PDA

View Full Version : Future PF map features I'd like to see



Tater-SW-
12-06-2004, 12:42 PM
This isn't about "bigger maps," though that would certainly be nice. It's about features we'd like to see in future maps using existing stuff, assuming the people doing the PF maps are remotely as responsive as Ian Boys is (S! to him, bigtime). Wishful thinking, I know, I have yet to see a post by whoever is the PF mapmaker.

The Current PF maps need some work, IMO. A few points for future maps:

1. Pick the map/direction/alignment you model based on continuing action, not set battles. An example is: the Early Guadalcanal map has a spot for USN CVs to first come to Guadalcanal from the south when the only possible air opposition is Rufes and Emilys from Tulagi. That Map should have gone to the NW instead, allowing far more combat for Guadalcanal on the same size map. the NG map is only "good" for a few months, where moving it West towards Lae/Wewak might have made more sense in terms of long-time play.

2. There are too many rivers. Yes, they show up on maps, but given what seems to be the minimum river width possible in PF, most should go away. On the Guadalcanal map many rivers wide enough to fit a CA in should be streams you could walk across in a few steps. It'd look better not to have them at all.

3. Forests. Yes, the palms eat up FPS too much, so just use the large forest object you guys have covering the whole interior of NG. In MOST of the SWPA islands (short of little atolls) the forest needs to come right up to the beach in most places. Literally, trees, then sand, then water. Not forest, then a 1 - 5+ km wide swath of green flatness, then beach, then water. Trees to the sand, and often overhanging the water. I can provide pictures (will edit them in later). Keep some flat areas wide open for mission builders to make thier own fields, but by and large, most should be forest.

4. Limit the "large" airfields more. They look too built up for most remote areas. It seems like the choice was to pick a time period after the US built huge fields everywhere. we need more really primitive strips. Perhaps a few maps that take the existing maps, and just erase most airfields. NG is a prime example. There are a few tiny strips on NG like this with just tents for buildings, those are excellent!

5. More airfields need to be hemmed in by trees (goes with the overall more forest on the flat bits). Instead of a rectangle cut out where the field is, it would be best to have the forest object edge be jagged, with "holes" in the edge around the size of revetment objects to tuck planes into.

6. Dispersal areas would by default be back along the treelines---fewer revetment objects right off the runway, and more (indeed, any) away from the runways.

7. Possibly a new color of strip. Not concrete, not grass, and not Marston Mat, but DIRT/MUD to go with the lovely crushed coral you did (S! on those!)

8. More areas where hills intersect water (the sea). The maps almost universally have a wide flat band arounf the perimeter of islands. Many places had hills that dropped right into the sea. It is far easier to deal with low-level attacks vs forested hill areas than flats since you cannot see the larget forest areas from the side at all, and the FMB placed trees are at most 1/2 the height of the forest object.

tater

Tater-SW-
12-06-2004, 12:42 PM
This isn't about "bigger maps," though that would certainly be nice. It's about features we'd like to see in future maps using existing stuff, assuming the people doing the PF maps are remotely as responsive as Ian Boys is (S! to him, bigtime). Wishful thinking, I know, I have yet to see a post by whoever is the PF mapmaker.

The Current PF maps need some work, IMO. A few points for future maps:

1. Pick the map/direction/alignment you model based on continuing action, not set battles. An example is: the Early Guadalcanal map has a spot for USN CVs to first come to Guadalcanal from the south when the only possible air opposition is Rufes and Emilys from Tulagi. That Map should have gone to the NW instead, allowing far more combat for Guadalcanal on the same size map. the NG map is only "good" for a few months, where moving it West towards Lae/Wewak might have made more sense in terms of long-time play.

2. There are too many rivers. Yes, they show up on maps, but given what seems to be the minimum river width possible in PF, most should go away. On the Guadalcanal map many rivers wide enough to fit a CA in should be streams you could walk across in a few steps. It'd look better not to have them at all.

3. Forests. Yes, the palms eat up FPS too much, so just use the large forest object you guys have covering the whole interior of NG. In MOST of the SWPA islands (short of little atolls) the forest needs to come right up to the beach in most places. Literally, trees, then sand, then water. Not forest, then a 1 - 5+ km wide swath of green flatness, then beach, then water. Trees to the sand, and often overhanging the water. I can provide pictures (will edit them in later). Keep some flat areas wide open for mission builders to make thier own fields, but by and large, most should be forest.

