Potential Map Improvements

[SHEF]

So the map needs some love, and I've taken it upon myself to give it a facelift! There are a variety of features I'm looking at, but I want to be sure to a) Appeal to a majority of the players and Include some functional benefit along with any aesthetic benefits. Here are some features I'm exploring, along with questions I need answered.

Front Lines

Everyone loves Xiper's BEGM tool, and the way he does frontlines are very slick. If he won't let us use his techniques directly, I could come up with my own using my college book learnin's. (Dear God, math? IN REAL LIFE?!)

What, if any, modifications would players want to see as far as the depiction of frontlines go?

Topography Layer

There are three basic options here to show topography, each one more difficult than the next:

1. Hill Markers: A symbol on the map for each hill/mountain. We could have three different height brackets, or some other variation to make it a bit more useful. This would be the easiest to implement, but also the least useful.
   
2. Color-scale Height Map:Full color map, where each height is represented by a color (Say sea level starts at violet, and 300m starts at red). This is a bit trickier to implement accurately AND make it look presentable, but it would also be the most accurate in terms of identifying the altitudes and slopes of the terrain. However, it would be the most unrealistic, as WWII commanders did not have access to these types of maps.
   
3. Contour Lines:This would be the most WWII-appropriate option, with thin black lines outlining the contours of different height levels. However, this is the trickiest to implement due to the way our terrain is built. Also, it would only be moderately accurate because we would have to fudge some numbers to make the contour lines look presentable. (You'd be able to identify a general area where there are hills and ridges and steep slopes, but it would still require some eyes on the ground!)
   

Which option would players prefer? What do they hope to get out of having topography available to them? How much would they use the information in game? How much of this is just aesthetics?

Map Tiles

Two options:

1. Make the tiles much nicer-looking, a la Xiper's BEGM tool. His terrain tiles are very nice and blend smoothly.
   
2. A more WWII-style map: False color, as if drawn by a WWII-era cartographer.:Awesome feature? Grainy, black and white layer (like photos taken from a spy plane!) when a player zooms in close enough.
   

Do the players simply want a little facelift to the map tiles, or do they want a drastic change to the way the map is presented? What's on the map now that nobody cares about? What's missing from the map now that players want?

Miscellaneous

1. There have been complaints regarding the map's placement of forests. How critical would it be to fix this?
   
2. There have been complaints regarding the straight-line rivers. Do players want to accurately portray this on the map (as it is now), or fudge it by making the rivers appear to be more serpentine (and less accurate) on the map?
   
3. Are there any useful icons/symbols that should be displayed on the map?
   
4. In Xiper's BEGM tool, there are dashed circles around airfields. Is there any similar feature players want?
   

I'd like to get a solid feel for what the players want, and then I can take that to Gophur and we can see what where we can go from there.

Edited March 21, 2011 by MOTORMOUTH

[MOTORMOUTH]

Link to article.

[Solono]

We get to torture the intern this time? Mwahahaha!

Contour Lines: Yes

False Colour Map Tiles + zoomed grainy: Yes

Not really that concerned about the map since I pretty much exclusively fly now. But anything that indicates elevation is a plus in my book.

Now, if this was about overhauling the UI in general, I'd be spamming the thread but this is a good project too.

[david06]

Which option would players prefer? What do they hope to get out of having topography available to them? How much would they use the information in game? How much of this is just aesthetics?

I would prefer option #2, the color-scale height map. Knowing the elevations, even the small hills is essential to gaining a farther view.. I play axis mostly so I know that Flak 36 gunners and tiger drivers would love this, but there are also the 17pdr as well as the S76 and M10 on the allied side that could really benefit from knowing the elevations as well. As much time as I have spent documenting the large and small-ish hills around towns in a desperate attempt to gain a longer shot, I would use such a height-map immensely.

It would also aid in planning overland travel(driving from a rear town). This doesn't happen as often but I'd like to know elevations so I could drive around the sides of hills, and determine whether I need to take the roads or not.

1. A more WWII-style map: False color, as if drawn by a WWII-era cartographer.:Awesome feature? Grainy, black and white layer (like photos taken from a spy plane!) when a player zooms in close enough.

If this is what I am thinking of, then absolutely.

[SHEF]

This is the sort of false color map (with contour lines) I think we're talking about here. It looks very WWII-ish, to be sure, but I do have some concerns:

• Any contour lines we draw will be 70% aesthetics and 30% helpful, because of the way our terrain is built.
  
• This will call for some new art - which may or may not be feasible.
  
• Will newer players be able to use the map easily from day 1? Having a "satellite image" map that directly corresponds to the actual terrain is very helpful to new players trying to find their way around.
  

