Map Question...

[barbarossa2]

(wipes saliva running down the sides of mouth after viewing AARs)...

Just curious. Everything here looks incredible. And it will definitely be my 3rd purchase from this series of games.

However, as I look at the maps in the AAR, I am having a hard time getting a feel for the lay of the land. Yes, the maps ARE beautiful. But not quite as functional as I would like them to be. I think it would be very useful to either:

1) Have a toggle button for standard elevation lines in light red or light blue (like any topo map).

or

2) Have a toggle button which allows players to turn off the woods layer which tends to make reading the elevations almost impossible in the woods. Especially, now that there are "light woods" and "heavy woods".

I think I remember reading once (about 3 years ago), that this was more complicated than it seemed. Is this still the case?

Thanks. [&o]

[Arjuna]

We won't have time to make such a change for BFTB. We want to overhaul the entire map drawing code and use DX graphics for it rather than the more limited MFC gdi code that we currently use. Then we can do lots of smart things like transparency effects and sophisticated shading. This should help significantly. Eventually we also want to overhaul the map data classes so we can import GIS standard map data files and we should then be able to provide a 3D option so you can fly through the terrain.[8D]

[barbarossa2]

Thanks for the answer and clarification.

I have to admit then, I wonder how hard it would be for someone to take these maps as they are and add elevation lines as they are on a topo map as a permanent fixture? Of course, care would have to be taken to make them visually appealing (or at least not aesthetically destructive). Perhaps a light shade of blue. For instance, one could export the map graphic, and rework it in photoshop and add the lines, then export the single, flattened image again, and reimport it to BFTB.

Of course, whoever was doing this would have to make damn sure that they knew where the actual lines were (and as far as I can see, from the maps in the AARs, this could be difficult. Even if not under the stress of fighting a real time battle.

Just curious.

[simovitch]

For me the LOS tool showing the profile of the land along any LOS gives me enough info to get an idea of the lay of the land. I like the terrain off-toggle idea though.

I highlighted the yellow stuff here for clarity. The only problem with this tool is that is reverses vertical direction if you go from left to right instead of right to left, which can be confusing to the novice.

[barbarossa2]

Dear Simovitch,

I do think that is a fantastic feature, but doing that for every possible combination required in the heat of battle is a little over my ability. I would love to use ele lines. As I look at the example map you just used here, the ele lines just disappear in the woods.

But thanks

[Arjuna]

To display the elevation without the terrain clutter ( such as woods ) we would need to maintain multiple map caches. These are quite large and take up a lot of ram, especially for large map areas. It's do-able but we would need to experiment and monitor the side effects.
 
TT3699 - UI - Map - Provide option to dhide terrain clutter - eg woods - so elevation contours clearly visible

[simovitch]

ORIGINAL: barbarossa2

Dear Simovitch,

I do think that is a fantastic feature, but doing that for every possible combination required in the heat of battle is a little over my ability. I would love to use ele lines. As I look at the example map you just used here, the ele lines just disappear in the woods.

But thanks

Actually, if I extended the LOS tool through the woods, it would still continue the profile. I just happened to stop the tool before the woods in this example. you can drag the tool all the way across the map if you want.

[Lieste]

I'm fairly sure he meant that the visible map contours aren't visible under the woods, not that the LOS tool wouldn't be able to offer a profile.

It is possible to use some alpha in the covered terrain overlays though I would think? This would give at least some idea of the underlying shape, even if it isn't quite as clear as discrete contour lines.
As for example seen here:
http://cota.matrixgames.com/images/hi_vis.jpg

[barbarossa2]

Simovitch,

Thanks again for your help. But I do know that the tool would have worked into the woods. I do mean simply, that looking at the image you sent me, what is happening IN the woods with elevation lines (the various shades of brown) is difficult to see. Just like the other examples in this forum.

But, look, I do need to say, this is an incredible product, and I don't want this to become my "nitpickie" issue. I will purchase it, and purchase it gladly, even if released "as is."

Chris

[barbarossa2]

Deleted because of improved presentation posted below.