4. Limit the "large" airfields more. They look too built up for most remote areas. It seems like the choice was to pick a time period after the US built huge fields everywhere. we need more really primitive strips. Perhaps a few maps that take the existing maps, and just erase most airfields. NG is a prime example. There are a few tiny strips on NG like this with just tents for buildings, those are excellent!

5. More airfields need to be hemmed in by trees (goes with the overall more forest on the flat bits). Instead of a rectangle cut out where the field is, it would be best to have the forest object edge be jagged, with "holes" in the edge around the size of revetment objects to tuck planes into.

6. Dispersal areas would by default be back along the treelines---fewer revetment objects right off the runway, and more (indeed, any) away from the runways.

7. Possibly a new color of strip. Not concrete, not grass, and not Marston Mat, but DIRT/MUD to go with the lovely crushed coral you did (S! on those!)

8. More areas where hills intersect water (the sea). The maps almost universally have a wide flat band arounf the perimeter of islands. Many places had hills that dropped right into the sea. It is far easier to deal with low-level attacks vs forested hill areas than flats since you cannot see the larget forest areas from the side at all, and the FMB placed trees are at most 1/2 the height of the forest object.

tater

MBot
12-06-2004, 02:00 PM
Good points.
Unfortunatly the maps are one of the weakest aspects of PF, me thinks. There the engine realy shows it's age. Basicaly the maps ( except water ) look the same as 3 years ago, wich is an incredible long time for graphic standarts.
While the small islands like Wake, Tarawa and Midway got a little facelift in form of new textures, the rest looks like "Pacific - east front style".
Of course the basic graphic technology is set and wont change till BoB, but Tater makes some good suggestions to enhance the maps with current technology.


Btw, isn't it ironic that the map that looks most pacific-like is the one year old "Pacific Online" from FB ?

MBot
12-07-2004, 08:46 AM
Bump for good ideas.

JG53Frankyboy
12-07-2004, 09:25 AM
NG map is realy a bad and unlogical thing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

-concret bases, sure not in this area http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
-most bases there are build after january43 , when the map is full in allied hands http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
-bases around Wanigela are missing , would be important fpr late 42 ops
-wrong positions of bases, espacially around PortMorseby
-the OwenStanly Range is a joke http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
-the Base at Goodenough is so worth made, its a shame


and the Guadalcanal is also not very usefull, Airstart (and no landing base) for the Japanese (ok , Rabaul is to much away). no fighting over the slot possible http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

so the most longest campaigns of the Pacific war, AND the mayor parts of the USAAF campaigns, cant be played with the current PF mapset.
just as an example, finding a historical map (start, fight, land) for P-38J/L&P-47D is close to impossible !

i had realy proplems to make a PF campaign for the VOW2 online event http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
so far i have only 24 Missiongroups (still with some i├┬║nhistorical tricks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

Tater-SW-
12-07-2004, 09:41 AM
Yes, those are all good points. That is why my number 1 suggestion for new maps is to pick the maps with operational history involved, not just "this place had an important battle."

Pearl Harbor is a great example. I understand people expect Pearl, but god what a waste of effort, IMHO. A large, built up island area so we can have 1 morning of virtually uncontested action for one side. Oh, and the AAA has to be turned absurdly low (or actually off altogether) for even that mission to work. What make a huge map for a single mission you can't even design well due to technical limits?

Rabaul is a talked about map, and will be a useful target map, but once again we'll have a map where one side can only fly defensive missions, and the other side must air start (or use CVs)

here are some NG-sized maps overlayed over the SWPA. Note that if used over the slot, there is actually far less land area than the NG map, so perhaps these could be bigger. Look at the NG land area, it looks as though you could do the Slot including even Bouganville and still have a smaller total land area (which controls how many elevation maps needed, and objects).

http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/SWPA_revised.jpg

tater

F16_Sulan
12-07-2004, 03:45 PM
I agree to most points! Though I can understand adding a pearl harbor map is interesting for sales, but for "historical" play ofcourse it isÔ┬┤nt much use.

About airfields. There are alot of airfields missing (3 in Palau for instance), but as with most other cases that depends a little what year.
I think this problem could be solved by making all kinds of airfields selectable+placable+deletable objects. Those that are on the maps by default could stay as a "template", but still being deletable ones.

