Thomm Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 I played the desert scenario as Germans last night! I felt it unnecessarily difficult to find the right avenues of approach for my troops because from the top the dessert looks like a featureless pixel soup. Practically by chance I found the central wadi that offers a covered approach up to the enemy front line. My question is: why did BFC not provide an in-built grid option?! It should be incredibly easy to paint the grid lines on the terrain bitmaps once they are loaded in the memory!!! And it would help so much reading the terrain. As it is now you really have to go to view 1 for giving good movement orders, which takes a little bit much time for my taste! Also, why is the dust barely visible??!?! Especially from close up. Sometimes the clouds look nice from a distance, but fade when nearby! Not good ... Maybe one could make these two things optional. Regards, Thomm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GJK Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 There's already a gridded desert tile mod at CMMODS.com, it's under the CMBO section for now. Sorry, don't have the author's name at hand and have yet to try it myself, though I have downloaded it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 I agree strongly with both suggestions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 Originally posted by GJK: There's already a gridded desert tile mod at CMMODS.com, it's under the CMBO section for now. Sorry, don't have the author's name at hand and have yet to try it myself, though I have downloaded it. The idea would be for the new engine to have a grid that you can toggle on and off, I believe. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwazydog Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 Thomm I know there are techinial reasons why we cant have two types of terrain in game (gridded and not) but I can really what they are to be honest. I think maybe it would have doubled the VRAM usage? Anyways, this is something that will certianly be looked at for the next engine! As for dust its fine on my end to be honest. Remember that dust tends to build up over time so maybe what youa are seeing is a thin dust cloud? Dust is calculated on a metre by metre basis. This means that if you call in an 81mm barrage you should see thicker dust in the middle which will block line of sote and only thin dust towards the edges which may not. Dan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted November 21, 2003 Author Share Posted November 21, 2003 Originally posted by KwazyDog: Thomm I know there are techinial reasons why we cant have two types of terrain in game (gridded and not) but I can really what they are to be honest. I think maybe it would have doubled the VRAM usage?I think the problem is with switching back from gridded to un-gridded terrain since you loose (overwrite) the color information in the (ungridded) bitmap tiles meaning that you had to re-load the whole bitmap set when switching back to ungridded which is not feasible. Me, I could not care less, because I would never play with ungridded terrain again! Maybe this option could be introduced through a back door like a command line option! It certainly would make a difference. Regards, Thomm PS: If I can write C++ code that manipulates bitmaps in memory then anybody can. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 Texture RAM would be no problem because you would unload "the other" set even if you used an approach to switch to new textures. But in any case, there is no need to switch to a different set of textures with lines around the borders, you could just draw the lines in Direct3D. As always, "dead easy" != 4 year old codebase 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 I disagree with the initial comments. If I wanted to pay a gridded board game I would'a bought a game of checkers! Reading the topography is one of those acquired games skills that sets one player apart from the next, laying grids sounds like a gamey crutch. About barely visible dust, if you really want dust so thick it hinders your ability to see the map try playing the smoke and dusk in fast/compatible mode. It'll be plenty thick then! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzertruppe Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 I have to agree with MikeyD. I still love a good game of ASL.....but when I play on the computer I don't want to see grids....or(hopefully not) counters! Bill 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 IMO gridded terrain is a must until such time as we have dynamic lighting in this game. You can call it whatever you like, but the current textures in no way reflect the real life ability to read terrain. Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thin Red Line Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 We don't need grids in a 3d enviromnent. Plus, grids are ugly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 Originally posted by Panzertruppe: I have to agree with MikeyD. I still love a good game of ASL.....but when I play on the computer I don't want to see grids....or(hopefully not) counters! Bill My ASL terrain and interface mods will be available for the full version. I can probably have the Demo version up at the depot tomorrow night if anyone is interested. They're ugly, but functional. Still getting the colours right on the desert terrain. