the Dneipr and the Don Rivers to support spawning of PT boats and be passable by boat for long reaches. But that might mean bridges are necessary, and they must be crossable. I know they are in towns, but can you span rivers with crossable bridges outside of towns, in the hinterlands?
I noticed this question only now.
Yes, there is a parameter river_width [1] you can define. Also I suggest to render only major rivers, probably level 1 or 2 using river_level option [2]
[1] https://github.com/artyom-beilis/makeahmap/blob/master/config.ini#L182
[2] https://github.com/artyom-beilis/makeahmap/blob/master/config.ini#L209
But notice you'll need to re run the makeahmap and import the terrain data again.
-
Artik how is river width affected by map scale?
Say if the map scale was 1 to map scale 2.5. Is the river width the same or is decreased (1:1 vs 1:2.5)?
-
Artik how is river width affected by map scale?
Say if the map scale was 1 to map scale 2.5. Is the river width the same or is decreased (1:1 vs 1:2.5)?
It does not change.
In fact, the river data base I use does not contain an information regarding real river width, only a "mark" how major the river is.
I defined default river width such that it can be represented smoothly enough using AH elevations grid.
It must be at least 1900 feet width otherwise you'll see some artifacts related to terrain polygons.
-
Cool looking map oboe