The New Guinea map has some bugs where the land texture donÔ┬┤t reach down to sealevel, so there is sloping water between. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gifIt looks pretty funny and can only be seen from low altitude.
It almost looks like one can fly into it, but no cando, I tryed it lol.

These bugs can be observed on some of the islands close to Good Enough island. On Good Enough island it can be seen on the eastern shore.
ps. IÔ┬┤ve sent 2 bug reports about this, but send one you too if you think its important...

Tater-SW-
12-08-2004, 08:58 AM
Our current PF coasts 99.999999% of the time (with an inset of REAL coast---note many times it would be jungle to the water, not palm trees)
The PF coast there between the jungle and water is easily wide enough for an airfield with dispersals, BTW. Also, look at the hill in the inset picture. Th US built an airfield any place that was reasonable flat (and some places we MADE flat). In PF all coast is a wide open band. The hills should drop to the water in many places. Assume that if there wasn't an airfield there during the war, it was probably too steep.

http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/Maps/coast.jpg


One of the better areas of coast in PF (Florida Island). Note the upper right area I pasted coast right to the surf which was not there:
http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/Maps/better_coast.jpg

And how about the rivers big enough to put the largest CV afloat into (with a picture of the actual river (wide, near coast) for scale). I realize IL-2 has a fixed river width, but if the river is a STREAM, don't put it on the map, or cover it with forest.

http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/Maps/rivers.jpg

tater

MBot
12-08-2004, 03:53 PM
Another Bump from me.

The issue with the forests/vegetation ending so far from the beach is also very important to me. I searched the New Guinea map for a nice hidden place to put some unloading ships ( for some B-25 action ). I wanted to make a setup like on these many pictures from B-25 attacks. I couldn't finde a good place. Everywhere the coast is large and flat with vegetation starting far behind the beach. The coast just doesn't look right.

To other thing are the heights of the map. Everything looks rather flat, no steep terrain,
expecially not at the coast.

I am no expert on New Guniea, but I have a 'mental picture' of how the landscape looks there. But I couldn't find that look anywhere on the NG map we have. Unfortunatly I have to say that in my eyes that map is very poorly done.

Tater-SW-
12-08-2004, 11:15 PM
Here's a famous USAAF picture:
http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/na80g34887-sm.jpg

The coasts in that picture are absolutely typical.

tater

PlaneEater
12-08-2004, 11:31 PM
I'll second all of this. Tater is definitely on the right track, and all of these improvements are highly feasible.

xTHRUDx
12-09-2004, 01:25 AM
huge bump, i can't do any good guadalcanal maps because the map cut off the needed sections.

check this map out. everything NW of Savo Il. and flordia Il., we don't get. and that's where all the stuff happened!!
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/USSBS/PTO-Campaigns/img/appendix43.jpg

Warlordimi
12-09-2004, 03:29 AM
Tater! That's amazing post!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

You got the point.

Let's hope you'll be heard!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

PB0_Roll
12-09-2004, 07:40 AM
Tater, excellent post.

now PLEASE email Oleg with this, PF at 1C dot ru http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

DjTeD
12-09-2004, 07:58 AM
http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/SWPA_revised.jpg


In fact, such a map as big as this one exists... but for Strike Fighter Project One !!!

DdT_Vil_coyote
12-09-2004, 08:53 AM
very good ideas !

I'd change just one thing on "better guadalcanal map".
South-East corner => Henderdon Field
North-West corner => Buin

Yes it's a little bit bigger http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif !

Perhaps one day ...

Tater-SW-
12-09-2004, 09:12 AM
Yeah, I think you could get all of Guadalcanal and all of Bouganville on 1 map and still have less land area than the NG map, actually. At the very least the Guadalcanal map SHOULD have gone NW and included New Georgia and Santa Isabel. That it didn't was... words escape me.

http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/Maps/the_slot.jpg
RED is the size of the NG map, you can get New Georgia and the bulk of the slot in with far less land than NG has.

GREEN is the size of the "Early Guadalcanal" map (500x500 km). Obviously the slot fits there, too (BTW, and mission can have the CVs, etc off the map in water, so any map can do the pre-invasion strikes)

BLUE is the size of the Iwo Jima map (800x800). Total land area approaches the current NG map.

YELLOW is the size of Hawaii map. We can fit Rabaul in this, and the land area looks to be slightly larger than current NG.


