Map elevations

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Map elevations

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Map elevations

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Map elevations - 5/15/2000 5:53:00 PM

grockall

Posts: 44
Joined: 4/19/2000
Status: offline

I have just read a preview of the changes planned for the Camo Group's SPWW2 v3 one of which is an increase in possible elevations to 9. Is there any prospect of seeing this in SPW@W as it does offer interesting possibilities for scenarios.Of the two games I currently much prefer SPW@W but reading the preview it looks like both will keep me interested leap frogging one another with new innovations.

_____________________________

Post #: 1

- 5/15/2000 6:39:00 PM

Wild Bill

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline

Oh yes, larger maps will be forthcoming too. We just ran out of time on this one, but they will be part of a patch. Now terrain heidhts are much more complicated than what they appear. I'll be interested to see how well they work in SPWW2. WB ------------------ Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games

_____________________________

In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to grockall)

Post #: 2

- 5/15/2000 8:38:00 PM

Drake666

Posts: 313
Joined: 4/22/2000
Status: offline

You guys are great. Larger maps are one thing I would love to see and it will add a lot to tactics and stratigy.

_____________________________

(in reply to grockall)

Post #: 3

- 5/15/2000 9:58:00 PM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

One of the problems with increasing the number of elevations, is correctly reflecting the effects properly. Gun depression angle becomes an issue, as does reflecting the vertical angle. Gradiant efects on movement are also a problem. Its not just a question of making teh graphics look right, but how it affects combat as well. These are tough questions that are hard to deal with in teh SP engine. The "Plateau" effect is perhaps the biggest, as there is nothing to "tip" a vehicle that is on a slope so the armor is presented at the correct angles. That was one of teh big reasons additional hill heights were not added to SP:WaW yet. You will probably see bigger mas and more units before you see more hill heights, but we do want to get to it eventually. We want to do it "Right" in the context of the improved game system. It will be interesting to see how SP:WW2 implements teh combat effects of the new hill levels in the old SP2 combat system they appear to be sticking with.

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to grockall)

Post #: 4

- 5/15/2000 11:09:00 PM

grockall

Posts: 44
Joined: 4/19/2000
Status: offline

Thanks for the info. I am certainly looking forward to seeing how SpWW2 does it. But i would rather stick to the 3 levels we have if the extra ones are just for visual appeal.I expect many of the features we are now looking for are going to realy need a new game altogether

_____________________________

(in reply to grockall)

Post #: 5

- 5/15/2000 11:45:00 PM

Posts: 19
Joined: 5/6/2000
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber: One of the problems with increasing the number of elevations, is correctly reflecting the effects properly. Gun depression angle becomes an issue, as does reflecting the vertical angle. Gradiant efects on movement are also a problem. The "Plateau" effect is perhaps the biggest, as there is nothing to "tip" a vehicle that is on a slope so the armor is presented at the correct angles. That was one of teh big reasons additional hill heights were not added to SP:WaW yet.

Paul, It seems to me that these issues are only issues for SP:W@W with the new AP modelling, not for other versions of SP. Evidently, including a more complex AP resolution system will have repercussions for a lot of other things in the game (as we discussed some months ago :-) ). So it becomes a matter of choice and preference (more complex AP modelling vs more realistic terrain modelling) which is, I believe, why we have two games (SP:WW2 and SP:W@W) in the first place. Btw. if the SP2 manual is correct, the "Gradiant efects on movement" was already built in, as it cost trucks 3 points to cross clear hexes while it cost 4 points to cross clear slopes. Much the same way as with trees, streams and rough. Claus B

_____________________________

(in reply to grockall)

Post #: 6

- 5/16/2000 1:14:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

Well, its a problem of reflecting "reality" in any game engine. You are correct that in SP2 the geometry of a combat encounter was not that big a deal, so accounting for the effect of extremes in gradient are not as big an issue! Perhaps an elegant solution in the SP2 system has been found? It would not surprise me, but in general the SP2 system can't deal with wide variations in encounter geometry. Any implementation would have to be relatively abstract. For those that accept the limitations of the SP2 comabt system that is fine! Since we have decided to portray encounter geometry in a more detailed fashion, it is a bigger headache to deal with than a system that effectively ignores it, or lumps in "the big probablility ball" with everything else. You were very helpful, Claus in my development of the new system! I think it would be helpful to perhaps go over some of those old points you have raised so this audience can understand its strengths and limitations:-) I'm certainly not saying the new system is perfect! A lot of compromises had to be made to shoe horn it into the SP "box". But I, think it is a big improvement over the old system! I'll start a new thread on "Combat System Discussion" where we and others can chew the fat once again on it. I always learn a lot from our discussions:-) As to gradients, The "steepness" of the slope should cause the penalty to increase, and in some cases render extremely convoluted ground impassible. Or the cahnce, as often happened in real life that vehicles were lost control of and wrecked. I'm sure The Camo Group understands this and is dealing with it appropriately. I brought it up so folks understood why it was not yet implemented in SP:WaW.

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to grockall)

Post #: 7

- 5/16/2000 4:40:00 AM

Posts: 19
Joined: 5/6/2000
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber: I'm certainly not saying the new system is perfect! A lot of compromises had to be made to shoe horn it into the SP "box". But I, think it is a big improvement over the old system! I'll start a new thread on "Combat System Discussion" where we and others can chew the fat once again on it. I always learn a lot from our discussions:-)

When I find myself some cheap broadband so I can actually download the game, I will have a good long look at your system, be shure of that :-) Claus B

_____________________________

(in reply to grockall)

Post #: 8

- 5/16/2000 12:04:00 PM

Wild Bill

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline

We await your expertise, Claus....How have you been, its been awhile (G)...Wild Bill ------------------ Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games

_____________________________

In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to grockall)

Post #: 9

- 5/16/2000 2:50:00 PM

Posts: 19
Joined: 5/6/2000
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Wild Bill: We await your expertise, Claus....How have you been, its been awhile (G)...Wild Bill

Well, you know, I've been playtesting for SP:WW2 V3 (still is). But the main reason is that the debate at the TGN forums went down the toilet with the new software - something you (well, TGN) should really look at. Even though I think SP-Camo did right in sticking with the traditional SP AP-system and put their labour in other areas, I look forward to see how Pauls AP-system works "in the field". Claus B

_____________________________

(in reply to grockall)

Post #: 10

- 5/16/2000 7:53:00 PM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

People ask why two games? You have said it Claus! Many will continue to think the existing system is sufficient, and it looks like the Camo Groups areas of emphasis show the fruits of the two groups concentrating in two seperate areas! Many others thought improvement was needed, and so far the response to the changes have been very encouraging that we have satisfied the segment of the SP community that feels that way. As one of our crew said "Coke vs Pepsi" - both are cola drinks and many say "what's the difference" - but to the "faithful" each is superior to their taste. Is Coke better than Pepsi? Depends who you ask, don't ever give my wife a Diet Pepsi :-)

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to grockall)

Post #: 11