[Map] Benghazi (2km) [Concept]

[Michael_Denmark]

Second, Michael. I am not entirely sure what you want me to do here, I am basing the map largely on the actual city, and in that way alone it leaves little room to change the base layout of it. EJOD had quite a bit of open land, this (the way I imagine it) wont have much empty space, the grass areas will have trees. The clearest area will be north east and west of the south lake. In EJOD both teams assaulted the city, in my concept the rebels are defending it. I am expecting this city to be roughly the size of muttrah, EJOD city is rather small scale and it was the choke point.

While there are 2 choke points my intention has always been an infantry way around the docks, and MEC most likely will have amphibious vehicles.

Well I'm honestly not entirely sure my self? I think anything being random on the map, would be useful.

I'm only trying to point out, that until anything randomly is coded into this cool-looking map, the overall planning-similarity, with Ejod, is already there. That doesn't mean the map wont be great play, however, coming from the planning perspective, it will not push the co-challenge up the skill-ladder. It will be on the same ladder-level, so to say, as Ejod.

I'm sure as a shooter map, this map will be awesome.

I deployed two images in my post above, as illustration of what I'm talking about.


Hi Rhino

I actually view the map just like you do, but also above the tactical level you describe as; common attack routes, player movement, engagement zones, assets, firepower, factions etc.

On the level above the tactical, I scan for similar map-patterns, like urban areas, dessert, hills and so on. I do that because they either represent complexity or simplicity.

After the pattern-level is processed, then I go down into the patterns and view those with the tactical perspective you describe.

So its the helicopter-pattern that is the same on this map, as with the Ejod-map.

Thats all I'm saying. Hope it is understandable. sorry for any confusion deployed.

Beside from that - cool looking map!

[Rhino]

Nice to see progress of this map, I have one comment about that base-flags for insurgents:

Once I read, in some thread, a DEV saying that multiple main bases (for each route in AASv4 one, that is) is not possible, because you would have all possible main bases spawning vehicles, regardless of what route is active (what main base is active).

Regarding this map, that would mean that you couldn't have multiple AASv4 routes, with insurgents' vehicles spawning only around one of them. Vehicles would simply spawn on all possible spawners.

-lucky

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Amok@ndy;1598322']i guess it was me, i have tested this an can confirm random mains doesnt work[/quote]

I do not see any reason why it shouldn't work as the flags are fully removed from the map before the round starts so providing the PCOs are attached to the mini-bases and not the main base (which is what I'm guessing you might have done) it should work fine.

There may be a problem with the vehicles spawning on the flags just before the flags are removed if the python is playing catchup but you could fix that with some extra python code or making the vehicles go on delayed spawn. Did you test if the vehicles respawned after you destroyed them after they spawned on a flag which wasn't there? If they don't respawn its down to them spawning before the flags are removed and if they do respawn, its another issue.

If there is a problem I'm sure it can be fixed with some extra python code or something.


[quote="Michael_Denmark""]Well I'm honestly not entirely sure my self? I think anything being random on the map, would be useful.

I'm only trying to point out, that until anything randomly is coded into this cool-looking map, the overall planning-similarity, with Ejod, is already there. That doesn't mean the map wont be great play, however, coming from the planning perspective, it will not push the co-challenge up the skill-ladder. It will be on the same ladder-level, so to say, as Ejod.

I'm sure as a shooter map, this map will be awesome.

I deployed two images in my post above, as illustration of what I'm talking about.


Hi Rhino

I actually view the map just like you do, but also above the tactical level you describe as; common attack routes, player movement, engagement zones, assets, firepower, factions etc.

On the level above the tactical, I scan for similar map-patterns, like urban areas, dessert, hills and so on. I do that because they either represent complexity or simplicity.

After the pattern-level is processed, then I go down into the patterns and view those with the tactical perspective you describe.

So its the helicopter-pattern that is the same on this map, as with the Ejod-map.

Thats all I'm saying. Hope it is understandable. sorry for any confusion deployed.

Beside from that - cool looking map!



[/quote]


You could really say what your saying about basically any map thou?







I'm sorry but I just can't see your argument at all tbh...


EDIT: Let put this another way, can you show how you would set out a map or w/e to maximise this CO-Planning side? Preferably using Benghazi or something but if not make up a map and try and explain how this would work better?

