Guest aaronb Posted May 9, 1999 Share Posted May 9, 1999 In the early eighties, we played 'TacForce' (a miniatures soviet/amercan game) on maps of our hometown at 1:1000 scale. Since the hometown is in a valley, it was tactically interesting. I'd like to convert the maps, or at least a couple of them, into CM format. The FAQ doesn't say much about the mapbuilder, hence my post. Anyone care to comment on the feasibility of converting topograhic maps into a CM format? Can I generate a bunch of data points (e.g.: 100,100, 1200 for x, y, height) and feed it into CM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 9, 1999 Share Posted May 9, 1999 Hi Aaron, No, the CM editor isn't that sophisticated. You would have to do things by hand. Also, the maps aren't as fine in detail as you might think. Although we don't use hexes or grids for gameplay, we do have a "tile" system for map elements. While you can bend a tile in several places (for elevation), you can't completely control it pixel for pixel. This is because even the ground has to be rendered in polygons, so we have to place restrictions on map resolution or there wouldn't be enough CPU horsepower left over for other things like, um, units I think you will find that CM will allow you to make a maps that are close to the ones you have. Exactly? No. But close enough. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest aaronb Posted May 9, 1999 Share Posted May 9, 1999 Thanks for the quick reply Steve. I didn't think you'd be working on a Sunday! The terrain features of the valley in questions ranges from rolling hills (golf course) to shear cliff face about 50' in height, to 1:1 slope escarpment with road cut across it. What is the resolution of a 'tile' (which affects modelling spires of rock jutting from a cliff face)? How much difference in height can we get from one tile to the next? Can the 'buildings' be long, narrow, and supported by pylons? To explain: this simulates an enclosed gravel or other rock conveyor belt bridging a quarry. Or it could simulate cable-car machinery that often hangs out from a mountain face. In WW2, there were some interesting actions with cliff faces (no kidding); off-the-ground buildings can simulate spanning stretches and/or, as mentioned, cable cars. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 9, 1999 Share Posted May 9, 1999 Sunday? Which day of the week is that? We work all of 'em so it is so hard to tell Difference between heights is (IIRC) 3m? Something like that. There is 9 height levels, which makes the total difference between lowest and highest some 27m (81ft). We are thinking of having another higher scale, to make the simulated difference even greater. We will just have to see. No to pylon buildings, conveyor, cable car, or other specialty structures. We simply don't have enough time to do these as they require both graphics and coding time. So anything that isn't common is out, at least for the initial release. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 10, 1999 Share Posted May 10, 1999 Just recently I added a feature where the scenario designer can choose how big an elevation level is: 3m, 6m, 9m, or for total mountain freaks, 12m. Nine levels means that you could have 96m in elevation difference from top to bottom. This equals 315 feet. Sudden elevation changes also produce "slopes" (which vehicles cannot climb) and "cliffs" (which no one can climb). Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest aaronb Posted May 10, 1999 Share Posted May 10, 1999 315 feet! That should do the trick. Alpine scenarios, here we come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted May 10, 1999 Share Posted May 10, 1999 WOWOWOWOWOW! Nice feature! NOW you can make some awesome Ardennes scenarios! Two questions though: - will this not cause any problems with gameplay, like tracking LOS and projectiles? - will a level 3 hill graphically APPEAR to have the same height always or will a level 3 hill with 12 meters elevation change appear higher on the screen than one with 3 meters elevation change? Hmmm... how can such a simple question be so difficult to write down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRourke Posted May 10, 1999 Share Posted May 10, 1999 A nearly related question: I was curious if sigting an AT gun on a slight rise gives it a little more protection from high velocity direct HE fire. It was my understanding that this was SOP in ww2.. the idea being a near miss would have to land either far in front or far behind the gun. From what I've heard about the physics model, this sounds like it should kinda happen on its own. Chris R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 11, 1999 Share Posted May 11, 1999 Moon - hills will always 'look' as tall as they really are. There shouldn't be any problems. Chris - I don't see that a short-shot would be much less damaging to an AT gun on a slight hill (though the slight difference in the vertical might help a little bit). But an overshot would, indeed, sail way past (and will in CM too). Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted May 11, 1999 Share Posted May 11, 1999 Hmmm... Chris - I believe the effect you're talking about was true when the AT Gun (or anything else) was located in a back slope defense, i.e. on the back side of a small hill. Short shots would then explode on the forward slope (shielding the AT Gun from shrapnel), long shots would fall down and far and add distance from the blast radius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRourke Posted May 11, 1999 Share Posted May 11, 1999 You might be right moon... But I still think that even on the top of a hill, you would gain an advantage since a low miss of equal angle would place the shell further away. But I'm not about to haul out the trig to prove this. In any case, the curvature of the slope is probably more important anyway. Unless the hills are pyramids (M1TP, anyone?) the curvature should shield you from stuff lower down. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted May 12, 1999 Share Posted May 12, 1999 I would LOVE to have a useful map editor, for exactly the same reason as originally stated. My hometown is also in a small, forested valley; my first experiences with miniatures gaming was a friend and I home-brewing some rules so we could fight for control of our town. We used soldiers from a dollar store "bucket o' troops" (the big ones) and tanks I built from scratch--in about 15mm scale(!) Quite interesting to see the grunts towering over the treadheads. In all, I am really really anticipating this game; maybe some sort of karma ceremony or something to help the development process. Touch your fingertips to your forehead and repeat after me: OOOOHHHMMMMMM...OOOOHHHHMMMM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted May 12, 1999 Share Posted May 12, 1999 OHHMMM....OHHMMMM... Steve, Charles - does it help already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sten Posted May 12, 1999 Share Posted May 12, 1999 OOOHHHMMM, OOOHHHMMM OOOHHHMMM, OOOHHHMMM OOOHHHMMM, OOOHHHMMM OOOHHHMMM, OOOHHHMMM May the force be with you! Sten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted May 12, 1999 Share Posted May 12, 1999 I would LOVE to have a useful map editor, for exactly the same reason as originally stated. My hometown is also in a small, forested valley; my first experiences with miniatures gaming was a friend and I home-brewing some rules so we could fight for control of our town. We used soldiers from a dollar store "bucket o' troops" (the big ones) and tanks I built from scratch--in about 15mm scale(!) Quite interesting to see the grunts towering over the treadheads. In all, I am really really anticipating this game; maybe some sort of karma ceremony or something to help the development process. Everybody touch your fingertips to your forehead and repeat after me: OOOOHHHMMMMMM...OOOOHHHHMMMM ------------------ A lot of my schoolmates called me "warmonger." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted May 12, 1999 Share Posted May 12, 1999 OOHHMMM. Come on everyone BE THE GAME.. OOHHMMM BECOME THE GAME.. OOHHMMM IMAGINE THE CODE coming together. OOHHMMM think POSITIVE thoughts ya'll OOHHMMM Best strategy game ever thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted May 17, 1999 Share Posted May 17, 1999 Steve / CM Team, You mentioned above that there will be nopylon buildings, ferris wheels, etc. This is understandable. But what kind of variety will there be in the form of just plain old buildings? All the ones I seem to have seen in the screenshots and movies so far appear to look like blockhouses of one or more levels. That is they are pretty much square or rectangular in terms of their footprint on the map. One of the cooler things about CC3, for example, are the buildings that have sections that jut out, are triangular in foot print, single buildings having multiple levels in the same structure (like a church w/ a steeple, or bell tower), etc. Will CM allow us to construct these types of strututures? I think it would certainly help in depicting many urban areas in particular in western Europe during the time period. City streets and alleyways in this part of the world don't follow straight grid like patterns, but rather generally meander all over the place. The buildings tend to fill in the areas in between and as a result there can tend to be some fairly odd shape sturctures in terms of their footprints. Finally, will we be able to "design" our own buildings and fortifications, or not? If the buildings will only be rectangular in shape do we at least get to define the overall length and width of the footprint as well as the number of stories in the building? Regards, Mike D aka Mikester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 17, 1999 Share Posted May 17, 1999 CM does not have a massive variety of buildings. Partly because of VRAM reasons (yup, that old thing again ) and partly because there are just too many things to do. CC has the advantage of hand drawn maps, so although there is more variety there is the disadvantage of not being able to change anything. We hope to add a few more buildings into CM before we ship, but it isn't likely. You can not define anything in CM like you describe. We provide "building blocks" and you must use them. The reason is that we can not generate buildings on the fly. You must also keep in mind that the scale of CM and CC are quite different. Since squads are abstract there is rarely a benefit to having very detailed buildings, except from a "prettiness" perspective. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted May 17, 1999 Share Posted May 17, 1999 Here's somthing I thought about for a cc editor that never materialized, Code in building sections that can be put together by the scenario designer. Not too many are needed really a few basic shapes should do the trick, than give the designer a few choices as to what type of walls the sections are to have such as wood, thick wood, concrete, reinforced concrete etc and viola, designer buildings. I guess you would have to give us the ability to add or remove walls and windows to make it complete. Another enhancement that would be cool would be to have the option to place buildings in the side of hills. Not on the side of the hill but built into the side of the hill. Anyways, BTS, do you think that building sections is something that could be coded easily? If so perhaps fortifications could be dealt with in like manner. in map design have a fort/building button which leads to a few choices bunkers, wire/trench type stuff, buildings clicking on buildings would bring up a graphical list of building sections click on one drag it, rotate it, place it in desired position, click on next one etc etc until done, if satisfied save building and exit back to map editor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Jenkins Posted May 17, 1999 Share Posted May 17, 1999 If anything gets added, I'm hoping for a control tower. That way, we can add streets and do airfield scenarios. They were such important things to take. ------------------ CLIMB TO GLORY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDW Posted May 17, 1999 Share Posted May 17, 1999 Will we be able to reproduce the original map boards that came with the orignal Squad Leader? Particularly, the "city" board that came with that game... It is kind of geeky - but I think it would be fun to see how some of those scenarios play out with CM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted May 17, 1999 Share Posted May 17, 1999 Steve, If nothing else the building / fortification question would be something that I would like to see addressed in either a follow on patch and/or CM2 if at all possible. I know it all takes time, so if not in the original release then maybe you guys can do something later. Thanks. Mike D aka Mikester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 17, 1999 Share Posted May 17, 1999 Lokesa, while your ideas are good there are some hardware limitations that make such things impossible to do for a 3D game such as CM. Forgetting the problems of VRAM and UI for now, the main problem is with terrain resolution. Although units move with pixel precision, terrain is not calculated to the same degree. The map structure is based on squares of terrain. Each square is a specific set of terrain, like grass or light woods. There are combinations, of course, but these are all preset and hardcoded before hand. There is no freeform "paint program" like ability. You must use our building blocks. The single largest reason why this is absolutely necessary can be summed up in one term: LOS. LOS is a computational hog, especially in 3D. I forget the statistics, but CM's routine is VERY slick and still hogs up a vast percentage of the CPU time. The finer we make the terrain resolution, the total computations needed per turn increase exponentially. We have found a good balance between real world simulation and computing limitations. As computing power is increased, so too will CM's ability to have even more finely detailed maps. Perhaps in 2 years we might be able to have a totally freeform map structure. Dunno, but it is possible. So I will repeat... buildings, like all terrain, are approximations. There are no defined windows or doors, nor staircases and internal walls. These things are all approximated. Since your squads of 9-12 men are also approximated, even if we could make more detailed terrain there would be no benefit without applying the same level of realism to the units. As stated many times before, computers are just not good enough to handle this yet. For proof, take a look at CC. Each man is simulated, correct? But how many men are in any given scenario? I forget the max, but it is only a couple of platoon's worth tops. Combat Mission allows you to have about 1.5 battalions EACH. CC couldn't handle this load even with 2D calculations, which are infinitely easier to do than 3D ones. And what is the size limitations to CC's maps? Far less than CM's for sure. And we all know that CC's maps are all hardcoded and that the enduser can't create their own. The point here is to explain why Combat Mission must do what it does. There is no way it can simulate the real world inch for inch, and therefore approximations are necessary. Individual men is one, terrain resolution is another. What works for CC can't work for Combat Mission and, in fact, couldn't work for CC if the engine attempted to simulate CM sized battles. The end result is a much more flexible system than any other out there, and much more realistic, but still not approaching 100% realism. Hope this clears up a few things Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted May 17, 1999 Share Posted May 17, 1999 We are hoping to add more buildings, but a control tower is not one of them. In any case, I doubt many airports in 1944/45 had the modern concept of control towers anyways. Certainly field airstrips wouldn't. If you have ever been to a small rural airport they *STILL* don't have towers in most cases. Just not necessary for a mere runway or two. BDW, you should be able to translate ASL/SL maps into CM to some degree. But because CM isn't based on hexes, you will have to fudge things. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted May 17, 1999 Share Posted May 17, 1999 Can you rotate the "tile" in the map editor? I'm thinking here that even with only three or four different buildings tiles you could get nice variety when able to place them in different "directions", so that when looking at them you don't see straight away that it's basically the same building. This shouldn't require additional coding or texture (I'm wildly guessing here since I know as much about programming as I do about cooking...) but provide some additional eye candy... PS. In case you wondered about my cooking abilities - let's just say that I almost burned down my kitchen last time I tried to make a soup... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts