We need maps like this....

[Abalieno]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna
BTW we already provide a terrain popup tool when you right click on the map. This shows the effects of the current location on movement, and on direct and area fire. See screen dump below. So what more details do you want to see? ANd when do you want them displayed - ie what triggers their display?

Status icons should appear when there's a status affecting the unit. It's not a rule change, it's an UI change. So instead of right clicking on the location under the unit to see what kind of terrain it sits on you also have an icon on the sidebar that shows the terrain type the unit is on and corresponding values if you put the mouse pointer over it. It changes absolutely nothing, but when you select a unit you see directly how the terrain affects it. And only pertinent info, so you don't show motorized % if you are selecting an infantry unit.

This would be a very minimal improvement that helps just the presentation, but it should be extended to all other status that may affect a unit. A status icon should be displayed every time there's an intervening variable applied to the game rules for that unit. For example, not only you would gain a defense bonus if you are in a village (20% to hit), but I guess the bonus should increase if I dig the unit instead of just stationing it in the village, right? And maybe the dig bonus increases over time (no idea)? If it is so you don't just display the terrain type icon, but also the dig icon. So two icons each describing a condition.

The game already shows the type of terrain the unit is on (bottom of the gen tab on the sidebar). What I suggest is to convert that text into an icon, that shows values if you put the mouse pointer over it, along with as many icons are needed to represent all possible status that may affect an unit. If an unit is being bombarded and the rules make this translate with a movement handicap because you are under fire, then you add a "suppressed" icon and moving the mouse pointer over it you see how it is affecting your unit.

I don't know if COTA models that, I'm just making examples of possible status as the terrain is just one variable and there should be a status icon for all the intervening variables, not just the terrain. And they should only appear when they are active on the unit.

ORIGINAL: RayWolfe
Not sure.
A commander IRL does not have a table of ground effects. He DOES guess that dug-in in town has a positive effect. His knowledge of that comes from his training. You may be correct in that new players need more/better training.

But this IS a game. The "duty" is to have game rules simulate as close as possible a real situation, so that it makes sense and is immersive.

At the end the game is programmed with math, reacts to math. You may think something is affecting the unit, when instead the game isn't modeling it at all (for example: the sound detection discussed in the other thread). This doesn't make a better game, just makes it more confusing because you don't understand to what exactly your units are reacting to.

You can feel as a real commander when those rules simulate closely the real thing, not when the rules are so obscure that you are never sure what does what. The difference between a noob and a veteran player is that the veteran player KNOWS how the game works. Down to the numbers.

The real difference is:
- Rules are opaque because the UI doesn't present them well.
- Rules still exist, but you have to dig them from the manual and then memorize them.

So the difference is not that the veteran player doesn't "see" the math below the game. The veteran player knows them very well because he memorized them and has experience of how the game reacts (including behaviors that aren't intuitive).

Status icons wouldn't change the way a veteran plays, only the way a noob plays because he would see right away what the game is modeling and how to play it effectively. It would help closing that gap, not denaturalize the wargame feel.

And even in that case: use still status icons but instead of exact numbers on the tooltip you just show text strings describing the status without giving exact numbers.

[RayWolfe]

ORIGINAL: HRose
But this IS a game. The "duty" is to have game rules simulate as close as possible a real situation, so that it makes sense and is immersive.

And it does!
The rules are there in the game and also listed in the game manual. I submit that the very last thing we want is the SSG Battlefront (good as it is) type game where it is all spelled out with the odds table and a graphical depiction of a die. Good game but different.
Very early in your training you should discover that dug-in is better than not; villages are better than clear; firing down on your eneny is better than attacking upwards. That I submit is the emersion, not a set of tables. Your milage may vary.
Cheers
Ray

[FredSanford3]

Yes! nicdain, you read my mind. I'm an engineer myself, and have had occasion to work alongside cartographers/geographers and I think that the data set already used in current maps is amenable to rendering in the pseudo-3D look you posted as an example. As Arjuna posted, they are heading towards GIS-based data. I said 'pseudo-3D', because I wouldn't suggest actual zoom/tilt/pan/etc. camera control, it would be a needless expense and distraction in this game. Colorize that baby, put on the contours that can be toggled, and ground textures for the varying terrain and the 'wow' factor, esp. to the bulk of casual wargamers, will go way up. I understand the 'throwback look' appeal of using conventional topo maps, but in the end the game market is driven by a certain level of expectation graphically.

ORIGINAL: nicdain

Personally I find COTA maps OK. Maybe because I work with maps and I am used to this layout.

Anyway, if I could improve their look, I could suggest a "hillshade" effect (like the one in the attached figure) which enhance the appearance of landscape, with the elevation ranges colors superimposed.

An additional helpful feature (with the ability to turn it on or off) could be contour lines with an variable interval depending on the scale of visualization.

[FredSanford3]

Oh, one quickie - how feasible would it be to allow the ScenMaker's elevation and movement displays to be shown (as say a tool toggle) in the main game? 

[Temple]

ORIGINAL: jmlima

ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro

The current maps provided are very close to real military style maps. When I'm playing super commander, that is what I want in my CP. If I'm playing a game of an aviator on green windowpane (a type of acid), I would welcome the 3d map suggestion. This is the only operational game that I know of with real maps-no need to downgrade this system.

