Jump to content
Welcome to the virtual battlefield, Guest!

World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

ZEBBEEE

TOP 10 towns that need architectural re-work?

Recommended Posts

tater

Different buildings would be nice, but someone would have to make them, then place them. Not sure if a copy/paste modality is possible, where building_copy2 points at a different texture could be done to create variability.

In the meantime, the ability to use what they already have to represent the terrain is certainly possible, even minus the immersive cues as to location.

Wiltz:

210.jpg

One obvious note is that we have linear roads, instead of curved ones, which makes for entirely different sight lines in town. The brushlines are interesting—and while passable, not the sort of thing you would run down the middle of.

Buildings actually on the terrain (meaning on slopes) are not seemingly a thing in ww2ol? That alone would be a big improvement in some places.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DOC
14 minutes ago, tater said:

Buildings actually on the terrain (meaning on slopes) are not seemingly a thing in ww2ol? That alone would be a big improvement in some places.

 

There was an issue in the terrain world builder code that made it so that while buildings on a slope were desirable, they always became buggy and unreliable and started to do strange stuff. There was a month where (this is like eon's ago) I had to go back and repair (flatten) all building footprints after an update release that wrecked the entire (as it was then) world with buildings floating all over the place, underground, above ground, in the air, half in and half out ... it was like the Philadelphia Experiment. I don't know if that is still an issue for the current crew, but it probably is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TR6AL

Buildings can be put on slopes if it has an extended "basement" to allow it to sit level . We have a couple of those but not many .  I just put a building on a slight slope just east of Dinant if you want to see what it looks like . I had to move it a couple of time to get it to sit reasonably level ( still not) .  There doesn't seem to be any functional oddities with slopes but it is easier to remove slope than to fix building  :)

 Roads are pre-designed  and there is nothing I can do atm to change that . I am looking at fixing a few tiles to make road changes but it will not be wholesale across the map . 

I can change buildings that are already there if I replace the model , keep the same footprint and give it the name of the model I'm replacing . We do that now with other things  as we update/upgrade them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fidd
4 minutes ago, TR6AL said:

Buildings can be put on slopes if it has an extended "basement" to allow it to sit level . We have a couple of those but not many .  I just put a building on a slight slope just east of Dinant if you want to see what it looks like . I had to move it a couple of time to get it to sit reasonably level ( still not) .  There doesn't seem to be any functional oddities with slopes but it is easier to remove slope than to fix building  :)

 Roads are pre-designed  and there is nothing I can do atm to change that . I am looking at fixing a few tiles to make road changes but it will not be wholesale across the map . 

I can change buildings that are already there if I replace the model , keep the same footprint and give it the name of the model I'm replacing . We do that now with other things  as we update/upgrade them.

What we really need is to be able to list all the towns by nationality into a data-base, and then "test for nationality" before the appropriate building is selected to place there, so that whenever a building is rendered, the "test for nationality" occurs before this and renders the nation-specific building architecture for that building type position. Either that, or achieve the same result by different means, sort of a batch-file transition so that when you're "in" a town of a certain nationality, all of a particular building type are loaded in a nation-specific fashion. We have move away from "Legoville, Texas", and start using some period architecture and an approximation of the terrain appearance in the areas portrayed. I've already volunteered before to collate wartime images from the area/although anyone with google could do it I suspect.

Share this post


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

There was an issue in the terrain world builder code that made it so that while buildings on a slope were desirable, they always became buggy and unreliable and started to do strange stuff. There was a month where (this is like eon's ago) I had to go back and repair (flatten) all building footprints after an update release that wrecked the entire (as it was then) world with buildings floating all over the place, underground, above ground, in the air, half in and half out ... it was like the Philadelphia Experiment. I don't know if that is still an issue for the current crew, but it probably is.

Would it be possible to have one "town footprint" - sort of cobbled road area - with slopes to conform to the terrain but allow movement into town - and then place all the buildings above ground but on that town-footprint. That way you'd on;y have one object per town that might be problematical instead of 1 per slope building IYSWIM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DOC
13 minutes ago, TR6AL said:

Buildings can be put on slopes if it has an extended "basement" to allow it to sit level . We have a couple of those but not many .  I just put a building on a slight slope just east of Dinant if you want to see what it looks like . I had to move it a couple of time to get it to sit reasonably level ( still not) .  There doesn't seem to be any functional oddities with slopes but it is easier to remove slope than to fix building  :)

 Roads are pre-designed  and there is nothing I can do atm to change that . I am looking at fixing a few tiles to make road changes but it will not be wholesale across the map . 

I can change buildings that are already there if I replace the model , keep the same footprint and give it the name of the model I'm replacing . We do that now with other things  as we update/upgrade them.

Yes we developed the "trapezoid basement footprint" to make slope placement possible, but it gets a but funky as the slope steepens. On mild slopes it works ok. Then came the "philadelphia experiment" release and time/manpower constraints at the time saw me tasked with fixing it by leveling all building footprints. Never got back from there but this was a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwilly
Quote

Roads are pre-designed  and there is nothing I can do atm to change that . 

