Too many roads and buildings?

[Robert Olesen]

I have been brwosing through all the maps that are available for download with BCR (here) and have found that they - in general - have too many buildings and too many roads for the Soviet Union in the 1940's. This isn't modern USA where every house is on a road and where houses are aligned symmetrically. I'm just wondering if this is my own - completely misguided - opinion or if others share it.

My purpose of going through the maps was to classify them for use in ROQC, so that I can identify a good match automatically (in a spreadsheet) for the current battle. In doing that, I also declassified a good deal of maps from rural status (there's a spreadsheet that can be downloaded with the maps that have such a classification). I interpret Rural to be practically devoid of houses and fields. And roads. Am I misguided here as well?

[Sergei]

Complicated question, because CMBB covers not only fighting in Russia and Ukraine, but also in Finland, Baltic states, Poland, Hungary and Germany, which all would have different types of villages, road networks and landscape. But if we concentrate just on Russia, it is good to remember that agriculture was collectivized in the early 1930's, and usually the farmers were ordered to move to the kolkhoz center so they'd be easier to control as in a factory. Sometimes kolkhozniks lived in barracks.

Proper roads were not awfully common in the countryside, and tracks of varying qualities were used. Near bigger cities like Leningrad the situation was better.

[dieseltaylor]

I agree with you - your contention of too populated , too many roads is definitely true in some set-ups.

Proper roads in Russia were very rare. Funnily enough the size of roads is also overstated but that I have always assumed was a function of the games 20 metre squares. The number of roads in W. Europe that could accomodate two tanks travelling side by side must have been very limited.

But aside from that, I am sure that decent WWII era maps exist for all countries to allow decent scenario specific regional designs. I think a database of "typical" terrain would be a benefit to many designers.

[Brent Pollock]

Hmmm...just got an idea for woods-/pine-roads to make them narrower: lay parallel running rouadblocks along one side to knock it down to one lane.

[Sergei]

Parallel lane? Doesn't that make the road wider, not narrower? :confused:

[Joachim]

Roadblocks (as in "fortification"). Not roadtiles.

But I fear the TacAI will screw up with this. As it is now, two lanes of a road can only be used with extreme micromanaging.

Gruß

Joachim

[Sergei]

Ooh, right.

I don't think the width of roads is the main issue. The quality is. I don't think the average cartway gave heavy tanks much better ride than open ground. It would help cars, however.

IMHO.

[Guest Manstein22]

Hi Robert

I`m one of the designers of maps. I agree with you what you said about roads and buildings. The problem for me is that there is no really good solution for the road problem. I tried scattered trees as cartways in forest and between fields. This works fine but how to simulate that cartway between houses?

The amount of buildings is also not the main problem, but the use of two storey buildings outside of larger towns or cities. This is a mistake,but how do you simulate those windmills that are common in Ukrainia or the grain silos?

Talking about me: I`m constantly learning to improve my map making and when I look at my older maps I would change a lot. At the moment I was releasing them I really was happy with the look and feeling of them.

Manstein

[Retigade]

yes it`s true that in russia and even in finland were 1940 some houses even farms where you couldn´t get whit car so two panzer`s next to eichother on road is very unreal if we are talking about 1930-1940

[WWB]

A few points:

1) WWII era, low-scale maps are hard to come by, especially if one is not willing to spend serious cash.

2) Unfortunately, CM has nothing in the way of terrain types between unpaved roads and open ground. So many designers use upaved roads to represent, say, cart trails.

3) What maps I do have (thanks to the US Library of Congress captured docs collections) indicate that there was a fair amount of habitiation in Russia. Especially where fighting was taking place.

4) Fighting tended to revolve around highways and rail lines, which tended to have more population. Battles are begat by logistics, and if you cannot feed and arm your men there is little point in fighting over isolated hamlets and large tracts of forest.

So, I dont think the problem is as pronounced as you indicate. Main issue is that the quality of roads is a bit too high due to engine limitations.

WWB

[Hans]

Originally posted by Manstein22:

Hi Robert

I`m one of the designers of maps. I agree with you what you said about roads and buildings. The problem for me is that there is no really good solution for the road problem. I tried scattered trees as cartways in forest and between fields. This works fine but how to simulate that cartway between houses?

ditto, hopefully in CMx2 we'll get a "trail or path" which will be only large enough for one vehicle

The amount of buildings is also not the main problem, but the use of two storey buildings outside of larger towns or cities. This is a mistake,but how do you simulate those windmills that are common in Ukrainia or the grain silos?

Talking about me: I`m constantly learning to improve my map making and when I look at my older maps I would change a lot. At the moment I was releasing them I really was happy with the look and feeling of them.

Large barns are also a problem, as are the lack of basements.

Manstein

[Robert Olesen]

Originally posted by WWB:

4) Fighting tended to revolve around highways and rail lines, which tended to have more population. Battles are begat by logistics, and if you cannot feed and arm your men there is little point in fighting over isolated hamlets and large tracts of forest.

Good point.