Slovenia and WW2 - Days of the partisans

[Zorchi]

Hello all. Great game.



I decided to make a map of a region that I live in (SE-Slovenia (or Dolenjska region as its called)). It was known as an important centre of partisan forces. I always wanted to make something like this, but never knew how or what tools to use...until this game came along.

1.
Currently it would be very hard to do a very long scenario of a whole front...(todays PC not powerful enough as it was said in other threads) But this doesnt hold true for resistance fighting. All the resistance units in the area of interest that did the fighting had a combined power of a normal divison (or two at best). They were fixed and sticked to their area of operations and were not shifted around to different fronts for the whole period of the war(with some minor deviations from that statement but i dont intend to delve into that). I was thinking this would allow for simultaing a large time periods of at least a month to a few years. Something currently undone in this engine. Enemy units saw more dynamics but still i think any problems could be successfully tackled over longer timeframes (at leat a month). I would put objective points all over the map. Points of each objective would be given relatively to the amount of time each point was held by the partisan forces during the time frame of scenario.
For partisan forces i intend to reuse Greek pertisans estabs and rename them accordingly... Not the best solution but for the first version it will do. Axis estabs are ok and suffice. But i dont know what to use for local collaborationist forces. Ill dwell on that until i make the terrain map and start the scenario editor.

Is the current game engine capable of very long time frames?
How does the doctrine thats currently implemented allow for partisan figthing?
Also as it is, currently the tackticks are lacking(ambush and such), but this will be amended up to a point in the Battles of the Bulge i suppose.

2.
I noticed in the mapmaker, that i cannot set a map thats larger than 50x50km. The minimum map that would allow me to do this scenario is 53x50km. Because of the restriction I rescaled that into 50x50km. Small distortion but not too big.

Is there any possbibility to circumvent the 50x50km map restriction?

3.
When i was creating a stitched map from google maps i didnt pay to much attention to the complexity of the terrain but when i looked at my bitmap underlay for the first time in the map maker i nearly lost my zeal. Huge map with innumerable complex contours.

Do you have any good starting suggestions as to how best tackle such a map?

And on another note. Since the recent extraordinary rise of all that map providers for GPS tracking equpment, do you have any plans to write an import tool, that would take the chosen layers and just automatically build the game terrain map.

For instance choose contour, vegetation and water layers in the map import tool and the map maker would create the terrain atomatically. You would just need to create roads and such man made terrain features, that were not the same 60 years ago.

Is or was this even considered and is maybe planned for any future installment?

Im just asking because i know, that before i have my terrain map made, weeks or months will pass. And this duplication of work would be easily spared if such a tool would be present. Id just buy a supported gps providers map databases. 40EUR for a topological map spent would save me huge amount of money in time and labor for me to manually try to recreate terrain from scratch. Also development of games for you would be easier too since there is no more that tedious terrain mapping and could focus on more content. Dont understand me wrong... great game, just wish there was an easier way of creating/importing terrain features so i could delve into scenario and OOB right away.

[Arjuna]

Zorchi,
 
Re Length of Game. In theory the game should handle long time frames, though this has never been tested. You will be the first. [:)]
 
Re Map Import of GIS data. No the current MapMaker does not support that. To be able to do so would require a complete rewrite of the map data classes. Thi is no small undertaking. At least six months of full time work, maybe twelve when you include the need to overhaul the MapMaker, ScenMaker and Game map GUI. Yes it would be good and yes it is on the wish list. But realistically it ain't going to happen any time soon unless the military or someone else is willing to fund it.
 
Re MapSize. In theory we can make the maps any size we like. However, the route finding on large complex maps would grind the game to a halt. No one wants to wait  while the game locks up determining routes for the AI. So we limit it to what we belive allows for a reasonable processing time - hence the 50km x 50km. As processing power increases, we should be able to increase the size. But for now the 50 x 50 stands.
 
Re Best Approach. With rugged terrain like you have in Yugoslavia and Greece, it's best to start with the contours and add the terrain features later. Either work from the bottom up or the top down and finish off each layer before starting the next. Remember that the contours work like a layer cake - one on top of the other.
 
Good luck.

