• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      Attention Soldiers Operation Fury Needs you!   02/20/2020

      Attention All Soldiers, Operation Fury needs you.  You need to choose a side and sign up.  
      For more intel on Operation Fury Please click HERE Please go to Special Event Forum (here), And sign up for allied or axis.
      This will be a CRS Lead event on both sides.  Xoom will be heading up the axis side and Heavy265 will be heading up the Allied side. This will be for bragging rights.
      Why are we asking players to sign up you ask. We are trying for a role play experience.   We want this to be a true realistic event.  
      So get up and sign up and let's make this the best event ever!!!!!!!!!!
      Give me your war cry, grrrrrrrrrrrrr
      Heavy265 **out**
enforcer

I have an 88 question

26 posts in this topic

Upon checking your order with the Reich Wartime Supplies and Party Favors Inc ordering Department, you appeared to have ordered this

9349995639_61df8cb738_b.jpg

Please package and return all 88's for refitting
Please include 7.000.000 reichsmarks for shipping and handling and processing per 88
Ship to Reich Wartime Supplies and Party Favors Inc Returns
PO Box 137
Berlin Deutschland  0704586DE
Please allow 6 to 8 years for return delivery

flak_36_02_of_55.jpg 

:)
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. Nice reflectorized fenders. Surely that has to be a modern addition? And if so, they drive that thing around at night?  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, jwilly said:

Heh. Nice reflectorized fenders. Surely that has to be a modern addition? And if so, they drive that thing around at night?  :)

Oh no, the Luftwaffe always uphold the highest of safety standards!
What if a poor allied soldier, after having lost his way in the dark, was to not see the 88 and run into it?
He could get badly hurt.
:) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because the original CRS thought it's a great idea to give us the Luftwaffe Anti Air 88 an not the Field 88. 

Hence no shield , it was all fine and dandy till CRS decided to make WWIIOL look like the jungle of Vietnam , and then scaled it back a bit , but gave us the insta  soldier out of a box deployed by any ML around , so the 88 became obsolete not to mention that the towing party did not get anymore points of doing so , so less and less people used the HT that and to be stealthy many ML rather walked to town to set the FRU then use transportation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2018 at 7:16 AM, papagaeio said:

Or sign up for Prime and receive it tomorrow.

LoL that's awesome 

49 minutes ago, dre21 said:

That's because the original CRS thought it's a great idea to give us the Luftwaffe Anti Air 88 an not the Field 88. 

That is also of course because the 88 in game is from the opening days of BOF.
And back then we didnt have any tiers, the equipment didnt go past that time, T0 was all designed around "What was in France on April 1940"

Insta soldiers from crawling through bushes ML's are thankfully gone, and the HT can now deploy it's own FMS supplying the 88
with close support troops, light AA, and even light AT assistance.

I'd not be surprised if one day some 88 variety rolls in with the dedicated field mount guns as well as actual AA capability on the Luftwaffe model
once some bigger fish are fried up and served.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dre21 said:

it was all fine and dandy till CRS decided to make WWIIOL look like the jungle of Vietnam

it's funny that you think this. the game needs significantly more trees, brush, under brush, etc to look like france, let alone the jungles of vietnam.

flat,1000x1000,075,f.jpg

albas-village-france-p3-0145.jpg?w=774

flat,1000x1000,075,f.jpg

 

I have to ask ... have you ever been outside? Some of the areas in which we're fighting share commonality with Areas like Upstate New York, The Pacific Northwest, etc. Others lack things like the dense hedgerows 

 

Here is a nice shot of belgium

58760b8a10fa7.jpeg

p1060149.jpg

 

You're telling me the game has more trees, brush, grass, and foliage than those pictures? According to you the game resembles the jungles of Vietnam and Laos right?

 

We need a LOT more of this stuff to have a realistic theater of war, anywhere ww2 was actually fought. We have so little of it now as is. Further, we really need undulations more than trees. Undulations break line of sight in a very hard manner affording zero space to maneuver in and surprise your opponent. opens up lots of shoot and scoot options and generally increases infantry survivability a great deal. 

 

I'd actually be curious as I'm guessing scotsman either knows or has an idea ... how much more survivable are HE blasts when terrain undulations come into play? If CRS did nothing to the rendering capability, meaning 'prettier' graphics, and only figured out how to deliver higher resolution terrain this game would RADICALLY change. I'd wager more so than almost any other feature. 

Edited by madrebel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been to Vietnam during the fighting.  NONE of the pictures shown, the terrain and foliage in game even comes close to the jungles of Vietnam!!  Some of the rice fields, and village areas are similar to the game terrain, but that's all.  

 

C4PTnAy.png

"Win with Class, Fight with Honor, Lose with Dignity!"