[saintj]

Really good news. We are talking about the ingame map right ? If so, I would say that all options on the game map should have some sense of "being there".

Zoom: Different maps, for different zoom. If you zoom in, display a map as WWII commanders would see it. If you zoom out, display map as a general would see it (a table with miniature tanks, inf, planes, ships would be great).

Topography: 3 (when zoom in - not needed in zoom out).

Tiles: 2 - but different in different zoom levels.

[bigrow]

Hill markers would have very little value without contour lines. I wouldn't mind at all if the contours look clunky, but it would be great to be able to toggle them on or off.

[parasit]

TOPOGRAPHY LAYER: 3

as it's the most ww2 like

MAP TILES:

would be good to have an update and also showing the KG/DIV without pulling the cursor on it.

MISCELLANEOUS:

1. it's a nice to have, as the forests are anyhow like swiss cheese

2. depends on the work, i would declare it also as a nice to have

3. YES definitely:

• markers that can be seen in all missions for the OIC. this way he can show his orders to all.
  
• markers that can be saved, for squads and personal e.g. FRU places and good shooting positions.
  
• AI placement would be good to be more visible, also the direction an AI shoots. could be a on/off option
  
• a bar under the name of a town, how much is allied/axis (e.g. the one ingame already
  
• FRU sign (friendly and enemy), so no one has to use the e-ship sign to show his FRU
  
• larger bushes, less open fields, more cover for inf
  

that's all came into my head right away

[calwatta]

I am stoked to hear of such an undertaking!

In terms of bang for your buck I think that a grey (colour)scale is the best way to go.

Although contour lines along with grainy map style would be incredible visually.

I would like more of the maps forrests closer to roads or even perhaps running right through the forrests.. Perhaps moving some golf balls to fill these gaps.

I have no problem with how the rivers are ATM. I do occasionally bring out the Fmb for some ruckas and I dont mind how things are now. more avid boaters likely have more to say.

What an awesome idea keep up the good work! Hopefully in between all the work you do we can get you out on the field! Bon Chance!

[Lexfire]

Definantly contour lines

Possibly put it so instead of the whole map being represented with contour lines all at once make it so if you click on a grid square you can have that map section represent the contour lines...not sure if that idea could take away some system overload instead of having the whole map represented at one time.

[gvonpaul]

Has anyone mentioned contour lines yet...?

These would be so useful in so many ways, game changing almost...

[Sudden]

HC Map Overlays!

Let the HC from each side create and "edit" overlays for the map.

HC could use overlays to identify permanent locations (where defensive lines should be, where offensive lines should be, gun positions, etc). We just do recon missions to get the info.

HC might also markup a battle plan on the fly or in advance for a particular target.

Similar things are being done with GPS units in the real world. For instance, I can download an overlay map of trails created by someone else (not the the maker of the gps I own) and it lets me see simple trail lines projected over the default map that came with my gps.

The gps was never designed to do this but it works (this description is what I'm talking about http://www.gpsfiledepot.com/maps/view/53).

The same concept might work in the game. The strategists might really enjoy this capability. Sort of a dotsie/parasit atg counterpart of the game but map overlays instead of aim points.

[alexmp]

1. I want the maps to be realistic to the world war 2 era maps.

2. I want geographically accurate as possible to the game world.

3. I like to have coordinates on the map like a-z 1-100 (example: A tank is in A-10, I can then route mortar fire in that direction or even give me latitude and longitude).

[Sudden]

1. I want the maps to be realistic to the world war 2 era maps.

2. I want geographically accurate as possible to the game world.

3. I like to have coordinates on the map like a-z 1-100 (example: A tank is in A-10, I can then route mortar fire in that direction or even give me latitude and longitude).

3 would be ideal

[groog]

So the map needs some love, and I've taken it upon myself to give it a facelift! There are a variety of features I'm looking at, but I want to be sure to a) Appeal to a majority of the players and Include some functional benefit along with any aesthetic benefits. Here are some features I'm exploring, along with questions I need answered.

Best of luck!

Front Lines

Everyone loves Xiper's BEGM tool, and the way he does frontlines are very slick. If he won't let us use his techniques directly, I could come up with my own using my college book learnin's. (Dear God, math? IN REAL LIFE?!)

What, if any, modifications would players want to see as far as the depiction of frontlines go?

I really like the present lines and arrows system. Feels like the sketches of where assaults are occuring.

Fill in all area behind german lines in faint red, allies in faint blue. Behind defined as supplied by a factory.

Topography Layer

There are three basic options here to show topography, each one more difficult than the next:

1. Hill Markers: A symbol on the map for each hill/mountain. We could have three different height brackets, or some other variation to make it a bit more useful. This would be the easiest to implement, but also the least useful.

