Ten Mile Maps are possible.....maybe.....

[Davinci]

All, for the past week I have been experimenting with a ten mile map.

The map is so large that it takes approximately 10 minutes to scroll from one end of the map to the opposite end and this is in a straight line, not diagonally.

Here are two pictures showing the same units with the same frontage being deployed.

The first picture is the ELPine map; with six brigades being deployed.

The second picture is using a ten mile map that has eleven brigades deployed shoulder to shoulder, with plenty of room left over.

There are a few problems to over-come, such as it seems to make the tiles smaller, I don’t really know why.

I’m sure that a fps problem will probably arise from this also, although I did test it with a FPS of 10 fps with sixty thousand troops on the field, or thirty thousand per side.

But, this was didn’t have any other type of terrain on the map, such as fields, or trees.

I could also try a smaller size to try to gain a few more fps such as a 7.5 mile map, but this is interesting.
5 Mile Map

The attachment 5miles.jpg is no longer available

10 Mile Map

The attachment 10miles.jpg is no longer available

davinci

[Jack ONeill]

WOW!

[Gudadantza]

Wowowowow!

Yes!

Ok, It will have fps issues. But for now the great news are to know it is possible.
I guess, with that maps in mind for a future, the the way the minimaps work should be slightly tweaked. An optional zoom/scrolling feature perhaps?

Greetings.

[Garnier]

There are a few problems to over-come, such as it seems to make the tiles smaller, I don’t really know why.

If you make the map bmp file larger, the tiles will be the same size, if I understand your meaning of "tiles".

For instance, if you have a 2.5 mile map you use a 2048x2048 grayscale bmp. That's 4 MB. If you have a 5 mile map you can use a 4096x4096 grayscale bmp, to keep the same scale. This becomes 16 MB.

If you have a 10 mile map and want to keep the same scale, you'd need an 8192x8192 grayscale bmp, which would be 64 MB.

I can't test the last one obviously, but it might work. You could just use the 16 MB grayscale file with the 10 mile map, which would have the same scale terrain as Alpine, which is less than the gettysburg and antietam maps as you probably know.

[Saddletank]

I'm not sure maps this big are of much benefit. You can't load them up with terrain objects and so end up with an empty moonscape like Alpine. I'd rather play on the 2.5 mile maps that are stuffed full of immersive detail and useful cover.

If the 5 mile maps of Gettysburg and Antietam can handle such huge battles, of what practical use is a 10 mile map?

[Gudadantza]

I'm not sure maps this big are of much benefit. You can't load them up with terrain objects and so end up with an empty moonscape like Alpine. I'd rather play on the 2.5 mile maps that are stuffed full of immersive detail and useful cover.

If the 5 mile maps of Gettysburg and Antietam can handle such huge battles, of what practical use is a 10 mile map?

Basically the future and the life it will bring to the game.

And He is testing. Just testing.

[Martin James]

One benefit of larger maps is that there is more scope for pre-battle manoeuvre, so I would like to see some of these for variety.

It would tend to mean longer games, and that could be an issue for MP games, where some players are often time-constrained. Others may also find the delay in getting into action is just too long to be fun for them. A personal thing.

Do we need to go all the way to 10 miles? Not sure. Maybe 7 or 8 miles would reap most of the benefits and still be stable?

I like the alpine map, and find it makes a change from the more cluttered Pennsylvania terrain. So if losing walls & fences is a necessary compromise, I wouldn't mind that. Personal preference again.

I do find that using alpine makes for a different style game, with more emphasis on getting troops to the right place, and somewhat less on tactical skill.

Martin

[Davinci]

Thanks, Braxton Bragg, Michael Slaunwhite, Jack ONeill, Guadadantza, Garnier

Garnier – Yes, You are correct, changing the bmp file from 2048x2048 too 4096x4096 does bring the terrain in closer.

But, My meaning of the tiles were,…..well…..really had a double meaning.

Basically, the tiles are the blocks of terrain that the game draws on the ground. If the tiles are made smaller by the game, well, they seem to look like a kitchen floor, every tile is noticeable……Not Good!

I converted the ELPine1 map from a 5 mile map into a 10 mile map, and I’m still in the process of trying to reduce the size of the stream and the roads.

I’m losing about 2 fps after converting the ELPine map with all of the terrain showing, but that loss came after increasing the size of the bmp file from 2048 too 4096.

Converting the maps seems to double the size of everything, roads, creeks, fields, etc….

Gudadantza – I couldn’t have put it better than you just did, testing, just testing to see exactly what this game can do, and not do.

davinci

[Davinci]

One benefit of larger maps is that there is more scope for pre-battle maneuvers, so I would like to see some of these for variety. Martin

Exactly, I ran several test and it took more than eight hours of game time to move the units from one end of the map to the other end.

But, it takes ten minutes of real-time just to scroll the map from north to south, or east to west.

I’ll continue to play around with this, and if it doesn’t work, well…..it doesn’t work!

Then, I’ll back off, and try a smaller size.

davinci

[Gudadantza]

One benefit of larger maps is that there is more scope for pre-battle maneuvers, so I would like to see some of these for variety. Martin

Exactly, I ran several test and it took more than eight hours of game time to move the units from one end of the map to the other end.

But, it takes ten minutes of real-time just to scroll the map from north to south, or east to west.

I’ll continue to play around with this, and if it doesn’t work, well…..it doesn’t work!

Then, I’ll back off, and try a smaller size.

davinci

Another benefit from using larger maps could be the common use of 1:1 regiment scales in a natural way.
And yes It could be perhaps more focused to single, Making Multi maybe too long, but, in all kind of games the multi maps use to be different than those in single if it is needed.

There is nothing wrong in getting different map sizes. It is interesting.

Greetings