Edited by Boudreau
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My house, which is NOT in vietnam.
Have fun trying to move an 88, or a pak36 or an ft17 for that matter

The world is amazingly jungle/forest like in many places when no one cuts it down or plows it under

Qhgk4eS.png

Battle of Bulge area during WWII
01880969029c06d6f3dd657d61e811b7--old-ba

6687194cec5218522724a7f6422d6f66--patton

Belgium
360817745-ardennes-wallonia-mixed-forest

Dinant modern
7855132c2feae794661538368452f94d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, madrebel said:

Further, we really need undulations more than trees. Undulations break line of sight in a very hard manner affording zero space to maneuver in and surprise your opponent. opens up lots of shoot and scoot options and generally increases infantry survivability a great deal. 

The game's terrain tiles are based on the 800 meter square spacing of the satellite-data-based height array-grid. The world database is correspondingly built, and everything in-game is coded per that database.

A key limitation of the current terrain system is how steep slopes can be. In the early days, it was said by CRS that the steep slopes in the Meuse valley were done with hand coding outside of the terrain system, involving a lot of hours and attempts to get something to work well enough. Elsewhere on the map, there are few steep slopes that are part of terrain tiles.

A change to  the terrain system involving shorter-pitched undulations...whether they are sometimes locally steeper to model rougher terrain, gulleys and the like, or just areas of up-and-down hills and valleys...would require a different, smaller set of terrain tiles, and a different terrain editor or at least different settings, and a new world database.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

Battle of Bulge area during WWII
01880969029c06d6f3dd657d61e811b7--old-ba

6687194cec5218522724a7f6422d6f66--patton

I'm not sure where those photos were shot, but the Eifel in the north is much rougher than that, with steep, rocky river valley slopes, lots of more rapid elevation changes, and high ridge lines.

41B.jpg

Aerial photos tend to look "flatter" than reality. This photo of Stolzernburg illustrates how over thousands of years, the creeks and streams have carved deep wandering valleys through the terrain. The roads and towns are built almost entirely in those valleys, with the hillsides rising steeply all around and covered with sizeable trees. The few farm fields and pastures are mostly on cleared hilltops, well away from the main roads down in the valleys.

fs1cj5oifi6z.jpg

In the background of this town photo, the steep slope-angle of the hillside--too steep to drive or run, probably difficult to walk when the ground is wet and muddy--can be seen.

The-Ardennes-Terrain.jpg

This ridgeline photo illustrates the Eifel terrain: it's all steep up and down slopes. Most of the fighting occurred in the narrow valleys, with no flanking possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, jwilly said:

I'm not sure where those photos were shot

in WWII, after the bulge i think
those are army units down on the ground

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, merlin51 said:
5 hours ago, jwilly said:

I'm not sure where those photos were shot

in WWII, after the bulge i think

What I meant was, where within the combat area. Very little of the early combat area was as flat as the pictured terrain.

The northernmost part of the combat area, the Belgian part of the German region called Schnee Eifel, is a high-forest plateau, poorly drained in many areas so consisting of wet forests interspersed with several-km-long bare-granite ridges jutting upward, with very little road net or human use.  The central part is (relatively) less rugged, but the terrain is dominated by the Our, Clerf, Wiltz and Sauer rivers all of which run north-south, so an attempt to move east-west must cross high ridges and the intervening river and stream valleys on narrow "roads" suitable for occasional farm traffic, not heavy military equipment and continuous bi-directional supply truck flows. The southern part of the combat area, mostly in Luxembourg, becomes more rugged and elevated again. The two best east-west roads ran in the north through Malmedy and Stavelot, and in the south-central area through Bastogne...which is exactly why those town names factor so prominently in the battle history.

As the central-area terrain progresses west toward the Meuse it becomes less rugged. Maybe the photos were taken in those areas, where US and British forces set up defenses-in-depth but to which German forces never penetrated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, jwilly said:

What I meant was, where within the combat area.

Oh, i am not 100% sure
Losheimer gap iirc

This reminds me of in game, especially Xmas
63a39b26ebdabde0a3e31a8b83285869--ww-pho

dce675741fb705b5_large

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jwilly said:

The game's terrain tiles are based on the 800 meter square spacing of the satellite-data-based height array-grid. The world database is correspondingly built, and everything in-game is coded per that database.

A key limitation of the current terrain system is how steep slopes can be. In the early days, it was said by CRS that the steep slopes in the Meuse valley were done with hand coding outside of the terrain system, involving a lot of hours and attempts to get something to work well enough. Elsewhere on the map, there are few steep slopes that are part of terrain tiles.