Regardless, changing the map sizes, or moving the maps around a little falls under number 1 of my ideas, but I was hoping some of this could be addressed in FUTURE maps.

tater

Tater-SW-
12-09-2004, 10:39 AM
More coastal images:
http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/SD_camo.jpg

http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/camouflage_sm.jpg

http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/supply_dump_tiny.jpg

http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/coastal_vessels_smaller.jpg

tater

RTA_cbal
12-09-2004, 10:41 AM
Yeah TAter, Thats a good idea, right tells, and its the same with normandie map and alot of map with Coasts..., The map is the worst thing in this game, But htis game is the best actually, ... hope ure request will be heard...RTA are with u... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

MBot
12-10-2004, 02:23 PM
One more bump for this one.

Bremspropeller
12-11-2004, 10:25 AM
Deserves not only one bump.

Count me in for a "plz rework the PF maps"-list.

fuser59
12-13-2004, 07:11 AM
Heck guys, this map here looks good to me! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://members.spinn.net/~merrick/Stuff/Maps/the_slot.jpg Just keep the entire map shown!

Tater-SW-
12-13-2004, 08:17 AM
I was trying to get away from just "bigger maps." All the areas shown on that map are existing sizes of PF map. NG sized as red, yellow is Hawaii, and the others are in between. Green is Guadalcanal early.

tater

fuser59
12-13-2004, 04:35 PM
Lol, I guess I wont be happy until we get map scenery for the entire world... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Tater-SW-
12-15-2004, 08:46 AM
More coast in RL:
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/c000001/c59615.jpg


http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/h89000/h89373.jpg


http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/g230000/g230056.jpg


tater

bigchump
12-15-2004, 09:24 AM
Oleg, how about this idea: Release the map editing tools to the mission designers and allow us to place these maps in a "user maps" folder? That would allow us to create missions / campaigns with a custom map. I know this would require some code changes, but to allow the exe to load maps from a "user maps" folder wouldn't be that difficult, would it? Of course, there would be good maps and bad ones, but you could license the maps created to be 1C property, and could include the best ones in future expansion packs at no cost to you. How about it?

S!
bigchump

Tater-SW-
12-15-2004, 09:46 AM
Ian has explained the map making process, and it is non-trivial.

Also, there are hard-coded things like roads, and airfields so that AI can react properly to them (follow roads, and land at airfields without crashing into local terrain, etc).

tater

bigchump
12-15-2004, 10:18 AM
Better planes were designed by third-party modelers for CFS2 than came with the original. Non-trivial to be sure, but better nonetheless. I would just like Oleg to explain why it is not possible for third-party map makers to create better maps than the originals.

S!
bigchump

Tater-SW-
12-15-2004, 11:07 AM
http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=012510#000012

Ian on map design. Note that the "hard coded" stuff I mentioned has to be done by Oleg, et al. It isn't that it's hard for 3d parties, it's that 1C must be involved.

tater

J_Weaver
12-15-2004, 09:50 PM
I always wondered about the colors on Okinawa map. If I'm wrong please tell me,but, the Okinawa seems to tan and too little forest to me. The map looks more like the med instead of the PTO. Is this because I can't run in Perfect mode or maybe I don't know as much about Okinawa as a think I do?

Tater-SW-
12-15-2004, 09:55 PM
The PF Okinawa has about zero vegitation. Look at the central image above of the sub base. Trees right to the water, even on Okinawa.

tater

pacettid
12-16-2004, 03:18 PM
Bumparuski

Freakbrother
12-16-2004, 06:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
The PF Okinawa has about zero vegitation. Look at the central image above of the sub base. Trees right to the water, even on Okinawa.

tater <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Another bad example is the Marianas map, the yellow/brown texturecolors are really ugly, there are much roads going into the nothing

http://img77.exs.cx/img77/1386/marianas9ss.jpg

and the islands have much to less vegetation, missing reefs (same in Midway) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

http://www.geneva-link.ch/snaker/nicollier/sts103/mission/s103e5361.jpg

Northern part from Saipan http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif
http://www.mpwarner.com/photo-lib/image/large/saipan-aerial-1000.jpg

aminx
12-30-2004, 09:54 PM
THE THIN RED LINE MOVIE
-----------------------

This movie was shot on location on GUADALCANAL and all the photos placed in this thread can be seen in the movie,rivers,vegetation,heights,coast line, etc.
aminx