Jump to content

CM Normandy Editor


pad152

Recommended Posts

I don't know if CM Normandy will use the same Editor as CM SF.

I've just started to use the Editor in CM SF and here are some things I think would make it easier to use. You use units during the map and setup but, groups when setting the AI. There is no way to find a specific group on the map or during scenario test.

Hot Keys

Hot Keys that will show a specific Group (F2, F3, etc) and it's objectives (terrain, unit) in both on the deployment map and during Scenario test.

Basic Map Generator

Some sort of basic Map generator, creating even a small map is quit a bit of work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basic Map Generator is not going to happen. The maps in CMSF are much more complex then the ones in CMBB/AK. The program needed to create a map would not be feasible to make.

I am sure there will be plenty of user created maps to download.

How many maps have been created for CM SF, less than 50, 75? Without some sort of Map Generator, what makes you think the numbers will be any greater for CM Normandy?

It just takes way too much time to create a good map, even a small one with the CM SF editor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Er... hundreds of maps have been created for CM:SF so far. I don't think the number available is really a problem as that's more maps than most people will ever have the time to play. Think about it... if the average RT game takes 2 hours to play, and the average WeGo about 4 hours, then for every 100 maps you're talking about 200-400 hours of game play. That's assuming no re-doing battles already played, which I know people do a lot of.

From my perspective the map creations, and scenario creations for that matter, are about what we expected. Much fewer than CMx1, but much higher quality per individual example. The reason for that is simple... CMx1 was "too easy" and it allowed a lot of sloppy, not very good stuff to be cranked out by people who really had no flair for it. Those people find CMx2 too much to handle, so those who remain tend to be capable of much higher quality scenario/map makers. The other reason, which is related, is that the massive amounts of choices in CMx2's terrain pallet compared to CMx1 mean that really good designer can do so much more than even the best of the best could do with CMx1.

There is no chance that we'll make a random map generator for CMx2. Probably ever. I do mean that. It's so much work that it's been completely ruled out. Whether people understand why that's the case or not isn't relevant. Reality is what reality is. Even the MegaTile concept, which we think will produce superior results for less effort, is a huge chunk of work. That is something we'll get to eventually, hopefully sooner rather than later.

As for the Editor... it will remain largely unchanged between CM:SF and CM: Normandy. We have a list of requested improvements that could literally take us more than a year to implement. We had the same issue with CMx1's Editor. The Editor can not be allowed to become a distraction for the game itself. Therefore, it will always remain a utilitarian tool and never more than that.

Having said that, a better way of laying out linear items (roads, walls, water, hedges, etc.) is something high up on my list. It's a good example of a feature which is likely to have rewards beyond the time it takes us to implement it. However, it is a significant time investment and we're not going to have it for CM: Normandy. At least not the initial release.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect a lot more maps and scenarios for the WWII games due to the presumably broader interest in the subject matter. There will probably be a lot of maps created by people wanting to play their favorite historical battles. I look forward to the Brits module so someone can do Villers-Bocage. Of course, the map can be created with the base game, but the units won't be available until the Brits (which will presumably include the SS) is released. Hopefully the rate the modules are released for CM:N will be more rapid than it was for CM:SF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Er... hundreds of maps have been created for CM:SF so far. I don't think the number available is really a problem as that's more maps than most people will ever have the time to play. Think about it... if the average RT game takes 2 hours to play, and the average WeGo about 4 hours, then for every 100 maps you're talking about 200-400 hours of game play. That's assuming no re-doing battles already played, which I know people do a lot of.

From my perspective the map creations, and scenario creations for that matter, are about what we expected. Much fewer than CMx1, but much higher quality per individual example. The reason for that is simple... CMx1 was "too easy" and it allowed a lot of sloppy, not very good stuff to be cranked out by people who really had no flair for it. Those people find CMx2 too much to handle, so those who remain tend to be capable of much higher quality scenario/map makers. The other reason, which is related, is that the massive amounts of choices in CMx2's terrain pallet compared to CMx1 mean that really good designer can do so much more than even the best of the best could do with CMx1.