A change to  the terrain system involving shorter-pitched undulations...whether they are sometimes locally steeper to model rougher terrain, gulleys and the like, or just areas of up-and-down hills and valleys...would require a different, smaller set of terrain tiles, and a different terrain editor or at least different settings, and a new world database.

The game uses a real satellite height map for terrain generation?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

800m squares, i think the guy wanted 20-100m squares. 

Tessellationon on the current grids would be cool too. Doubt it's possible, something to think about for 2.0 though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok poor choice of words maybe . I know very well what Europe looks like I grew up there .

Having said that, 88s were set up in strategic positions which we can't do in game , I doubt a gamer wants to sit weeks at a certain spot just waiting . Also Bombs don't do dilly to trees , tanks don't just dislodge them either . So in that retrospect it's a jungle for the 88s in game . None of the real live aspect factors into the game we play. 

I'm well aware the hedgerows are missing but exactly these hedgerows were awesome ATG positions , but again we play a game and no player will set up an ambush and sit there for days just hoping that HC will put an AO onto a town.

I hope that cleared it up a bit.

Edited by dre21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, pbveteran said:

The game uses a real satellite height map for terrain generation?

 

Yes, game map was generated from real sat elevation scans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, dre21 said:

we play a game and no player will set up an ambush and sit there for days just hoping that HC will put an AO onto a town.

Hehe kind of funny you say that.
Way way back in olden times, there was this revolutionary hard core MMORPG called Everquest.
And they had mobs that would literally only spawn every few days or once per week etc, and do you know that people would in fact camp out those mobs
in real time waiting for them to come by.

Can you imagine, sitting in game for 3 days, no shower, we wont discuss bathroom, camped in a hedgerow with an 88 waiting and hoping the allies make a push east and that they push in your area.
Even worse, imagine an entire squad camped out along the hedgerow and tree line for 3 days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, pbveteran said:

The game uses a real satellite height map for terrain generation?

CRS started with sat elevation data.

Note though that horizontal distances are compressed 2:1, so the amount of game-countryside doesn't correspond to the actual map and some of the towns are hybrids of more than one actual town, and/or are iin adjusted locations.

Ditto the rivers, forests, roads and bridges.

So, the sat elevation data was a starting point, which CRS then adjusted as they felt would provide good gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, start WWOL v2.0 with no compression, sat data, and the whole world?

Sure, most of it will be empty - but start with the everything - then we can add to it as time goes on?
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, delems said:

So, start WWOL v2.0 with no compression, sat data, and the whole world?

Sure, most of it will be empty - but start with the everything - then we can add to it as time goes on?
 

Few reasons...

1) polycount
More ground detail = good, but you have to pick a balancing point between what really is, and what can be run on a players PC
ground is polys, tanks infantry planes buildings, these are all polys. can afford
The average player does not have nor can afford  a super PC running a vega watercooled crossfire setup, so you have to design to what the average can run acceptably.

A 10 meter scan would look friggin awesome, but unless you shoebox mapped it where you can control a lot of other things
it would go from awesome to wtf i cant even play this fast

Remember how far you can actually see in game and how many things you can possibly see, add in up to 128 player units to that.

That is not to say that you could not bump it up a notch with todays current machines, that are a galaxy away from the pc of 2001, but to keep the open world and range of views we have, you would have to accept some limits that you would otherwise not have in a smaller game.

2) Compression means you go farther and take longer.
When you run or drive from an FB to town, you run at a simulated 1 to 1 speed , if you uncompress distances
you are going to start taking real world amounts of time to travel, everyone already hates travel time.

Memory constraints might or might not come into play now days, it all depends.
The reason we can run around and fly around the game world so flawlessly is because it keeps all this stuff preloaded up in memory so it has the areas around you that you are not in yet already preloaded.
Expanding the area may have some effect on that unless you start resubdiving the area, which is not only a client thing
the server has to load and track these areas as well though in a different way, there may be things there to work within.

But mostly it would be the distance that would be the killer.
You know how long it takes a TT to go to england for example?
Now double that.

Remember our world is not actually finished, you can see large parts of landmass that have nothing in them, up in the far north east, and heading down to the south and south east.
And while the theater currently ends east and southwards at kind of an abrupt line, that doesnt mean it is the end of the world
just the end of the play area that was generated, which is huge, imagine when all the current landmass populated.

Now imagine adding in another chunk, as the Italians come in and eventually become a faction they will probably need an Italy right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2018 at 11:06 PM, merlin51 said:

Few reasons...

1) polycount
More ground detail = good, but you have to pick a balancing point between what really is, and what can be run on a players PC

the delta between what the game is today and what the average player's PC is capable of is measured in light years, not miles. look at those 2.0 pictures ... take guess at what the frame rate was? wanna bet the rate was higher in the 2.0 pics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.