Have you experimented yet with constructing an all-new tile to replace an existing tile in the tileset?

The points of doing so, in my imagination anyway, would be to add to the road(s), and (for shoreline tiles) add shoreline features like "beach" or "rocks".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwilly

How many tiles are in the existing tileset, and what's the upper limit on that number? Is there room to create ~ 30 more tiles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tater
26 minutes ago, TR6AL said:

but it is easier to remove slope than to fix building

Can "removing the slope" mean making a flat spot (like a terrace) on a slope? Hill, then a flat spot for house, then hill again?

That's entirely reasonable, my own house is like that, indeed, the upslop side of my house is actually underground with naught but a clerestory window facing the mountains above grade (you can walk onto my roof, lol).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tater

Bottom line is that I think given just the buildings you have, there could be some pretty realistic townscapes made. The slop thing is interesting because you can see in some pics how 2 buildings can be the same height (say 3 floors), but one looks right over the other because they are hill towns.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwilly

In reading about other uses of Creator...mostly in military and industrial simulations...I've seen a description of what sounded like a world built with a primary tile-size, plus a secondary tile-size that was a sub-multiple of the primary size. It looked from what they were able to do...and I'm winging these specific numbers just to illustrate the point, because I had no way to measure...as if they had say an 800 meter primary tile, and a 50 meter secondary tile. Thus there would be 256 secondary tiles filling the terrain space that otherwise would be filled by one 800 meter tile.

The point of this in the example I saw was to build a model of rough terrain. The point here would be to be able to build a topographically much much rougher-terrain model of locales like the northern and eastern parts of the area over which the Battle of the Bulge fighting occurred.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TR6AL
7 minutes ago, jwilly said:

Have you experimented yet with constructing an all-new tile to replace an existing tile in the tileset?

The points of doing so, in my imagination anyway, would be to add to the road(s), and (for shoreline tiles) add shoreline features like "beach" or "rocks".

I have been learning to work with the editor program but can only modify them atm .. I have introduced a coupld and another one will be in the next update. Starting from scratch  I hope is in my future but have to stick with what I know/can do atm

We already have beaches (knokke) and I am looking at adding more with rocks on my todo list for "soon" .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TR6AL
10 minutes ago, jwilly said:

How many tiles are in the existing tileset, and what's the upper limit on that number? Is there room to create ~ 30 more tiles?

Without counting , there are around 100 tiles and i can add (as far as I know) as many as I want . Problem is time and expertise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TR6AL
7 minutes ago, tater said:

Can "removing the slope" mean making a flat spot (like a terrace) on a slope? Hill, then a flat spot for house, then hill again?

That's entirely reasonable, my own house is like that, indeed, the upslop side of my house is actually underground with naught but a clerestory window facing the mountains above grade (you can walk onto my roof, lol).

The way the game engine operates , no this can't be done unless i modify the buildings or make special ledges in the terrain tile , but i would have to experiment with that to see if feasible. That's where the extended "basement " or base comes in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TR6AL
7 minutes ago, jwilly said:

In reading about other uses of Creator...mostly in military and industrial simulations...I've seen a description of what sounded like a world built with a primary tile-size, plus a secondary tile-size that was a sub-multiple of the primary size. It looked from what they were able to do...and I'm winging these specific numbers just to illustrate the point, because I had no way to measure...as if they had say an 800 meter primary tile, and a 50 meter secondary tile. Thus there would be 256 secondary tiles filling the terrain space that otherwise would be filled by one 800 meter tile.

The point of this in the example I saw was to build a model of rough terrain. The point here would be to be able to build a topographically much much rougher-terrain model of locales like the northern and eastern parts of the area over which the Battle of the Bulge fighting occurred.

Our setup is an older engine and the main cells are 256 smaller cells of 800 msq . There has been no mention of going smaller with this setup . Would be nice to go smaller .. nice detail then .

Edited by TR6AL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DOC
15 minutes ago, tater said:

Can "removing the slope" mean making a flat spot (like a terrace) on a slope? Hill, then a flat spot for house, then hill again?

That's entirely reasonable, my own house is like that, indeed, the upslop side of my house is actually underground with naught but a clerestory window facing the mountains above grade (you can walk onto my roof, lol).

Well speaking from how the terrain was originally created, which as far as I know has not changed at the base level ... the tiles are only adjustable for slope as a square tile divided into 8 "pizza slices" where you can raise or lower the center point, or any of the edge points of each triangular slice of pizza. A buildings footprint is magnitudes smaller than that as each tile is 800 x 800 meters. So a slice has a 200 meter base line between points you can adjust as a single 200 meter slope. Each base of that triangular slice then runs to a point at the center of the square which you can raise or lower.