There is no chance that we'll make a random map generator for CMx2. Probably ever. I do mean that. It's so much work that it's been completely ruled out. Whether people understand why that's the case or not isn't relevant. Reality is what reality is. Even the MegaTile concept, which we think will produce superior results for less effort, is a huge chunk of work. That is something we'll get to eventually, hopefully sooner rather than later.

As for the Editor... it will remain largely unchanged between CM:SF and CM: Normandy. We have a list of requested improvements that could literally take us more than a year to implement. We had the same issue with CMx1's Editor. The Editor can not be allowed to become a distraction for the game itself. Therefore, it will always remain a utilitarian tool and never more than that.

Having said that, a better way of laying out linear items (roads, walls, water, hedges, etc.) is something high up on my list. It's a good example of a feature which is likely to have rewards beyond the time it takes us to implement it. However, it is a significant time investment and we're not going to have it for CM: Normandy. At least not the initial release.

Steve

I've created two maps w/scenarios so far, the first took about 16 hrs, the second about 10, still a newbie with the editor. Both games took about 45 to 60 min to play (small battles).

26 hrs of creation for 2 hrs of game play, those number would have been reversed for CM 1 games. Can't say my creations were any better than those CM 1 QB battles. Yes, the AI editing (control of forces) on the map is much better in CM SF and the maps look better but, not everybody is a good map maker. Anything even a basic terrain generator to help ease and speed up the process with the editor would go a long way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see the map editor with OBJECTIVES that end games.

For example..If your forces take OBJ x, then the game is over.

also - the terrain editing boggles me. I havent really read into it, but it seems veyr hard to make minor adjustments. How about a brush (similiar to textures) that can adjust height.

I'm saddened to see that the random map generator will go away. I've used those maps as a basis for several of my own custom creations. Something to get me off the ground, so to speak. Does this mean random battles will go away? I hope not, I've gone through the scenarios and most missions. I'm running out of material!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pad152,

26 hrs of creation for 2 hrs of game play, those number would have been reversed for CM 1 games.

Sure, but the level of detail was also reversed. There's no way we can make an editor that allows 10 times as much detail with the same amount of work for the end user. It just isn't possible.

Can't say my creations were any better than those CM 1 QB battles. Yes, the AI editing (control of forces) on the map is much better in CM SF and the maps look better but, not everybody is a good map maker.

Just like not everybody can make levels for games like Quake, not everybody will find they have the patience, talent, vision, or whatever for making CMx2 maps and/or scenarios. There were plenty of people who bought CMx1 that never did more than fool around with the Editor because they didn't find it appealed to them. With the increased amount of details to play around with, it's not surprising to us that the threshold has been raised.

Anything even a basic terrain generator to help ease and speed up the process with the editor would go a long way.

I doubt we'll ever get around to it, but it would be somewhat feasible to have a random elevation and base terrain generator (i.e. just grass and trees, not buildings, roads, water, or anything else interesting). Not that I think that will do very much since I can create that sort of stuff on my own within a few minutes. That's not were the time is sunk... it's the fine details and those will always have to be user placed.

Spending enormous energy on making the Editor more approachable means stunting the game itself. Our goal is not to make the Editor work equally well for all people, rather it is there to ensure that people have a steady flow of new game experiences which we could never provide on disk. This is the same philosophy we've had since 1997 and it's not likely to change.

Again, the Editor will be tweaked and improved over time. But it will always have a high threshold and a steep learning curve compared to CMx1 due to the massive complexity difference between the two. Which is a good thing, because if we spent 5 years making a game that was no different than the one from 5 years previously... we wouldn't be doing our jobs :D

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CPT Mike,

I would like to see the map editor with OBJECTIVES that end games.

For example..If your forces take OBJ x, then the game is over.

Hmmm... first one I've ever heard request such a thing, er, since we started making CM! Congrats on a completely unique request, as far as I know :) I honestly don't think we'll introduce such a thing per se, however it's not out of the question that we will make it easier for a game to auto-end just due to points from Objectives.

also - the terrain editing boggles me. I havent really read into it, but it seems veyr hard to make minor adjustments. How about a brush (similiar to textures) that can adjust height.

