Equipment Transitions

[cathar1244]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I did. Weird things happened with the game graphics; not surprising since the game doesn't have any graphics for hexside rivers. I didn't play things out to see how/if movement/combat were affected.

I believe hexside rivers was tried and dropped as a possible feature at some point in the past. I have a vague memory of seeing a dev screenshot with hexside rivers, but this might be my memory playing tricks.

Screenshot can be seen at https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... 55&mpage=4

Cheers

[Simon Edmonds]

From your link I think I have worked out an answer to another question. Map size. So the underlying data for the map is stored in a xml spreadsheet. What are the row limitations on an xml spreadsheet? Excel has a limit of 1,048,000 rows. There are ways around that which actually speeds up the program and reduces ram usage. I will have to look for my notes.

[Simon Edmonds]

Hi Lobster. I probably communicated my thoughts on hills poorly. The relevant part of a hills elevation; or a mountain for that matter, is how high it is above the surrounding terrain. A hill might be 300m high but if the surrounding terrain is 280m then it's not so much of a hill after all. When used at 5km scale or less the open topo map clearly shows the contours to enable you to interpret the hill.
At 5km scale I would reckon the grand canyon would be adjacent hexes with opposing impassible escarpments.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Simon Edmonds
Map size. So the underlying data for the map is stored in a xml spreadsheet. What are the row limitations on an xml spreadsheet?

You need to bear in mind that the XML is just an export of game data (which can then be re-imported). That doesn't mean that whatever you put in the XML will work in the game, because the game might disregard it, have "hard" limits, etc. Even if the game allows it, you could easily bump into constraints on memory, etc.

XML files are simply text files. AFAIK they can be of virtually unlimited size--certainly in the range of gigabits. As stated above, whether the game could handle XML files of that size is a completely different matter. Only one way to find out, eh?

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

A hill has everything to do with elevation. The Atacama Plateau is between 11k and 13k feet high but is flat. Except for the hills and mountains on it. Parts of the mountains in the Crimean Peninsula are flat also. There are hills on those flat parts too. So I really don't understand what you mean when you say hills have nothing to do with elevation. [&:]

I thought we were talking about TOAW. A hill;
1) reduces the movement speed of non-mountain troops
2) adds to the defence strength of units in the hex
3) increases the number of hits armoured vehicles will receive

So given all this, flat ground at 10,000 feet is absolutely not a "hill"- not in TOAW.

It can be perplexing sometimes to figure out how to portray some terrains that could be hills or could be ravines. Lots of that in the former Soviet Union.

The big question is, does it obstruct movement in every direction, or only along a given axis (e.g. north/south)? If it's the former, it's a hill. If it's the latter, it's an escarpment.

Naturally if it obstructs movements in every direction, but particularly in one direction, it's both hills and escarpment.

[golden delicious]

This is the way I see it:

Lower middle, hills
Upper left, escarpments
In between, neither

[Curtis Lemay]

The term you are all searching for is: Relief: Variation in altitude. A location can be high altitude but low relief, or low altitude and high relief. It's the level of relief that matters.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: Lobster

A hill has everything to do with elevation. The Atacama Plateau is between 11k and 13k feet high but is flat. Except for the hills and mountains on it. Parts of the mountains in the Crimean Peninsula are flat also. There are hills on those flat parts too. So I really don't understand what you mean when you say hills have nothing to do with elevation. [&:]

I thought we were talking about TOAW. A hill;
1) reduces the movement speed of non-mountain troops
2) adds to the defence strength of units in the hex
3) increases the number of hits armoured vehicles will receive

So given all this, flat ground at 10,000 feet is absolutely not a "hill"- not in TOAW.

It can be perplexing sometimes to figure out how to portray some terrains that could be hills or could be ravines. Lots of that in the former Soviet Union.

The big question is, does it obstruct movement in every direction, or only along a given axis (e.g. north/south)? If it's the former, it's a hill. If it's the latter, it's an escarpment.

Naturally if it obstructs movements in every direction, but particularly in one direction, it's both hills and escarpment.

Aye. The southern part of the Crimea is a good example. A few flat spots at elevations that would not be considered flat if elevation were the only criteria.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

This is the way I see it:

Lower middle, hills
Upper left, escarpments
In between, neither

And scale matters. That 'flat' valley is not flat by any means. At large scales those elevation variations in the valley wouldn't matter. At smaller scales they would make a great difference. At Gettysburg the hills and ridges were not all that high. But they were commanding elevations none the less.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Lobster


And scale matters. That 'flat' valley is not flat by any means. At large scales those elevation variations in the valley wouldn't matter. At smaller scales they would make a great difference. At Gettysburg the hills and ridges were not all that high. But they were commanding elevations none the less.

Agreed. This is why mapping is a nightmare and why you use someone else's map at your peril.