Map Altitude Layer

[RockinHarry]

Am now in the planning process for Operation Veritable (..or rather parts of it) and before I actually start the map, need some hints.

The operations area is rather flat and highest points is about 50-60m IIRC. Basically it would be sufficient to work with 5-6x 10m altitude layers, but in the case I want finer resolution (5m per layer) would that cause any problems, using about 10-12x 5m layers?

With regard to the invisible 100m sub grid, I find it a bit disturbing that most maps aren´t quite WYSIWYG, so I intend to rather adapt the map to this limitation, by just drawing terrain, that is at least 50% of a particular 100m sub square and avoid spilling over terrain into neighboring 100x100m squares. Any tips for working like this?

I intend to work 100m grids into my bitmap underlay. Has that been tried yet?

[simovitch]

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry
The operations area is rather flat and highest points is about 50-60m IIRC. Basically it would be sufficient to work with 5-6x 10m altitude layers, but in the case I want finer resolution (5m per layer) would that cause any problems, using about 10-12x 5m layers?

No problem with that.

With regard to the invisible 100m sub grid, I find it a bit disturbing that most maps aren´t quite WYSIWYG, so I intend to rather adapt the map to this limitation, by just drawing terrain, that is at least 50% of a particular 100m sub square and avoid spilling over terrain into neighboring 100x100m squares. Any tips for working like this?

If I understand your intent, I think the mapmaker code will cause it to spill over to adjacent 100m grids whether you endeavor to control it in this manner or not. The 'spill-over' should be looked at as an abstraction of the real world interface of the terrain and the unit.

I intend to work 100m grids into my bitmap underlay. Has that been tried yet?

I cant imagine what the benefit of all the extra effort could be? But I might be missing something in the thought process - it's been known to happen.[;)]

[RockinHarry]

ORIGINAL: simovitch

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry
The operations area is rather flat and highest points is about 50-60m IIRC. Basically it would be sufficient to work with 5-6x 10m altitude layers, but in the case I want finer resolution (5m per layer) would that cause any problems, using about 10-12x 5m layers?

No problem with that.

With regard to the invisible 100m sub grid, I find it a bit disturbing that most maps aren´t quite WYSIWYG, so I intend to rather adapt the map to this limitation, by just drawing terrain, that is at least 50% of a particular 100m sub square and avoid spilling over terrain into neighboring 100x100m squares. Any tips for working like this?

If I understand your intent, I think the mapmaker code will cause it to spill over to adjacent 100m grids whether you endeavor to control it in this manner or not. The 'spill-over' should be looked at as an abstraction of the real world interface of the terrain and the unit.

I intend to work 100m grids into my bitmap underlay. Has that been tried yet?

I cant imagine what the benefit of all the extra effort could be? But I might be missing something in the thought process - it's been known to happen.[;)]

Disregard. I´ve to deal with the terrain abstraction as is and so far, things work rather well.[:)]

[RockinHarry]

Yet here´s an example for how the 100m sub grid compares with the visible road network in the map editor. I created a bitmap underlay from the foot movement table and merged it with my map to get the idea. It´s just for my own purposes (debugging and evaluating likely AI movement capabilities) and the screeny is from the yet unfinished map. The white areas is flooded terrain (lake) and I´ve yet to remove the visible roads/tracks. I also have to adapt the height layer for the flooded area, as the true flood extends lies somewhere (~10-15m) between the tenths height altitudes layers. I´ll drop the area to a unified 10m, so it better matches with the higher ground.