Mercury Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 Just done a search but couldn't find any mention of this bug...if it is one. I can't give you a pic just yet because I'm not on my home PC but maybe a description will help. I've designed a railway line that is at level 7, this moves in a straight line to a long viaduct over a valley. The rail is in a cutting with terrain starting at about level 10(can't remember precisely) above it and on either side, gradually fading down to 7. Now whenever I save this seemingly perfect setting and then re-load it I get a 'bump' on the railway line about two levels above what it should be. This always seems to happen at the crossover between, say level 9 and 8 above the railline that is on level 7. Confused? So am I!! What is going on? I hope you can figure this. If not I'll do it again with pix at the weekend. Thanks PS this is with v1.03 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 On the tile that is the railroad, and the one to the right and left of it, make sure they are all the same height. If there is one next to it that drops, you get weird results. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercury Posted November 6, 2003 Author Share Posted November 6, 2003 So this is a glitch that needs fixing! On my travels through Europe I have been through plenty of railway cuttings that are very narrow and almost hug the track. It is not realistic to have a wide expanse of flat either said. I know, I know, its only a teeny tiny problem but lets make this game just that bit more perfect cos I can't design an accurate scenario! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 I came across that very problem just last night for the first time, myself! I had a thought. One thing you could try that I haven't had time to try myself: Go to the map editor, select 'Change height", then nudge the whole map up a few points (Command +). Maybe the map will elevate above the unfortunate bump. I've got to dash home tonight to see if my 'clever plan' works or not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 not a glitch, but with 20 meter tiles, and 5 meter elevations, was the best that could be done. With a re-design of the engine, and 10 meter tiles, might be better off. What are the elevation you selected? change it to the lowest difference. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 This came up in a discussion I had with Moon over a scenario he wrote that's on the CMBO disk. There is an RR in it that looks like a roller coaster for exactly the reason described in this thread. I think the only real cure will be to switch to smaller terrain cells in CMx2. Also, if it can be programmed, being able to turn off terrain smoothing between any pair of adjacent cells so that near-vertical declivities would be possible would help a lot. Not only could you make cuttings and fills, but embankments, and with 5 meter cells you could make your own AT ditches anywhere you wanted. The only thing you can do for now is to make sure that the right of way for the RR extends at least 20 meters to each side and is on the same level as the RR. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: Also, if it can be programmed, being able to turn off terrain smoothing between any pair of adjacent cells so that near-vertical declivities would be possible would help a lot.I think something like this is already in use, to a degree, with buildings, water and marsh cells. I would like to warn against too great freedom for designers, however. It can get out of hand if people get to place phone booths and choose the colour schemes of the cows in the meadow. going to 10m tiles means four times as many tiles to put into place. Maybe the next installment will be something similar to Close Combat's scale in which case this is not a problem as maps are smaller. But otherwise I'd be against it. Or maybe if there were two levels of terrain, laid separately: the actual base type (open, grass, bush, trees, pines, rocky) in 20x20 and then on top of that "objects" (roads, buildings) in 10x10. Or something. I would hate to be a game designer! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 I don't know what the CMX2 engine is going to look like. All I know is BFC members start giggling with glee whenever it gets mentioned. Still, if every notion from the board were implimented it sounds like the thing would be as unplayable as it would be unrunnable! 10m tiles on 8km deep maps sounds kind'a scarey. Of course that's probably what was said to the BFC gang when the suggestion of a 3-D true perspective battle field was raised a few years back. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Originally posted by MikeyD: Of course that's probably what was said to the BFC gang when the suggestion of a 3-D true perspective battle field was raised a few years back. True enough. Circa five years ago I for one was foolish enough to declare that I'd probably never run the game in anything but an overhead view. *sigh* Live and learn... Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.