[Zorchi]

I thought making an import tool was very time consuming too...just poked in that direction to see if it was on the table in the foreseable future.

What kind of effort will it take to make CoTA map compatible with your next game installment BFTB? Will it suffice to just simply load the map into BFTB mapmaker and redoing its calculations... I saw in BFTB forum it will be easy to run maps from CoTA in BFTB...just how easy will that be?

Currently on that map i have a height of as low as 160m up to 1250m. How do i slice that into 15. Is it better to put the base height to say 500 and have more diverse 'sharp' terrain, or leave it as it is whereupon 70m per contour will smooth the terrain somewhat? First option is worse for me because that would be so error prone as hell, because that would mean drawing contours as i see fit and not what map says. Im just going with the second option for now... Will it be possible in the BFTB mapmaker to use more elevation levels?

Thx for the help and answers. I very appreciate it.

[Arjuna]

Zorchi,
 
I would recommend option 2 as well. What are the contour intervals on your source map? If for example they are at 30m then you might consider using 90m elevations - ie every third contour. That way you can accurately follow the contours provided, albeit every third one.
 
For BFTB we will be having the same number of altitude layers.

[simovitch]

ORIGINAL: Zorchi
What kind of effort will it take to make CoTA map compatible with your next game installment BFTB? Will it suffice to just simply load the map into BFTB mapmaker and redoing its calculations... I saw in BFTB forum it will be easy to run maps from CoTA in BFTB...just how easy will that be?

As easy as opening it up with the BFTB mapmaker. We created the BFTB maps with the COTA mapmaker.

[Zorchi]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Zorchi,

I would recommend option 2 as well. What are the contour intervals on your source map? If for example they are at 30m then you might consider using 90m elevations - ie every third contour. That way you can accurately follow the contours provided, albeit every third one.

For BFTB we will be having the same number of altitude layers.

Regarding map
Map is 50x50km (actually 53x50 squezzed into 50x50) with 20m per contour. I made scale of the bitmap equivalent to the mapmaker standard. Google topo max zoom has scale 3m/pixel. I rescaled that to 4m/pix.

I decided to use 300m base and 60m per contour. But i feel i am losing to much elevation info with 300m base (See image below. With the current contour scheme poorly depicted narrowing of Krka valley. Its the most representative of my bad contour choice.). Iam gona scrape what i have done up to this point and start anew. Lessons learned used in the new attempt.

I am gona not raise from 160m, but lower base elevation to 140m. Then i am gona set elevation per contour to 80m. This will allow me to squeeze 2 contours in where there were none before. I think this choice is the right one now. If sharpnesw of the terrain is gonna suffer somewhat as the result (not reaching the elevation of the next contour but still very hilly terrain with changing elevation in that 80m interval), i am just gona add contour to the highest line of the pack in that interval so some sharpnes is preserved.


Simovitch,

Its good to hear maps will be easily loaded into BFTB mapmaker.

P.s.

Oh and progress is predictably painstakingly slow. And I must admit my opinion about 15contours limit in mapmaker has drastically changed At this point I DON'T want to hear anything about more contours in the mapmaker. It would just double all the effort to produce a map. It will take me a month with the current tempo (with very limited time aloted to this little project of mine...you know everyday (necessary and obligatory) activities have priority sadly).
But worry not I am slowly marching forwards...

[Prince of Eckmühl]

Zorchi,

I'm certainly no expert on this, but I've come to the conclusion that it's easier to do the lowest level, first, and then add one altitude layer at a time, bottom to top.

Looking at your map, it would appear that most of the layers will require only two large polygons to be drawn, one on each side of the river, the obvious exceptions being the several "islands" on the Northern half.

Once a contour is completed, finish the polygon with corner points drawn all the way back to the map edge/corners, unless of course you're drawing an island.

Then go to work on the next level, working your way up and back toward the corresponding map edge.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Zorchi]

Below is a few days work (around 2 hours per day)...

Notice the large 1st contour. Hate that. When I was making it, it was a pain.. It seemed no end to that one. I suppose i should look at this more like an adventure... You never know where a contour can take you.

