Maps

[IChristie]

Now if Iain could give us some expert lessons on doing the wonderful artwork, we can all be Picaso cartogrophers

A couple of years ago I put together this page about making close combat maps - much of it is still applicable - although I've learned an awful lot since then myself.

http://www.militarygameronline.com/Clos ... page11.htm

(OK, so even even if you were only half serious - file that under careful what you wish for , you might get it! )

Seriously folks - about the only other advice I would have would be to grab a copy of photoshop and start teaching yourself. That's what worked for me. My RL job has nothing at all to do with graphics or art - this stuff is really just a hobby that has gotten out of control.

[IronManBeta]

Hey, I saw that article when it first came out! I never dreamed that I would some day work with the author.


It is bitterly cold and snowing heavily outside right now. Gee, do I go out and shovel or do I work on Flashpoint documentation. Hmmmmm. Tough choice.

Make another coffee and do more documentation I think. Warm is good too!

Cheers, Rob.

[IronManBeta]

Originally posted by IChristie
It is interesting to note that there has been a significant paradigm shift from the original game to this incarnation. In the original game the maps were drawn to conform to the grid system and to make the underlying terrain in each grid location easy for the player to interpret. This is obvious when you look at the original graphics. Even without the grid lines you can see where they should go by looking at the graphics. In the current game the maps are drawn to represent realistic terrain and the grid structure is laid on top as a means of allowing the software to keep track of things. This will mean that locations are much more ambiguous in terms of what type of terrain they contain, where the road net actually goes, etc.

Further to this observationn, here is a comparison of the two map styles. The original SimCan BMT Central Germany map quadrants 11 & 12, and then the same area from the Flashpoint map:

[IronManBeta]

The new map:

[IronManBeta]

Try again! The new map:

[jrcar]

The new map is very pretty, but will there be a code overlay that can be bought up so as to help work out what is what? It is hard to tell in the new map elevation and terrain type.

Cheers

Rob

[IChristie]

Robert already has a mode that does that. I assume that something like it will sppear in the final version.

[IronManBeta]

Yup, in the bottom right corner of the game display (down in the status bar) the terrain that is currently under the mouse is described in the format "Location col, row: Elevation (m), Terrain (eg. forest, open, mixed, closed, dense urban, etc)." You can see this in the screen shots. This ought to be good enough for playing the game when used in conjunction with the LOS tester (control-L or shift-left click) on specific locations.

This little display will also tell you what kind of road and what kind of river bank is present, but the maps are so good that this is really unneccesary and I might take it out because it crowds the space a little.

In terms of seeing all the codes at once for the entire map, there are a series of debug routines that Iain is probably referring to that clear the map and then print the codes directly to each location. It is not very elegant, but nothing beats it for verifying that the maps have been coded correctly. I was planning to hide them in the release version for normal play but reenable them when you are some sort of map-maker mode. In this, as in other matters, the play test gods will decide.


Cheers, Rob.

[jrcar]

H'mm thanks.

Unsolicited comments follow (I was an Army survey officer in a previous life where I was responsible for a range of mapping products).

The current maps are very pretty. The old ones bad

BUT the essence of any graphical representation of the earths surface is to enable someone to quickly and easily understand the terrain, and the likely effect it will have on a units manouvre.

For me the map fails at first inspection.

Now I am basing this on the comparison between the old map and the new one.

For example where the road comes up from the bottom heading towards the city is a village? On the origional map that appears as two coloured in yellow squares, on the new map that same area looks like it covers four or more squares of built up area. The loop road just north west of that is coded as open, BUA or what? From the new map I would expect it to be BUA, on the old one its clear. The city has similar problems.

Also while the fields look very nice, they clutter the map and make the interpretation difficult.

Now its very hard to tell from this point, and when playing the game it may be easier.

I would like to see some hillier terrain to see how it works in being able to judge the height difference.

Now if you can bring up an overlay that helps in the interpretation I suspect that will help, but I grant you its also a bit unrealistic.

So in short, the maps are nice, but don't throw out the overlay tool yet

Cheers

Rob

[jrcar]

What did I do?!?

I thought this would generate some constructive comment...

cheers

Rob

[Mac_MatrixForum]

I don't know about you but I like to watch the prettier maps and I don't have a problem with those . Some things to consider.

• Maps aren't perfect in real life (as you undoubtly know) so I think a couple possible mistakes in interpreting the game map simulate nicely the fact that real maps aren't perfect.
• We don't have the luxury of driving around inspecting the terrain in the game nor do we have satellite photos. However we get to try the scenarios again and again .
• Wouldn't most details about the terrain be relevant to your subcommanders and not yourself? LOS makes it somewhat your problem in the game though. I hope there isn't too much terrain micromanagement.
• I wouldn't go comparing the old and new maps or are their codes going to match 100%. I'd think if the new map has some visual differences with BUAs then the coding will be done based on what it looks in the new map and not what it used to be.

[Catgh_MatrixForum]

I would also like to make a quick comment.

From the casual gamer market segement, the prettier maps should stay, with the cavet that overlay tools also stay in. I hate to say the non-military (raising my hand here) types are shallow and we like pretty pictures over topomaps.

From a marketing POV pretty maps will bring kudos over topo maps, as long as they don't impact game play (ie not having overlay tools to help "read" the maps).

Of course I am assuming that Flashpoint is going to be marketed to a broader audience.

Just my .02 cents.

Ron

[jrcar]

The pretty maps are essential, we just need to make sure the whole purpose of the map (to pass information about how the environment will affect the battle) is enhanced, and not degraded by the pretty map. I caveted it that I will need to play the game first...

Thanks for your thoughts!

Cheers

Rob

[kipanderson]

Hi,

The more I click around, the better it all looks. It really does look very good.

Quick point.

It sounds to me as though it would be possible to scan in a real topographical map, scale it and convert it to bmp, then “code” it in some way for the terrain features and elevation.

Am I correct in my assumption?

Great looking maps above, but I am very deviant in liking the look of real topographical maps for this scale of game and upwards. I am just a bit odd.

All the best,
Kip