Recent discussion about graphics being to busy

[choppinlt]

76mm,
Sorry for the lack of response regarding your questions...my attention was elsewhere...
1) I am assuming you mean mapmakers for CO (not CM) correct? The basic theory is that each tile will each have unique characteristics, and battlefields will be made up of several tiles. There will be a cumulative effect on the battlefield based on all the tiles included, furthermore the exact tiles a unit occupies will further modify the terrain effects. Does that answer your question?
2)correct, each tile will have multiple layers of characteristics, but any image could be used to overlay it....

[76mm]

1) I am assuming you mean mapmakers for CO (not CM) correct? The basic theory is that each tile will each have unique characteristics, and battlefields will be made up of several tiles. There will be a cumulative effect on the battlefield based on all the tiles included, furthermore the exact tiles a unit occupies will further modify the terrain effects. Does that answer your question?

Matt, thanks for the response, but that's not really my point...  My point is that the terrain on a topo map is what it is, and it won't necessarily match up well with 200x200 meter tiles.  In other words, a hill/town/river/woods could be right on the edge between two tiles, so how would the tiles reflect this terrain feature?  Same issue to some extent with sloping terrain--real terrain might drop x meters for every y meters, but how will it work with 200m tiles--will they be "tiltable"?  The underlying issue is that whatever you put in the tiles should match up with what players see on the topo map, or they will get frustrated.

That's the reason that, as far as I understand it, most computer wargame maps are "curated"--in other words, the mapmaker might work from a topo map, but tweaks the actual game map to ensure that the "tiles" or "hexes" (or whatever the computer is working with) matches up with what players see on the game map.

Do you understand what I'm talking about?

[A Canadian Cat]

Oh, now I get what you are saying.  You are worried that the topo map will not match the actual terrain being used.  Obviously I cannot speak for Matt but it never occurred to me that people would just slap on any old topo map or other image and just play.  The map would have to be designed (curated as you say - I like that) and afterwards could be represented in game by the topo map.  But yeah those two things would have to be in sync.  That is pretty important.  In fact the game should probably have a way to render the designed map itself.  Some topo maps look terrible and I would not want to play on them but I might use them to design a scenario.

[76mm]

...it never occurred to me that people would just slap on any old topo map or other image and just play. 

OK, when I saw the topo maps that is what I assumed would happen, hence my concern. 

And once you move away from original topo maps, I'm not sure if it is worth the trouble to recreate a "curated" topo map--I think it would be easier (and potentially better looking) to use maps like Combat Ops (not topo, but not hex-based either). 

Generally, I'd be pretty pleased if this game ended up being similar to Combat Ops but allowing for manual play for the tactical battles.

[choppinlt]

Ahh, OK I understand too... To answer your question that is exactly correct; there are going to be areas that straddle when placing a fixed grid on real topos. So this is where I hope to have my cake and eat it too! The terrain data of the game map is based on the real topo map. The visual overlay to the data beneath can be whatever "skin" you want. The plan is to give 2 play options: the real topo for those that will enjoy using that, and a "curated" version. We already have the topo, so we just need to curate a map. Answer your question? Sound good? So kohlenklau could strategically use his picture of Kate as the playing field picture over the terrain data if he wanted to do that...in fact I'm sure he already has.

There are many similarities between Command Ops and my CO, and there are very significant differences. Before I go on, look for a new thread regarding a name change. OK here is a good segue to interject back story...I never intended to be in this position of indie development for my game concept. About 3 years ago I was trying to give my concept away to publishers and developers. Among several other people, I met Erik Rutins of Matrix at a convention and we started a chain of correspondence. He directed me to several developers to include Dave O'Conner at Panther Games. So I contacted Dave, and in a short series of emails he basically said "you come to me with a million dollars and we will talk, otherwise beat it kid". I'm not joking, he literally explained how it was going to cost $1million. There was nothing motivational about the exchange so I was close to packing the whole idea in, because I wasn't gonna raise that much money for a game. Furthermore, all other dev studios already had their own development schedules and were not interested in pursuing CO further. After some encouragement, to include Steve at BFC, I started my quest to create a team to develop CO just over 2 years ago. That is when i made the announcement on the BFC forum soliciting help (go back and look at my initial post). Lots more to the story, but I just wanted to shed some light on my relationship with Command Ops since it was brought up.

[Asid]

Generally, I'd be pretty pleased if this game ended up being similar to Combat Ops but allowing for manual play for the tactical battles.

Do you mean "Command Ops" by Panther Games?

[choppinlt]

Asid, ha yes he does! Thus my comment about altering the name of my game!

[76mm]

Do you mean "Command Ops" by Panther Games?

Doh, yes!  I'm getting confused with all these "Command Operations" and "Combat Ops"...

[76mm]

...there are going to be areas that straddle when placing a fixed grid on real topos. So this is where I hope to have my cake and eat it too! The terrain data of the game map is based on the real topo map. The visual overlay to the data beneath can be whatever "skin" you want. The plan is to give 2 play options: the real topo for those that will enjoy using that, and a "curated" version. We already have the topo, so we just need to curate a map.

Well, my concern is precisely that the terrain data of the game map will not match up well enough with the real topo map, and I'm concerned that anyone opting to use the "real topo" will be frustrated because he has pretty weak idea about what terrain he'll really encounter in-game.

[choppinlt]

That is why there will be 2 options for players to choose from. The default option will probably be the curated version and for those that want the topo, they can change it. I would like to make it a user frirendly process to switch, but I can't say for sure how the exact process will work right now.

Going further, I am wanting to incorporate terrain info to the UI so players can get explicit verification of unit terrain info regardless of the overlay picture. For instance a defending infantry battalion may be centered over a completely clear "tile" in the middle of a huge forested area. The UI will indicate the predominant terrain occupied by the unit for combat purposes, and common sense would dicate they are mostly occupying the forested area even though they may be centered over a clearing. Hopefully I explained that clearly....

[mitchA]

(Programmer)

That is why there will be 2 options for players to choose from. The default option will probably be the curated version and for those that want the topo, they can change it. I would like to make it a user frirendly process to switch, but I can't say for sure how the exact process will work right now.

Going further, I am wanting to incorporate terrain info to the UI so players can get explicit verification of unit terrain info regardless of the overlay picture. For instance a defending infantry battalion may be centered over a completely clear "tile" in the middle of a huge forested area. The UI will indicate the predominant terrain occupied by the unit for combat purposes, and common sense would dicate they are mostly occupying the forested area even though they may be centered over a clearing. Hopefully I explained that clearly....

@choopinIt I think it will be very possible to have the ability to switch between a topo and custom map (even in-game switching). We would probably want to start with just a topo first then add the custom map functionality in after we have an alpha. This would also give us the ability to create a map that isn't based off a real life location.

[choppinlt]

Excellent, thanks @mitchA! My guess is that players will be in one "camp" or the other, without being all that interested in switching mid-game...but I don't know for sure. It makes no difference since it sounds like this option is easily accomplished.

So let me step back and introduce mitchA! He was the very first programmer to sign on to the project, and he is still here! He continues to work on this project on a volunteer basis because he has to pay the bills after just getting married!