Southern part will require 3-4 large contour polygons with the new scheme. But the southern part is higher with peaks up to 1250m so that big polygons are just additional work needed that will increase the base level of that part of teh map, so I can start making hills. In the northern part I can just dive into creating hills, cause they are somewhat like 'islands'. You can actually see something is done in one 2h sitting.

I do build from ground up, but when concetrated on one 'island' of hills on max zoom I just do all the contours. I see no point in going through this huge map in max zoom muiltiple times. Every new base contour I make, I hope it will encirlce a relativaly small 'island' of hills so I can finish them right there and then, so I dont have to come back. I can forget about that part and move forward.



P.s.

I check your threads regularly. Nice progres on your maps PoE.

You faced/face same problems as I do, and the answers there helped me here.

[Arjuna]

Zorchi,
 
One thing we did on some of the COTA maps, was to treat all areas over a certain hight as impassable terrain and so we were able to cap our highest altitude. Eg. your source map indicates altitude hight of from say 0m to 1000m. But you know that no military ops were contucted above 750m. So set the base to 0m and the interval to 50m, which means you can accurately map to 750m ( 50 x 15 ). Then in the MM set one of the layer types to "impassable hights" terrain, with 0% move effects for mot and foot. Apply this terrain where the actual countours go above 750m. We also changed the map graphics pattern files to display this area as a solid black or very dark brown colour IIRC. That way it blends into the contour colour shading quite well.

[Zorchi]

I carefully inspected the map again. There are only 2 big 'islands' of hills that go over 1100m (Image below.). Since only those two areas have peaks over 1100m, I decided to keep 60m contour layer. And as you said Arjuna, its pointles to model such heights with precision. In addition I lowered the base to 180m. This will be the best combo, that will allow me to reuse the work done so far...

...but..

I have one question. Is it possible to change the elevation of a selected layer?
I changed the base to 180m and left elevation step at 60m, so my previosu work wouldnt go to waste. I need to lift all contours by 2elevation steps. How do i achieve that.

And another question. Is it possible to disable mouse 'grab and move' command for the whole contour polygon? Sometimes when I am making a new contour and am grabing a new point with a mouse, I instead of moving that point move the entire polygon. Whats worse move is so small that i dont even notice it until I scrolll back and look at previosuly made parts. The I usually just Ctrl-Z until I come to the wrong step or just go around correcting the whole contour if I am not sure when did I move the polygon.

[Arjuna]

Zorchi,
 
Try creating a new map from scratch.  With your existing map already open ( ie both maps open in the MM ) go to the new map and select "Import map..." from the Map menu. This will open the SelectMap to Import dialog. Leave the Position at X and Y at zero/zero ( ie no offset. Then select the Base Layer To: popup and choose the desired alt layer you want the base layer to map to. All the other layers will be remapped accordingly. I hope that helps.

[Zorchi]

It worked.

THANK YOU.

Question I added to my previous post after I made it. I think you missed it because of that.

"Is it possible to disable mouse 'grab and move' command for the whole contour polygon? Sometimes when I am making a new contour and am grabing a new point with a mouse, I instead of moving that point move the entire polygon. Whats worse move is so small that i dont even notice it until I scrolll back and look at previosuly made parts. The I usually just Ctrl-Z until I come to the wrong step or just go around correcting the whole contour if I am not sure when did I move the polygon."

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Zorchi

Is it possible to disable mouse 'grab and move' command for the whole contour polygon? Sometimes when I am making a new contour and am grabing a new point with a mouse, I instead of moving that point move the entire polygon. Whats worse move is so small that i dont even notice it until I scrolll back and look at previosuly made parts. The I usually just Ctrl-Z until I come to the wrong step or just go around correcting the whole contour if I am not sure when did I move the polygon.

I accidentally move objects or layers all the time, perhaps dozens of times on my map with the escarpment.

One thing that I've observed is that it rarely (perhaps never) occurs when I'm working with an end point, which is to say that it only happens when I go back to manipulate a previously placed control or corner point. I'm aware of this, so I'm very, very careful about how I approach those situations.