Ai,Ai.

Besides, adding 3d maps would only add further PC requirements, would not enhance at all the wargaming experience, and would turn this engine into some sort of miniatures game... (1 less costumer here)

Absolutely agree with this. Please don't make it "pretty" and sacrifice the ability to run the game on lower spec computers.

[FredSanford3]

I may be wrong, but I believe that the map similar to what nicdain posted wouldn't be a big deal, and a high end graphics card isn't required, as it's simply a static picture that the action is superimposed on. If we were talking about full camera controls, tilt, pan, zoom, then you are getting into hardware issues. But once again, I'm not an expert on that. What I'm getting at is that the 3D aspect that matters to the game is already there.

But really, I'm ok with the maps pretty much as is, with the possible exception of a contour line toggle to help pick out the sometimes subtle change in shade. If you want to get fancy, look at the movement table and elevation table plots for the maps in the map drawing editor - being able to toggle those in the game would be informative.

[06 Maestro]

The 3 available map mods may suite your eye better than the vanilla map. I usually use the "Back to Paper", but use the others sometimes. With some practice, this map system is not all that difficult, but there are some scenario's, like Pindos Bases, where is is a little tricky to chose the best route. I agree that the contour lines are sometimes difficult to discern at a glance, but in some areas, that too is realistic.

Although some may view it as a chore, a thorough map recon is a RL task which must be performed. In many of the CotA scenario's, it is a very good idea to perform that same action. If the terrain is really tough, then some sort of map overlay is very helpful. Sometime ago, a built in overlay system was discussed and added to the wish list. As it is, you need to copy the map and use a drawing tool to make your overlay. If you do this, the amount of time you spend on terrain analysis during the game will be drastically reduced.

The realistic action of the AA engine, coupled with the orders delay, make prior planning a much more important part of the game than any other game I know of. For some of the scenario's, it should be viewed as part of the overall game. Some of you old solders out there may recall the 6 P's; "prior planning prevents piss poor performance". It works, unless of course, your opponent is just too good.

[Arjuna]

Some of you old solders out there may recall the 6 P's; "prior planning prevents piss poor performance". It works, unless of course, your opponent is just too good.

Old soldiers in Australia refer to it as the 7 P's - ie prior preparation and planning prevent piss poor performance. [:)]

[06 Maestro]

The "7 P's"? I don't know, that's getting a little too complicated.

[Arjuna]

No way...I can see the headlines now...."aussies pip yanks at post with extra 'P'!"[;)]

[06 Maestro]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

No way...I can see the headlines now...."aussies pip yanks at post with extra 'P'!"[;)]

[:D] Well, "the devils in the details"; so who knows.

[chrisol]

There's always Google Earth for elevations (seriously, I think it's very helpful)
Chris

[Arjuna]

Yes I like Google Earth's style. The ability to "fly through" the area is great in gaining an appreciation of the terrain. I see any 3D map interface as an adjunct to a top down 2D interface not a replacement. That way we could have our cake and eat it too.

[FredSanford3]

I like that thinking. After all, the current maps are by no means broken, so there's no reason to get rid of it. My main argument for some 3D and any visual eye candy is that that is what the bulk of casual gamers respond to. Selling more copies would be a good thing.

But how about this for a wish-list feature: Can there be a way to tack a route calculator routine to the path tools and display pertinent data like so:

[Arjuna]

We store all that data except the est fatigue accrual in our routes at the moment. So yes that would be do-able. The only issue really is then making the routes selectable so that when your right click on them the popup appears. Or would you prefer that this type of info popup automatically when a unit is selected. I would be worried by that considering the current ability to use the shift down arrow to select subordinates. You would then end up with a plethora of these data displays pasted over propably the same area of the map....mmm...I'll think on that one.
 
Oh one option would be to include this data popup automatically when you use the pathing tools, as you will only ever have one displayed at any time.

[Arjuna]

TT3453 - UI - Route Data Popup - Add right click popup to display key data on selected route

[FredSanford3]

I was thinking of the pathing tool myself. You raise good points about the clutter factor, but if it were restricted to the Unit Pathing tool, then a player would have to actively want that information to use that tool.

If a player were contemplating a move, I would think he'd be most interested in checking the unit(s) with the farthest/most difficult route, so just occasional spot checks would be good.

Too bad about the fatigue accural- I imaging that forecasting that could be complicated, though just a rough # based upon march time would be informative, and caveat emptor to how the player chooses to interpret that based upon the particular circumstance.

[Arjuna]

If it is done at the user's request - ie via the pathing tool - then we can easily afford the time to calc the fatigue accrual as the user is focused on getting information rather than play progressing as fast as possible. So yes it could be done.

[Rasputitsa]

I am a little late to this discussion, but support the comment that the 'Airborne Assault' series has the best and most realistic maps so far available. As for calculating paths and fatigue, that wasn't available in 1939-45. Therefore, the ability to command depended on understanding maps and estimating the progress units could reasonably achieve, whilst having a plan that could work when things went wrong (the plan never survives first contact - etc.). By all means add anything that will widen the appeal of the games, but leave a realistic system which can turn off any unwanted 'help' features. [:)]