You should start up a thread in the design forum to ask people for tips on making elevations. Just by your question I'm pretty sure you're not doing it "right". The key is to learn the difference between locking and not locking terrain elevations. Quick suggestion, make contour lines out of locked elevations of a single height, each line representing a deviation from whatever you consider base height.

I'm saddened to see that the random map generator will go away. I've used those maps as a basis for several of my own custom creations. Something to get me off the ground, so to speak. Does this mean random battles will go away? I hope not, I've gone through the scenarios and most missions. I'm running out of material!

Remember, random maps didn't "go away", we never made them for CMx2. And never intended to either. It was an acknowledged sacrifice for increasing terrain fidelity and complexity years ago. It's simply not within practical reach of us and so we're not ever going to pursue it. Randomly assembled "MegaTiles" is something we will eventually have.

CM: Normandy will introduce a new QuickBattle system that will be a hybrid between the concepts of the QB systems of both CMx1 and CM:SF. Players will be able to choose their own maps or have the system pick from the hundreds that are available. Or will be available, just like there are for CM:SF already.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

Not that I think that will do very much since I can create that sort of stuff on my own within a few minutes. That's not were the time is sunk... it's the fine details and those will always have to be user placed.

Steve

I think many of these details can be gotten right only in 3d mode. If editing the map (tiles and elevation) in 3d mode is a huge task, do you think it would be possible to make a small change to Editor that would make it easier to change the map in 2d mode?

my idea would be to have a "cursor" the size of one map tile. You could move it in 3d Preview mode (like actions spots are shown when placing a waypoint when you play the game) and when exiting back to 2d mode, this cursor would be visible in 2d map also.

So it would be possible to find just the right places on the map that you want to change in 3d Preview, move cursor to that place and then make the changes in 2d mode. I think this would be a very useful feature for very many map making tasks: placing buildings, deciding where a road should make a turn, how big some field should be etc. It's very time consuming to get these right in current 2d mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think many of these details can be gotten right only in 3d mode. If editing the map (tiles and elevation) in 3d mode is a huge task, do you think it would be possible to make a small change to Editor that would make it easier to change the map in 2d mode?

my idea would be to have a "cursor" the size of one map tile. You could move it in 3d Preview mode (like actions spots are shown when placing a waypoint when you play the game) and when exiting back to 2d mode, this cursor would be visible in 2d map also.

So it would be possible to find just the right places on the map that you want to change in 3d Preview, move cursor to that place and then make the changes in 2d mode. I think this would be a very useful feature for very many map making tasks: placing buildings, deciding where a road should make a turn, how big some field should be etc. It's very time consuming to get these right in current 2d mode.

I like this idea, the battlefield makes a lot more sense in 3D mode but can only be edited in 2D. Some way to pass information the other direction would be very helpful when putting in micro terrain features and ironing out kinks like cliffs appearing where you don't want them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 hrs of creation for 2 hrs of game play, those number would have been reversed for CM 1 games. Can't say my creations were any better than those CM 1 QB battles.

I doubt you could make enough maps for 26 hours of CMx1 play in 2 hours unless you are just using the random map generator :)

But the point is that you can upload those 2 files to the repository, and if say 20 other people have also spent 26 hours making maps then you can also download another 40 hours of maps for playing for free.

I would suggest that making maps just for your own use is an inefficient use of time. People who make maps and scenarios generally do so to share them with the wider community.

(I've finally finished a map I've been working on intermittently for months; now I'm left wondering if it is even possible to create an interesting battle on it :D )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the issues with CMx2s more detailed scenario editor is that their are those who can/have the patience to map makes, but they may not have the skill to deal with actually creating a scenario. And there are those who may not have the same penchant for map design who enjoy creating scenarios.

The ability for scenario designers to use put together maps from others work would be invaluable. Would it then be possible for map makers (with the introduction of mega-tiles) to create a tile and then upload it to the repository, and then allow scenario designers to patch together a map with them? Or allow scenario designers to pull apart maps as mega-tiles and insert them into their scenario?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(I've finally finished a map I've been working on intermittently for months; now I'm left wondering if it is even possible to create an interesting battle on it :D )

For sure. Just fill it with FO teams, nothing else, and give both sides a ridiculous amount of heavy artillery and BM-21 batteries.

