View Full Version : missing maps ?

10-20-2004, 03:02 PM
i'm not moaning but i dont see:

Rabaul (very important jap base in the south pacific)
Leyte gulf (phillipines)
Truk (jap naval base)
Burma (flying tigers campaign)
China early air battles

can anyone comment

10-20-2004, 03:07 PM
Maybe the maps you list Amnix will be in the patch coming out. It was said that alot was leftout of PF as they didn't want to put it on a 3rd CD, due to costs for them and costs to us in the end. Hang in there. I'm sure we'll see em. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

10-20-2004, 03:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aminx:
can anyone comment
I'm sure that everybody at MG is aware of their signifigance. Given that we are still getting new Russian maps 3 years after the release of the original Il-2, I don't think that there needs to be any worry about important locations being ommited from the PTO.

10-20-2004, 03:48 PM
Why isn't the New Guinea map extended up to Rabaul? Or is it?

10-20-2004, 03:58 PM
Why is the Guadalcanal map not putting Guadalcanal on the bottom right corner instead of the top right? Reason being that most of the action took place in The Slot northwest of Guadalcanal. And that's where all the Japanese attacks came from.

Nothing came from that patch of sea southwest of Guadalcanal except on May 4th when Yorktown launched a quick morning raid on a handful of small ships landing troops on Tulagi.

Compared to the endless action over The Slot, I can't for the life of me figure out why the Guadalcanal map left so much out.

10-20-2004, 04:08 PM
Probably because it's easier to script things the way the map is now.

The campaigns don't try to perfectly re-enact History.

I agree, it;s hard to imagine the action anywhere else.

But to me, the real kicker is Burma/Southern China. I had arguned before, as much as I want my AVG campaign, that compared to some other places, Burma might have to be on the back burner. Now I see some stuff that was only involved for a day in battle (Pearl Harbor) and it kind of slaps me in the face: Yes, Pearl is very important and i want it, but what makes Burma less so, exactly? My guess is size on the CD. Some things had to be left out, they had so much. I am hoping against hope that Burma or at least maybe northern Burma, S. China gets to find it's way into PF. It's fairly important to the Japanese aspect, if a reason besides the AVG's point of view is needed

10-20-2004, 04:22 PM
i wonder wether tecnically it is possible to have a scrollable map for widening the area of play eg. scroll down Guadalcanal and up again covering the slot up to Rabaul,scroll right to Tulagi and scroll left to......Bismark archipelago?

10-20-2004, 04:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aminx:
i wonder wether tecnically it is possible to have a scrollable map for widening the area of play eg. scroll down Guadalcanal and up again covering the slot up to Rabaul,scroll right to Tulagi and scroll left to......Bismark archipelago?
If you mean having one huuuuuge map. Well... if you have about 8 Gb of RAM I guess it could be done.

10-20-2004, 05:28 PM
No, building objects take up most memory. Most here is ocean, with few buildings in the water. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

If they can do 400km x 200km Finland Map with 500,000 buildings in Lenningrad City, they can do 2000km x 2000km with nothing but islands and a few maintenence tents at a few airfields.

10-20-2004, 05:44 PM
I think Ivan said something about certain maps taking up enormous amounts of memory, about 700 Mb or so.

10-20-2004, 09:01 PM
in the mission builder forum, someone (bird_brain) stickied a message on how to extend oceans/maps in any direction. this should extend any of the island maps to cover more ocean than one could ever want. so, you can definitely get miles and miles of ocean in any direction you want.

10-20-2004, 09:11 PM
All the maps seem abit to small.
While there layout mightbe OK for small unit actions there is no room to move the CVs about with out getting to close to the land targets.
Saw the extend map stuff, fine for some situations not all.
Would have liked some space to move the CVs (TF) all around any given island.

10-20-2004, 10:07 PM
Midway map is very large, if I remember. But they stuck Midway in the southeast corner, because of "historical" reasons I guess, so you will always know the approximate location of the enemy carriers. I think its more historical to simulate the historical confusion than the historical positions. It would take absolutely no effort to extend the Midway map further to the East and South because its just empty water, leaving Midway target in the middle and the enemy fleet who knows where. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

10-20-2004, 10:13 PM
You have to think this through:

If you want to recreate the tense search for enemy carriers on the historic scale then you are going to have to recreate the length these missions were flown for. To do that you would require players to fly strike missions that took 2 or 3 hours just to reach target. To recreate the recce search you'd have to create missions where the players took off at dawn and landed at dusk.

You CAN make those kinds of missions for Midway because you can place objects off map. The sea literally DOES go on for infinity. But for a map like Guadalcanal, where The Slot was a channel between multiple little islands northwest of Guadalcanal, you are out of luck because you can't place islands on the map.