When accidental movement of a polygon does take place, and I'm far more likely to notice zoomed-in, I release the left mouse-button and then select undo from the mapmaker menu. Assuming that I didn't accidentally move the polygon, release the button, reselect the polygon, and errantly move it yet again, that's all that it should take to resolve the miscue.

[Zorchi]

I accidentally move objects or layers all the time, perhaps dozens of times on my map with the escarpment.

One thing that I've observed is that it rarely (perhaps never) occurs when I'm working with an end point, which is to say that it only happens when I go back to manipulate a previously placed control or corner point. I'm aware of this, so I'm very, very careful about how I approach those situations.

When accidental movement of a polygon does take place, and I'm far more likely to notice zoomed-in, I release the left mouse-button and then select undo from the mapmaker menu. Assuming that I didn't accidentally move the polygon, release the button, reselect the polygon, and errantly move it yet again, that's all that it should take to resolve the miscue.

I use Ctr-z (undo) frequently to. But every then and again I miss(I dont see) a miniscule polygon move. Thats a problem, because I then proceed with setting points, where I find myself in a situation where say half of the contour is properly aligned and half is not. Should I Ctrl-z or just repair the other half.... Its all the same time-wise.

I would like very much, if this function would be disabled for contours alltogether. I dont't see a point of this 'whole polygon' move function countour laying wise. I am carefully positioning every point, why would I need a move function that would displace all of my carefully placed points (ruining my efforts).
Perhaps it would be also prudent to make some sort of snap to point option in the mapmaker, that when near a point (but not on it) that I am about to move, instead of either losing focus or moving whole polygon, it would snap to the nearest point that I would then proceed to move. This should afcourse be made user switchable, so when you have alot of points very close you can turn it off so it wont interfere.

I know, I know, I'm making only my first map and already all this complaining. Don't get me wrong. I am just making suggestion as how future editions of mapmaker could be improved IMHO only.

[Arjuna]

I'll seek Panther Paul's views on this matter of disabling the "move polygon" feature for contour layers.
 
Paul,
 
What do you think?

[Zorchi]

Made another big layer. This one is the first over base.


Is there an easy way of making a valley on a large polygon? Something similar like subtracting from polygon.




I'll have to make some small valleys in that big contour layer. Is that possible?

[Arjuna]

No, you need to "cut" this in - ie draw a line to the "valley" draw around it and then back along the original line to ti and then continue on from there.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Zorchi

I know, I know, I'm making only my first map and already all this complaining. Don't get me wrong. I am just making suggestion as how future editions of mapmaker could be improved IMHO only.

Nah, you're doing just fine. You certainly did start out with a hard one, though. If gets easier as you go along. [:)]

[Zorchi]

@Arjuna

You say I need to cut valleys in by going in, make the vally and then retrace as near as possible the original line that lead me to the valley. So if I understand then correctly. When doing the elevation calculations, the engine will see two lines very close together and ascribe to the area in between them heihgt values that are very near or for all purposes and intetnts the same as the surrounding contour, even though in reality I made a micro gorge on the map. According to this the engine interpolates with some curve (cubic perhaps) the height between contours, so if the separation between them is very small, the interpolated height is practically the same. This works for two adjacent (by height) contours.

But what if I needed to make a very deep valley, one that bores through say 5 contours. For every cotour I would need to lead polygon line in, trace the valley contour and lead it out the same way. If I would make that for all 5 contours I would make a very deep and steep gorge. Wouldn't the interpolation by height calculation be bounded by the lowest and highest contours. That would in effect make a very steeep gorge - ergo impassable terrain.

P.s.
Not that I need to make a valley that spans 5 contours, but I am curious.

@Prince

Well thats so like me, pushing the gas pedal to the floor on a new car. Making tyres squeal for mercy in road bends... I wish. [:-]
No seriously...I only treat software like that. [:D]


Otherwise I made another huge contour (300m), the biggest one yet. Hopefully the next one will be "antyclimactic" length-wise.

[Arjuna]

Zorchi,
 
Good questionh. Short answer - don't know. Why don't you try it and see what happens and let me know. You can test it with the hight map in the MapMaker and then with the line of sight tool in the ScenMaker ( not the area LOS tool but the one that shows the elevation marks as you trace the line. )