2. Color-scale Height Map:Full color map, where each height is represented by a color (Say sea level starts at violet, and 300m starts at red). This is a bit trickier to implement accurately AND make it look presentable, but it would also be the most accurate in terms of identifying the altitudes and slopes of the terrain. However, it would be the most unrealistic, as WWII commanders did not have access to these types of maps.

3. Contour Lines:This would be the most WWII-appropriate option, with thin black lines outlining the contours of different height levels. However, this is the trickiest to implement due to the way our terrain is built. Also, it would only be moderately accurate because we would have to fudge some numbers to make the contour lines look presentable. (You'd be able to identify a general area where there are hills and ridges and steep slopes, but it would still require some eyes on the ground!)

Which option would players prefer? What do they hope to get out of having topography available to them? How much would they use the information in game? How much of this is just aesthetics?

Like the hill-top representation and contour lines. Dislike the colors. Don't want the Meuse to look like a rainbow.

Contour lines would be best. But if you can't, then just get a grid of markers mapwide with the locations' altitude based on whatever data the world was based on. So this will have little altitude marks every 500m or so regardless of whether it is a hilltop or middle of a slope, or flat fields of geel.

The MOST IMPORTANT thing is knowing where favorable ground lies. So knowing where a hilltop is and where protected valleys run is key. I'm sure any battle commander would love to know if there is a hill to the SW side of town which is perfect for a zone of control.

Map Tiles

Two options:

1. Make the tiles much nicer-looking, a la Xiper's BEGM tool. His terrain tiles are very nice and blend smoothly.

2. A more WWII-style map: False color, as if drawn by a WWII-era cartographer.:Awesome feature? Grainy, black and white layer (like photos taken from a spy plane!) when a player zooms in close enough.

Do the players simply want a little facelift to the map tiles, or do they want a drastic change to the way the map is presented? What's on the map now that nobody cares about? What's missing from the map now that players want?

Drastic changes would be all I care about. Something not so 1999.

Interesting to get:

- WWII country borders. I'm sure axis forces would come out in droves as allies push for the border. Little morale boost for fighting for a region.

- Aerodrome circles. If you guys still have the maps from launch box, then you know what I mean.

Miscellaneous

1. There have been complaints regarding the map's placement of forests. How critical would it be to fix this?

2. There have been complaints regarding the straight-line rivers. Do players want to accurately portray this on the map (as it is now), or fudge it by making the rivers appear to be more serpentine (and less accurate) on the map?

3. Are there any useful icons/symbols that should be displayed on the map?

4. In Xiper's BEGM tool, there are dashed circles around airfields. Is there any similar feature players want?

I'd like to get a solid feel for what the players want, and then I can take that to Gophur and we can see what where we can go from there.

- Forests are pretty random, and not enough of them. Certain regions need far greater density, such as the ardenne, to reasonably fit the real feel. Lack of undergrowth is a problem in forests. Moral imperative to fix Ardenne region, otherwise, not critical.

- Rivers MUST be exact around towns. For external map(s), yes a more "realistic" view with serpentine rivers would be nice. In-game must be retained as is.

- Country Factory states

- Topo maps or hilltop marker maps again!

Good luck with your project!

[groog]

Question: Are you making changes to...

a) in-game maps?

out-of-game maps?

c) moving trees/bushes/towns/terrain objects with the terrain editor?

d) Drawing a new map by hand and scanning it in?

[czpetr]

Topography Layer:

option3 - contour lines

Map tiles:

option 2 - WWII-style map: False color, as if drawn by a WWII-era cartographer

Miscellaneous:

1) fixing welcomed, but not so important

2) not important

3) useful icons/symbols:

- directional arrows - possibility to place arrows to show the direction of contact movement

- private marks - possibility to add and save some private marks to remember various important places

4) not necessary

Generally:

- new terrain engine like Outerra

at least more bumps, creeks, trenches, ditches, more diverse trees, gardens, parks, plantations, cornfields, simply more "european" look of terrain, not the current sci-fi everywhere uniform terrain.

[jon8798]

This is the sort of false color map (with contour lines) I think we're talking about here. It looks very WWII-ish, to be sure, but I do have some concerns:

• Any contour lines we draw will be 70% aesthetics and 30% helpful, because of the way our terrain is built.

• This will call for some new art - which may or may not be feasible.

• Will newer players be able to use the map easily from day 1? Having a "satellite image" map that directly corresponds to the actual terrain is very helpful to new players trying to find their way around.

This is perfect. It's a little harder for a new player, but not much. Kids nowadays play things like Operation Flashpoint which has topographical maps more complex than this.

30% helpful is better than nothing. As long as it lets me see where the high ground is overlooking a position or hidden ground that lets me get past it then I'm happy.

