Author Topic: Ma5 (Read 704 times)

NUTTZ · « **on:** July 07, 2002, 03:31:01 PM »

I think HTC going to 512x512 maps is the proper way to go. So I think the design should focus on this size. that doesn't mean the fields need to fill up the whole map.

Comments?

Also , I like the idea of the 3 teams each being split into 2 areas on the map. IMO it stops the gangbanging and insures you have a field to up from.

Comments?

This is really hard to give a realistic terrain shape, while breaking it into 3 EQUAL parts.
Here is a draft ( already in the editor ) I have started. The 3 teams i split with the red lines to show land owners. The HQ placement I just put in, which at first causes a problem. I think the water is equal for each teams CV's to fight each team equally.

Comments?

IMO i feel we should stick to greens and earth tones.

Comments?

Remember this map is 512X512 Cv's will fit up most of the "rivers" you see on the map.

The map doesn't really show elevations. but as you get closer to the enemies HQ ( or further inland ) you'll be fighting an up hill battle.

Comments?

I'll pop a few feilds in and post the .res file in here. I'll constantly change add stuff from the comments so I'll post the upgraded res files in some sort of numerical order.

NUTTZ

BenDover · « **Reply #1 on:** July 07, 2002, 05:13:00 PM »

i think i see a prob, rooks are bang smack in the middle, they'll more than likely get gang banged

looks good thou

Hawk52 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 07, 2002, 05:30:33 PM »

Someone is always going to be in the middle, any way you slice it.
Alot will depend on how and where the battle starts, as to who that will be.

I like also like the green earth tones on the maps, they look and feel much better than anything else I've seen.

Any Idea when we'll get the new Editor ?

Looks good Nuttz

NUTTZ · « **Reply #3 on:** July 07, 2002, 07:16:29 PM »

well, you can look at it a few ways. yes Rooks would be in the center, BUT since their land is ajoining it would balance that. Also IF map is reset, I think the sides are placed random so every side would get it's chance in the center. Since every side has 4 fronts it looks equal to me.

I replaced the hq's in the area I felt they should be in, I'll have to map out the squares to place HQ's so they all are the same miles from any enemy front.

About the new editor, i haven't a clue, i have to wait just like the rest of ya's

NUTTZ

Quote

Originally posted by Hawk52
Someone is always going to be in the middle, any way you slice it.
Alot will depend on how and where the battle starts, as to who that will be.

I like also like the green earth tones on the maps, they look and feel much better than anything else I've seen.

Any Idea when we'll get the new Editor ?

Looks good Nuttz

AKIron · « **Reply #4 on:** July 07, 2002, 09:58:32 PM »

I like it Nuttz. Looks balanced to me but as someone already mentioned, the rooks appear to be in the middle. Even though there are the same number of fronts for each side, perception of unfairness leads to grief.

I'd paint some fields on it and run it by Hitech before spending too much time in the editor. Looks balanced to me.

Oh, and we can it expect it when? 3 days?

NUTTZ · « **Reply #5 on:** July 08, 2002, 12:22:34 AM »

OK, heres a more balanced map, Not breaking the countries apart.

I made a tool to balance the arena into 3 equal parts and used another shape to add the HQ's so they are evenly spaced apart from each other and thier bounderies.

Black=water,lowest level
white= height

COMMENTS?????

NUTTZ

EvilDingo · « **Reply #6 on:** July 08, 2002, 12:37:13 AM »

Half the problem with the MA map in it's current state is that it's just too big. It might not be too big for the few short hours in prime time, but it's too big 80% of the rest of the time. I think that looks like a great bitmap, but if it takes the entire 512x512 it might be an effort largly wasted.

My suggestion would be to make a 512x512 map, but only use about 2/3rds of the space.

SunKing · « **Reply #7 on:** July 08, 2002, 12:38:35 AM »

I like the second map alot. The 1st map looks like the Rook HQ is closer to each border versus the other two countries HQ.

Maybe make the exact center of the map sea level so we could add some close bases to ensure these big maps will cater to any wishing to furball. i.e. Furball island. Just to insure all styles of play are considered.

Innominate · « **Reply #8 on:** July 08, 2002, 08:44:29 AM »

Am I the only one who would like to see a map centered around CV vs CV fighting?

hitech · « **Reply #9 on:** July 08, 2002, 11:16:22 AM »

Nuttz, on your 2nd map, draw some zone lines like 3 to 5 zones per country.

NUTTZ · « **Reply #10 on:** July 08, 2002, 07:42:51 PM »

Ok, I'm not sure How the zones work. Assuming they work like the resupply does now, This would be a general first run. It looks equally balanced. I used 4 zones per country. If the zones need to be closer to the fields for more realistice speeds of the convoys, I can move them up and add a 5th zone behind each HQ supplying the back feilds. Since i have no fields yet this would only be an approximation.

NUTTZ

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Nuttz, on your 2nd map, draw some zone lines like 3 to 5 zones per country.

LLv34_Camouflage · « **Reply #11 on:** July 08, 2002, 11:21:07 PM »

How about a little mixing in the middle, like a furball-island sort of thingie? Kinda like what Wabbit hinted in Sabre's thread - having a beach head for invasion...

Something like this: the circles represent the strat-zones, the solid areas represent areas with fields.

Moose1 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 09, 2002, 07:01:01 AM »

I like the second map a lot Nuttz. If the waterways are all wide enough to handle a CV, so you can potentially take the risk of driving a CV well into another country's territory and use it to make a surprise behind-the-front attack, so much the better.

One idea that I saw on another thread was to make the terrain generally slope upward toward the HQ and rear areas--the highest bases would be at the rear and the bases toward the starting "fronts" would be lower. This would give a slight advantage to the defenders.

I also like Camo's idea of the "furball island" in the middle for the folks that just want to fly and kill.

Oh, and I also vote for 384x384. I like the AKDesert map a LOT, but using every inch of 512x512 does seem to be a bit much even with 450+ in the MA. Maybe put high mountain ranges around the perimeter of the map to fill it out to 512x512?

hitech · « **Reply #13 on:** July 09, 2002, 11:32:35 AM »

Nutts, didn't meen that type of zone lines. The resone we use that type of display on the map is to show ownership of each strat piece. We could also just draw boundires around the lines but it's harder to see whats going on. Think of zones as small counties that can be captured.

For layout purposes the boundries of the zones works much better.

When you capture a zones master field, your country then owns all resources in that area. So lay out areas that can be captured.

NUTTZ · « **Reply #14 on:** July 09, 2002, 07:21:34 PM »

Ok NP, I do have questions. I can resupply feilds using barges to cross the rivers. Can I assume the "zone" can cross rivers? Is it meerly asigning one field as the "zone" ownership? And I think I read that the 'Zone" that HQ is in CANNOT be captured?
Just wanted to know before I equalized and place the "Zones"

NUTTZ

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Nutts, didn't meen that type of zone lines. The resone we use that type of display on the map is to show ownership of each strat piece. We could also just draw boundires around the lines but it's harder to see whats going on. Think of zones as small counties that can be captured.

For layout purposes the boundries of the zones works much better.

When you capture a zones master field, your country then owns all resources in that area. So lay out areas that can be captured.