Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Major Lee

A Poll: Which Map Layout?

Which Map Layout?  

54 members have voted

  1. 1. A or B?

    • Map A
      18
    • Map B
      36


Recommended Posts

Here are two versions of DBS:2. Both maps are 2000km square. The first map is close to 1:1 scale. The second is "normal" SF scale. Map B allows a wider range of target areas. Map A is more accurate. Both maps would require very long range flights. Please select one choice, A or B... Just looking for opinions.

 

Map A:

DBS_test1.jpg

 

Map B:

DBS_test2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any reason why we can't have 1024^2 tiles?

Well actually, I'm not sure :biggrin: Aside from being a large download I can't think of any, the thing is, I'm also not sure how much benefit(visually) would it be with anything over 512x512 or the performance impact :dntknw:

Hmmm maybe I should make some(2048-512) and compare...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if one set up the terrain for 1000-->250 then the standard 256 pixel tile would only cover ONE km insterad of TWO, effectively doubling the terrain tile resolution also :ok: ... Plus, height data points would be every 250 meters instead of the current 500 meter height resolution... :good: Distance flown is the same regardless of map scale; it is still a 2000km wide map... I am leaning more towards "B" since I can squeeze in more places for targets. It is positioned on both so that I can place Anchorage in the correct place and be able to model the base there... This means the eastern edge is fixed... Going off-scale means I can include at least part of Kamchatka and the entire Bering Sea, from Diomede Islands to the entire Aleutian Island chain... Karaga Island off the east coast of the Kamchatka pennisula will be a great place for a Soviet naval base, as are a couple of other locations... :cool: I want this to be a target rich environment for both sides. This is why new objects will be critical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there any reason why we can't have 1024^2 tiles?

 

Available sytem memory for most people would be taxed to the Nth degree with 1024 tiles... I'm not sure the things will even run with an HFD file of 122mb...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B is cool, more targets are soooo much better!!! :smile:

 

yes the subtile choice between distance accuracy (the 1:1 scale) and gameplay

 

the gameplay must prevail in the goal to get the most pleasure from the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very long flights are still a reality. The map is 1242 miles square... Long range flights from Anchorage to the farthest western target will still range about 1000 miles... I dare you to not use Alt-N...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very long flights are still a reality. The map is 1242 miles square... Long range flights from Anchorage to the farthest western target will still range about 1000 miles... I dare you to not use Alt-N...

 

i never use Alt-N, i like to struggle with fuel consumption.

 

when i said the gameplay is more important than the map scale, it's a reference to a higher target density than on a full scale map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..