[macg23]

Personally I like the contour lines map, the more similar to a WWII-era map (visually) the better IMO.

I like the idea where this contour map is a close up layer - and once you pull further back the map jumps to a more strategic map, with more emphasis on false colours for forested area, water, etc. to give a general overview of local terrain. This would be the ideal way to show larger scale map information.

TBH, I have no complaints about the forest placement... the only terrain factor I'd like to see changed is to make the inf avatar move slower when running through the hedges... sooooo not realistic at the moment :-P

No complaints about rivers... the only times I see rivers being a major factor is when you're trying to get into a town by getting across the thing. Maybe have shallow ford areas, makes it hard for the FMB's maybe, but TBH they usually end up as anti-air bridge def anyway... or introduce player made poontang, err... -pontoon- bridges...

Will have a think about the other points...

[Unhocky]

Frontlines - Anything you can do would be cool. Maybe also have an explicit depiction of no-man's land towns.

Topography layer - Perfer option 3 but realize how much of a headache that could turn into. As a quick fix just go get something in... Option 1 would work. Topo information would help in the placement of quick ATG lines on just started AOs. I know the ground around alot of towns... but not all... especially those that don't see much action. Center of the map is very familiar ground... fringes not so much.

Misc - Don't do anything to the straight-line rivers on the map unless you plan to change the rivers in the game world. The map MUST correspond as close as possible to the world we're in. Would rather have accurate maps than pretty maps.

[david06]

Would rather have accurate maps than pretty maps.

Yes this is my attitude as well. I don't care if the contour lines look ugly and blocky, and I don't care if they get prettied up a little as long it's not anything that would mislead the player.

[Sudden]

Here's a period grid style map and another local map.

Looks awful busy to me. I do like the grid idea though

[Sudden]

Period German map symbols

[groog]

Now if you want to get way too realistic, here is a project for you...

Make the map fold. Just for visual effect, but when someone spawns and opens a map, they fold it to show the present region.

[gunnie]

Regarding frontlines, I wouldn't mind seeing more "fluidity" represented. Right now, the frontlines are tied to cities so it always seems like the front is very jagged--it's like connect the dots with the cities. What I'd like to see more of, is more of a generalized zone that also incorporated the area around cities, maybe by adding FBs in addition to the cities that determine where the frontline is located. In my mind it'd just help break down the front a little and make it more of a zone of control rather than who owns the city.

Topography:

I'm going to go with option 1. While I know of other players whom like to be as precise as possible when it comes to the terrain and elevations, as a common infantryman, I need very little in this respect. Something as simple as a small cross with some sort of hill identification would be helpful, especially when referencing it for other players for artillery strikes or reinforcements. What kind of hill ID? It doesn't need to be fancy, just something as easy as "Hill 20". Again, speaking as a common grunt, I don't need elevation brackets or other fancy gizmos for topography--leave me with my rifle and binoculars and I'll be good .

Map tiles:

I would love option 2. I'm always a fan of more immersive techniques like this. The more realistic, the better IMO. I don't know if I'm about to bite the hand that feeds me but I would love to see a map animation. What if I saw my trooper's hands pull out said authentic map and actually unfold it in front of me before zooming in like what we have now? That would be pretty neat.

I really just think a little face lift is in order. Functionally, I think the map is fine and does exactly what it's supposed to do--get you from Point A to Point B.

Misc:

1. There have been complaints regarding the map's placement of forests. How critical would it be to fix this?

Not important.

2. There have been complaints regarding the straight-line rivers. Do players want to accurately portray this on the map (as it is now), or fudge it by making the rivers appear to be more serpentine (and less accurate) on the map?

Leave it the way it is for now in my opinion.

3. Are there any useful icons/symbols that should be displayed on the map?

I wouldn't mind some brigade movement arrows representing past attacks and progress made. It's very much like the attack arrows we have now only these would be behind the frontlines and really only show the past paths of attacks or brigade movements. Look here for an example with the arrows detailing some Allied offensives: http://www.history.army.mil/brochures/romar/map1.JPG. Look at Anzio in the west. The arrows there show the initial invasion and then a push north towards Velletri. I like having that immediate attack history as it clearly shows what kind of momentium the attacks are achieving. If there's four or more 'trailing arrows' within 24 hours, I'd know that attack was rolling through dominating enemy territory. On the other hand, if there was only one or none, I'd know that attack has either stalled, died out or is experiencing heavy resistance. I think that kind of feature would be rather handy.

4. In Xiper's BEGM tool, there are dashed circles around airfields. Is there any similar feature players want?

Would a circle or an arc be appropriate over RDP factory towns? Just something to say to the new bombers out there "Hey come bomb me! I'm not like the other cities!" Edited March 22, 2011 by gunnie