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wadepm Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 I agree with Bil, until we get dynamic lighting effects we aren't really reading the terrain, we're just guessing. The grids just provide the information you would get from the dynamic lighting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 Or not even dynamic lighting (if that means that blasts, fires etc. create a light source), but just having the hills shaded according to the position of the sun, so that it would look like 3-dimensional, not just a flat mass on my screen. Until that happens, I'll be using grids for greater realism. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 Must of been hard for the soldiers to go out and paint a grid before a battle. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew H. Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 Originally posted by rune: Must of been hard for the soldiers to go out and paint a grid before a battle. Rune Nah, it's all part of combat preparation. Plus, if you captured territory, you could usually just use the grid painted by the enemy. Except in Russia; the Russian grid was a different gauge and couldn't be used by the Germans. Also, if a side was practicing "scorched earth," they would often erase the grid. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 Originally posted by Sergei: Or not even dynamic lighting (if that means that blasts, fires etc. create a light source), but just having the hills shaded according to the position of the sun, so that it would look like 3-dimensional, not just a flat mass on my screen. Until that happens, I'll be using grids for greater realism. Brilliant, so if I lose our battle, I can blame it on you being a gamey, grid-using, tank-rushing, infantry-camping bastich? Shame I have no need for that since you are not about to win. I'll keep it for next time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted November 22, 2003 Share Posted November 22, 2003 Bill H and Wade are right. The rest of you are eye-candy hounds. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cull Posted November 22, 2003 Share Posted November 22, 2003 I believe the point of the discussion is practicality, not realism. The skill of "reading terrain" (as used in this thread, read: like a soldier) is facilitated by gridlines. The idea that game skill or experience affects the player's ability is horsehockey. I prefer not to use them (as they remind me that I am playing a game and not in a battle), but I'd rather use them then cycle down to level one four hundred times a battle to "read the terrain". The ideal would be that suggested by an individual in this thread---shading relative to light source (sun). Dark/moonless night scenarios would preserve realism by the increased difficulty of reading terrain. I'm also sure the shading would be a processor hog, in which case I am happy enough with gridlines. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CKibler Posted November 22, 2003 Share Posted November 22, 2003 Originally posted by rune: Must of been hard for the soldiers to go out and paint a grid before a battle.This goes a long way in explaining the unusual request in March 1942 by the Army Dept. for athletic field preparers (AKA as "Limers"). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted November 22, 2003 Share Posted November 22, 2003 Originally posted by MikeyD: Reading the topography is one of those acquired games skills that sets one player apart from the next, laying grids sounds like a gamey crutch. Give us a break. I suppose you never zoom around the battlefield from different views and heights, or rewind the movie to watch it from other points of view either. Those are just as much 'crutches'. The point of the grids is just to make it easier to _see_ the topography, in the way that a person on the scene naturally would, not to make it unnecessary to still read it. It has to do with interface quality, not gamey 'crutches'. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted November 22, 2003 Share Posted November 22, 2003 Originally posted by rune: Must of been hard for the soldiers to go out and paint a grid before a battle. I wouldn't have expected this silliness of you. The point of the grids is that what we get on the screen of our computers is visually much worse than what a mark I eyeball in the field really sees. Many normal visual cues are missing, such as shading from a light source. The grid is just to aid the eye in perceiving the contours in the same way we naturally would in real life. Anyone who has recorded or filmed knows the difference between how things looks when we are really there, and how different they can look on film or in another sort of reproduction, and this is one of those cases. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply thinking unclearly or is uninformed. To put it bluntly, those calling this request 'gamey' are flat out wrong. In any case, the request has been for an _optional_ grid. Ideally it should be toggable, so that you can only use it when you need it. No one is supposed to have it shoved down their throats if they don't want it. [ November 22, 2003, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: CMplayer ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted November 22, 2003 Author Share Posted November 22, 2003 Part of my frustration is that I am currently doing some automatic map-shading experiments, and I am not used to look at 'flat' top-down views anymore: Regards, Thomm 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.