[Michael_Denmark]

Phew, I would have to think that through, I have thought about it some years ago, but it will take allot of time, in order for me to do that without too many gabs in a somewhat solid solution.

So far only thing I can see as possible solution is randomly content on the map. Cause that is often in it self, complexity, and thus the Ejod-other-maps-pattern is breached.

And yes -you can say the same about several PR-maps, although Ejod was the one popping up, when I saw this map, due to the similar N/S pattern.

Again, not trying to fuzz things around here, -only commenting on the map from my co-planning perspective. However, in my guide I will address the issue in a hopefully far-more detailed way, in the final chapter of the guide. Perhaps that will open up new solutions. Only time will tell.

[Reddeath]

I made some small updates to the map, and am probably still going to find a few more points of interest within the city that I will add before I get started on the building process, almost in the middle of the city is a mosque.

As for the rest of the process, I got plenty of time to worry about the layout and the base system.

A question that might just hold me off for now depending on the answer. Would I be better off waiting for the next patch? or would starting as soon as I figure the map out be the best option? I do not know if the new patch will remove certain statics, add more?

[Shovel]

I don't know when the next patch will come out, but all mappers will have to make a new pr_edit folder afaik, so you should get your plan finalized, so when the new update comes out you can get started right away.

[Rhino]

Looks good, can't see that much difference than the one before thou, although for the southern most CSB locations, I would still recommend my proposed ones here over what you have put on your map as the top one is the shortest location, but very exposed and would probably only be used if the bridge is blown up (with also the possibility of putting CSBs on the bridge, but that can have multiple sections blown) where the second location is very long but much more out of the way of the enemy's view. The one you have suggested seems to be a middle ground option, which you could have with the other two but I would recommend on having the two I suggested as its most likey that the player is going to choose one extreme depending on the situation rather than go for a middle ground option.




As for the GPO stuff, ye you have ages to finalize what you want to do there, important thing is you have an idea of what you want to have, details come later
With muttrah I hadn't decided on a final attack rout until quite some time into the build, although I knew generally what I wanted and even then that attack rout changed before its release too as I initially had things like 3 flags in the docks you had to capture before you moved on into south city, which turned to the one flag which we have today (with a few minor changes)


As for when you should start, starting right now is fine as very little changes with the mod in relation to what statics are removed as we can't remove statics which are already in use in maps without removing them from the maps, which is a tricky operation as you need to redo lightmaps etc
Just keep an eye on this topic and if your unsure about any statics, ask if they are ok and we will let you know
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f354-c ... -maps.html

But no reason why not to start right away, and you don't even really need to update your PR_EDIT unless you plan on setting up GPOs for your map, and even then you don't really need to either, only when vehicles have been renamed or new ones added

[Broseph]

Meanwhile, In a country that no longer exists...

[Rhino]

Meanwhile, In a country that no longer exists...

Dunno what you mean by that comment but umm as for your textures, there is a perfectly good Octagon detail texture that is used on muttrah if RedDeath wanted to and if you did want the lybian flag painted on the slabs, it would have to be very big and done in the terrain's colourmap and not as a detail texture.

[Reddeath]

Not entirely sure what that template is for to be honest. Is it for the ground of a plaza of some sort?

Some concerns I need addressed.

How should I go about the park sidewalk's? I have not been through all the statics but it seems unlikely that there are sidewalks with all the bends and curves needed, would it be best to set down a texture instead of a static for the sidewalk there?

To what extent should I use the actual road tool? I see some maps cities are just a concrete texture with sidewalk statics, is it easier? optimal? or just preference. I was messing a bit with the roads tool and it seems like I wont be able to make the 90 degree turns I have quite a few of.

[Broseph]

[quote=""[R-Dev"]Rhino]Dunno what you mean by that comment but[/quote]
I was jokingly referring to the fact that the country I am posting under no longer exists

Rhino]umm as for your textures, there is a perfectly good Octagon detail texture that is used on muttrah if RedDeath wanted to and if you did want the lybian flag painted on the slabs, it would have to be very big and done in the terrain's colourmap and not as a detail texture.