VERY interesting, I guarantee! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the issues with CMx2s more detailed scenario editor is that their are those who can/have the patience to map makes, but they may not have the skill to deal with actually creating a scenario. And there are those who may not have the same penchant for map design who enjoy creating scenarios.

The ability for scenario designers to use put together maps from others work would be invaluable. Would it then be possible for map makers (with the introduction of mega-tiles) to create a tile and then upload it to the repository, and then allow scenario designers to patch together a map with them? Or allow scenario designers to pull apart maps as mega-tiles and insert them into their scenario?

This is why, I'm learning to use the editor now, before CM Normandy's release, figured it would use the same editor. :) I can't say what I have now is worth releasing, but hopefully I'm getting there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see the map editor with OBJECTIVES that end games.

For example..If your forces take OBJ x, then the game is over.

Thank you, CPT Mike, for stating this!! I have wanted something like this for a while. I despise gaining the objective with over an hour left in a scenario, then having to wait for the scenario to end. This would be a great boost to the game.

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, CPT Mike, for stating this!! I have wanted something like this for a while. I despise gaining the objective with over an hour left in a scenario, then having to wait for the scenario to end. This would be a great boost to the game.

Ken

How about just an end battle button, one that would give you the End of Battle Results, just like a normal ending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about just an end battle button, one that would give you the End of Battle Results, just like a normal ending.

pad152, actually such a button it does exist. It's called "Cease Fire".

c3k, CPT Mike, the problem I see with those auto-end Objetives is that in case that you also get points for unit objetives and/or other parameters (enemy casualties, condition, ammo) you might prevent yourself from winning the scenario if you take that objetive too soon. You would need to know your score in real time and that would eliminate the FoW of guessing how you are doing it so far. Or you could only use one auto-ending Objetive, so it might end up being a "everyone run for the hill"-ish scenario because casualties doesn't matter so much. I guess the best solution has been pointed out by Steve: to make it easier for a game to auto-end just due to points from Objectives. Now, it seems that the only way for the AI to surrender is by casualties and condition. Please correct me if I'm wrong. So you can get the feeling in some scenarios that it's easier to win by slowly advancing, taking good overwatch positions and then slaughtering the enemy force from the distance, getting a surrender and the points from all the objetives, than trying to reach objetives that are far away and likely to be well defended/covered by fire. Just adding to the debate.

Cheers,

Lomir

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would suggest that making maps just for your own use is an inefficient use of time. People who make maps and scenarios generally do so to share them with the wider community.

My problem exactly...I can see Steve's point about refusing to make an "Editor-lite" in order to keep the standard of community maps high, but the editor is not just for those wanting to release to the community. My preferred method of play is to pick a QB map and select my own forces in the editor, before assigning a few objectives, making sure the AI setup is sound, and playing. Basically allows a custom battle on any map. I only add polish when I'm making a campaign for friends/others to play.

As vulture said, it's not the best use of my time. I usually have to spend at least 30-40 minutes setting up for a battle that lasts 1-2 hours, thats around a third of my play time just spent tweaking the map and adding forces. I personally would say yes to anything that make "quick setups" easier (like drag-creation of roads) but then I'd probably miss the in-depth features when it comes to creating something really fancy to show off to other people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not so much that we don't want to make an "Editor lite", its that one isn't really practical. If people want maps to play on there's no getting around the fact that the higher level of fidelity and greater variety of terrain options does require more work than CMx1.

What can be done, and will be done over time, is to make the CMx2 Editor easier to use. It will still be far more involved than CMx1, of course, but it will take less time to make the same map as it would take in an earlier version. Improving the way linear objects are drawn is probably the #1 element that we should focus on. There's another one which you'll see in CM: Normandy that I'm not ready to talk about quite yet ;)

One thing to keep in mind is that some things are much easier to do in CMx2's Editor than in CMx1. For example, the different sized paintbrushes, better organization of types, more elevation control options, etc. We can build on that over time.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...