So what you are suggesting is somewhat more difficult than you might imagine, because that means going under the terrain zero level, which in my day was not possible. We did in a number of instances (the Dinant Castle for example) make a building object that was above the terrain zero level, and mimicked tunnels by having them inside the base "terrain" that was actually not the terrain, but a 3d artifact placed onto the terrain that made you think you were "embedded" such as would be the case with terracing.

Now, extrapolating what I know, and assuming the basics haven't changed a lot ... one could take an octet (basic 800 x 800 terrain tile) and design an object that was the entire tile, with embedded "terrace" footprints within it. Such as the really large cities that have those urban tiles alongside the river with railway tunnels under the roadway above it (Antwerp for example) have done ... but that would place a need on the designer to create something that would have to mesh well within more random applications whereas in those really large city tiles that did this the application was much more specific.

Not impossible, but very time consuming to get there I'm going to imagine, especially as TR6AL is probably the only guy on this and not full time AFAIK.

Edited by DOC
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tater
13 minutes ago, DOC said:

Well speaking from how the terrain was originally created, which as far as I know has not changed at the base level ... the tiles are only adjustable for slope as a square tile divided into 8 "pizza slices" where you can raise or lower the center point, or any of the edge points of each triangular slice of pizza. A buildings footprint is magnitudes smaller than that as each tile is 800 x 800 meters. So a slice has a 200 meter base line between points you can adjust as a single 200 meter slope. Each base of that triangular slice then runs to a point at the center of the square which you can raise or lower.

So what you are suggesting is somewhat more difficult than you might imagine.

Gotcha. So the slope is the slope, and the building would need some sort of sloped bit (the basement) configured to fit the slope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DOC
36 minutes ago, tater said:

Gotcha. So the slope is the slope, and the building would need some sort of sloped bit (the basement) configured to fit the slope.

Basically. Depending on the slope, to avoid it looking stupid in many examples, requires much bigger building footprints, as a small building with a large offset "foot" to accomodate a slope that is less than extremely gentle in angle looks silly when the "foot" at the low end of the slope is relatively large compared to the building itself. So that is better served by a larger building but this conspires against you because you have to cater to the base fact that a flat surface (even at an angle the surface itself is flat in undulation) becomes more obvious the larger the area it covers. You need small undulations. The buildings won't fix to a 3d "undulations" object you place on the terrain to make it not perfectly flat ( to cover the no undulations aspect, even if the surface is a slope) so they would still sit on the terrain, and have to "poke up" through your undulations object for their visible attributes as you the viewer would perceive them.  Thus ... there will be many instances where the slope isn't right unless you have a gigantic number of options regarding which building object you choose to place on any given slope, in concert with it's undulations object that is making the terrain look terraced and upon which you subsequently place the buildings that must now be made to poke through it.

The basement "foot" part was in our original approach, a coded part that adapted to the terrain. It had a universal look and appearance because it simply "filled in" the gap under a building if that building sat "sticking out" from the terrain on a slope, which it would given the building was always level (it would look wrong if it wasn't because floors are not sloped, and doors and windows remain square to the horizon) and the high end sat on the terrain making the low end jut out over the terrain. If the slope was 20 degrees it made a "foot" that accommodated that in the coded render portion of the process. The building itself had no actual foot on it, if placed on flat ground that was level there would be no foot. If the slope was 10 degrees, it did the same, created a foot that accommodated the gap. 

Making that foot "look like terrain undulation" rather than a concrete ramp ... well I don't know, I would say not easy given the huge range of configurations you'd have to make it look right in ... and this is probably still something that will take a fairly dedicated effort to solve. I will add that the "foot" basement/ramp thing went belly up on us at one point, and that's why we stopped using it and I just made town footprints flat and level.

Obviously it's working again as a result of what I am gleaning from TR6AL so maybe they can come up with something as the suggestions here are alluding to.

Edited by DOC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TR6AL

Lol @DOC I like the way you explained that in such simple terms :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B2K
24 minutes ago, TR6AL said:

Lol @DOC I like the way you explained that in such simple terms :D

that's his years of forum activity showing through... I do miss old grumpy DOC though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DOC
14 minutes ago, B2K said:

that's his years of forum activity showing through... I do miss old grumpy DOC though.

Was never grumpy. You were referring to blunt Doc. Yeah ... when I'm doing stand up he can still be found though. Grumpy does exist, but you've never seen him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delems

Oh, in Couvin, the Virex and Rocroi CPs should be swapped.

Minor, but makes for consistency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B2K
Just now, DOC said:

Was never grumpy. You were referring to blunt Doc. Yeah ... when I'm doing stand up he can still be found though. Grumpy does exist, but you've never seen him.

well blunt DOC then - he was entertaining 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DOC

Happy place moderates have taken the blunt out of the sharp end of our comedy. It took the sharp away too, so well done there. Bloody solidbodilywaste for brains be nice copulatetards have ruined everything.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delems

Oh, forgot another one.

How can Lier not link to Ant S?  It is obviously S of town.

And closer to Ant S than Ant C.  Current link makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...