I seriously have no idea how the Battlefield map texture system works

[quote="Reddeath""]Not entirely sure what that template is for to be honest. Is it for the ground of a plaza of some sort?[/quote]

yes

[Amok@ndy]

for 90? turns you may better use the intersection statics
rhino created a tutorial about how to create your own statics for your needs

[K4on]

What I want to aim for is
OPFor:
2 MBTs
1 BMP

BLUFor:
Rebels
1 MBT
2 SPG9 Technicals
2 .50 Technicals

and transport vehicles ofcourse.

I want the MEC to have superior amounts of armor, but still want the BLUFor to have armor, but I am feeling as if 3 tanks is a little to much for a 2km map.

why is mec opfor?

[lucky.BOY]

Because In Insurgents are "the good guys" and/or "fighting for the good thing" i guess. But Yes, as this is an Insurgency scenario, MEC should be BLUFOR i think.


I dont really know

[Reddeath]

I personally have a somewhat mixed opinion on it but I lean toward the rebel's being the right out of the two in the real life scenario.

[Shovel]

If there was an insurgency mode, the MEC could be the team that searches and the militia defend caches. makes more sense than the rebels hunting for MEC caches. But overall I think the map should be AAS, because that if more similar to the real life scenario.

[Reddeath]

Yea the intention here is AAS, not insurgency.

[Rhino]

How should I go about the park sidewalk's? I have not been through all the statics but it seems unlikely that there are sidewalks with all the bends and curves needed, would it be best to set down a texture instead of a static for the sidewalk there?

To what extent should I use the actual road tool? I see some maps cities are just a concrete texture with sidewalk statics, is it easier? optimal? or just preference. I was messing a bit with the roads tool and it seems like I wont be able to make the 90 degree turns I have quite a few of.

There is really two ways of making roads in cities.

1. the vBF2 way and used in a few PR maps, using the "sidewalk statics" to mark out where the road edge is.
Pros:

1. Nice 3D ground making the ground look a little bit more realistic and comes into gameplay a little too with being able to take a tiny bit of cover at the curbs etc
2. The road's width can be changed pretty easily at any point, providing the sidewalk statics agree with what you want to do
3. You can also put in shell crates and other holes in your roads easily.
4. You can change the road's texture quite easily at any point, providing you have enough detail textures for it.

Cons:

1. Not good for performance, the side walk statics take up a large amount of lightmap space and there are extra polys and draw calls to render/process.
2. Road markings don't look very good if you want road markings on your roads.
3. Requires you to use up a detail texture slot for your road detail texture, although tbh its unlikely your not going to have a concrete detail texture w/e the case.

2. The second method, is what I did with Muttrah which is to use 2D sidewalks and relying totally on the road tool for the roads.
Props:

1. Very good for performance, no extra lightmaps required as the road uses the terrain's lightmaps.
2. Road textures are much higher rez than ground detail textures and as such, the road's concrete and markings look much better.

Cons:

1. Road width is pretty inflexible, although can be changed with custom road intersections at some points but that takes a little, although very basic modelling skill to do.
2. Roads and sidewalks look less realistic being 2D and the curbs can't be used for cover etc.
3. Not very easy to put a shell crater or hole in the middle of the road unless you want to stop the road just before the hole, or you can do it with a custom road intersection.
4. Not very easy to change the road's detail texture at any point although not that hard and doesn't take up a new detail texture slot.

There is also an option 3 which is a mix of using 3D side walks with the road tool in the middle but tbh its not a very good option.


Personally I go with option 2 myself as its performance pros really help with a large scale urban map and while the roads might not be 3D, they still look better

Because In Insurgents are "the good guys" and/or "fighting for the good thing" i guess. But Yes, as this is an Insurgency scenario, MEC should be BLUFOR i think.


I dont really know

I can't see how Ins would reflect to the real life situation in Libya
Best to keep MEC on team 1 tbh.

[Robskie]

Are you considering different skins for the Gadaffi forces? or just MEC?

[Shovel]

I know, that's what I was saying. I was responding to lucky's comment.

[Reddeath]

So I am having a problem with saving, but I can not save the terrain. After saving, when I reload the map the terrain is back to its default flat surface.

Same deal with objects.



With those settings for a save, am I doing anything wrong that would cause my terrain to not save? or do I have to separately load a terrain file?

To Robskie, all options are on the table, that is far from the point I am at right now, its debatable I suppose, I know nothing of editing faction model textures so I would either need some help, or someone to volunteer.