[barbarossa2]

message deleted and presented below.

[barbarossa2]

I hope that within 2 versions of this release we will be playing on a scalable, tiltable, rotatable, zoomable, 3D map anyway, so the player is always "flying through". I think the technology is there for that now anyway. And shouldn't be too difficult to implement.

And this is another example of a screenie with ele lines which are not overly destructive. These are light blue lines with a width of 2 pixels, set to 45 percent opacity. Light blue appears to work the best. Red and green and yellow aren't the greatest.

Interestingly enough, even in open terrain, when muddy, these elevation lines were in some cases difficult to find and trace. And that was without being forced to fight a battle at the same time.

Again, Arjuna, this is not a complaint, but a positive suggestion for the improvement of an already incredible game.

(Okay...upon looking at these images again, I noticed I missed one or two lines and totally screwed up in one location, but I think that is an indicator as to just how difficult tracing these ele lines is...even with nothing else to do. I won't bother reposting the changes, as I am sure you get the feel for what I am talking about here.)

[barbarossa2]

Removed due to improvements below.

[barbarossa2]

Even Better...

Note that the area north of and around Stavelot was difficult for me to do the tracing in. Even with nothing else to do. In fact, I still don't know I have it right around the railway junction to the north and along the road headed out of town where it crosses the tracks. And of course most of the work in the woods was wholly guess work. The elevation lines make sense of these many, many shades of light brown which are virtually indistinguishable and easily become confusing when entering or leaving cover. These elevation lines solve all of that.

And I personally, don't find them aesthetically displeasing and think they would add to my enjoyment of the game.

[barbarossa2]

Another view, using this empasized line every 5 elevation steps is attached here. Note how I have intentionally chosen the emphasized lines to be placed in the middle of the browns and in the middle of the greens. The human eye can easily tell where the browns turn to greens. We know then, that this transition line is equal elevation all over the map. But these shades of brown are what are tricky to read. Placing an empasized line in the middle of these many shades of brown makes finding equal elevations all over the map much easier.

[barbarossa2]

This version has stronger elevation lines and a heavy line every three changes in elevation. I find it to be the easiest to understand.

[barbarossa2]

Post removed due to improved post below.

[barbarossa2]

This is a zoom out on the valley...

Arjuna, I would personally prefer seeing this to removing "clutter" with a button. I would play with this version of a map. But toggling back and forth from "no woods" to "woods" would be not exactly the best option in my opinion.

Perhaps we can toggle back and forth between a "map with elevation lines" and a "map without elevation lines"?

Again, I hope that within 2 versions of this release we will be playing on a scalable, tiltable, rotatable, zoomable, 3D map anyway, so the player is always "flying through". I think the technology is there for that now anyway. And shouldn't be too difficult to implement.

So, the improvements I am most interested in are:
1) Elevation lines (as discussed here).
2) Hiding the status of the bridges (primed or not) as necessary and realistic from each player, forcing a more careful advance on them. Somewhere else you said this would require two different sets of movement tables and gave it a TT. Few things took me out of the game more in previous versions than knowing the bridge I was advancing on was primed or not in every instance when I would have had only limited (at best) intelligence about this fact.
3) When dealing with mechanized infantry, coding for separate truck and infantry sections, forcing infantry to dismount around a kilometer before making contact in many situations and having them get picked up again later (a complicated mess to code perhaps, but it is still on my wishlist). German half track units would be treated differently, as doctrine was to use the half track as a fire base. Unlike the British half tracks. I still haven't found any defniitive info on US doctrine regarding half track usage.
4) Doing research into doctrinal differences between the armies involved, and coding for these differences in the AI. At the moment, you indicated that the code used is identical for each side. I am sure there were differences--albeit "minor"--and it would be a matter of research to discover these, then hopefully just tweaking the code used by each army. However, the game would gain an additional layer of immersion by adding this and telling customers about it.

And of course...
5) More sexy women used in the player interface.

[Arjuna]

I think #5 is going to pose the biggest challenge. [;)]

[Panther Paul]

Should make it easier to get a new swag of BETA testers though!