Scourge of War Boards

Thanks for the kind words.

I'm pretty sure I've got the 'Walk' speed set correctly for true distances at 3 miles per hour, as explained in the first post.

That's something else I don't understand. Measuring the map size by using marching speed doesn't make a lot of sense. If you do so, then you have to say the map is a 2 hour map or whatever. All you are measuring by walking speed is how long it takes a unit to march over hills, through stream valleys, through woods, etc. in a certain amount of time. That is completely dependent on the terrain features and does not measure distance. It measures time for one particular path across the map.

I thought that in the old days of TC2M - One man was three feet wide and one man stood for 1 yard of distance, so each man represented 10 men, so is that where the ( 30 ) originated from?

NSD wanted its regiment line to represent the average length of ground a real regiment occupied. So they enlarged the sprites such that an average regiment had the correct length. Hence the sprites are 12 feet high.
To find out why the number of pixels/yd. is 30, just a little arithmetic is needed. A SOWGB 2.5 mi. map is 130752 pixels on a side. So 130752 / 2.5 = 52301 pixels / mi. There are 1760 yd. per mi., so 52301 / 1760 = 29.7 or 30 pixels/yd. For 5 mi. maps, (261824 pixels) you end up with 29.75 or once again 30 pixels/yd.
Reb's mod cuts the size of the maps in half, in effect bringing the geographical items closer together, (in terms of yd. apart), but making the units look like they are farther apart, (pixels apart).

To find out why the number of pixels/yd. is 30, just a little arithmetic is needed. A SOWGB 2.5 mi. map is 130752 pixels on a side. So 130752 / 2.5 = 52301 pixels / mi. There are 1760 yd. per mi., so 52301 / 1760 = 29.7 or 30 pixels/yd. For 5 mi. maps, (261824 pixels) you end up with 29.75 or once again 30 pixels/yd.
Reb's mod cuts the size of the maps in half, in effect bringing the geographical items closer together, (in terms of yd. apart), but making the units look like they are farther apart, (pixels apart).

Thanks, You explained that in a way that I could actually understand!

Math is Not my strong point!

So, a "Single" man would occupy a single pixel standing up, and if it were laid down it would only occupy two pixels in length, correct?

If that's True, it would be fairly simple to place several miles of pixels on a Map to test the walking speed for the men. It would just require the removal of any objects, and movement penalties.

Or, did I also get that Wrong?

davinci

Dis-Regard This Post!

davinci

Thanks for the kind words.

I'm pretty sure I've got the 'Walk' speed set correctly for true distances at 3 miles per hour, as explained in the first post.

That's something else I don't understand. Measuring the map size by using marching speed doesn't make a lot of sense. If you do so, then you have to say the map is a 2 hour map or whatever. All you are measuring by walking speed is how long it takes a unit to march over hills, through stream valleys, through woods, etc. in a certain amount of time. That is completely dependent on the terrain features and does not measure distance. It measures time for one particular path across the map.

I used the Kansas map and tested across flat and open terrain. A unit was moved the distance of 880 yards, 1/2 mile, and the walk speed was tweaked until the unit completed that distance in 10 minutes...Establishing a walk speed of 3. This is based on historic observations that marching troops cover 3 miles in 1 hour, or 1 mile in twenty minutes, hence 1/2 mile in ten minutes. Am I being clear yet, or did I miss something?

NSD wanted its regiment line to represent the average length of ground a real regiment occupied. So they enlarged the sprites such that an average regiment had the correct length. Hence the sprites are 12 feet high.
To find out why the number of pixels/yd. is 30, just a little arithmetic is needed. A SOWGB 2.5 mi. map is 130752 pixels on a side. So 130752 / 2.5 = 52301 pixels / mi. There are 1760 yd. per mi., so 52301 / 1760 = 29.7 or 30 pixels/yd. For 5 mi. maps, (261824 pixels) you end up with 29.75 or once again 30 pixels/yd.
Reb's mod cuts the size of the maps in half, in effect bringing the geographical items closer together, (in terms of yd. apart), but making the units look like they are farther apart, (pixels apart).

I knew about the 12 feet sprite scaling procedure, but the rest of your explanation provided for more enlightenment...Thanks

A SOWGB 2.5 mi. map is 130752 pixels on a side.

Now I'm confused even more

I thought that A SOWWL map is based on the heightmap, and 2.5 miles would olny be 256 pixels.
The actual bmp can be any resolution no?
GB is different?

I thought that A SOWWL map is based on the heightmap, and 2.5 miles would olny be 256 pixels.
The actual bmp can be any resolution no?
GB is different?

The "height.tga" located in the LStudio does determine the size of the Map, but if you start up the LStudio and turn the camera ninety degrees and move along the edge of the map until the end of it.

That will show you the coordinates from one end until the next.

The Mapname.bmp has to be 8bit as far as I know.

davinci

The Mapname.bmp has to be 8bit as far as I know.

Yes, and grayscale too.
But it can be any size, changing it from 1024p to 2048p doesn't make more miles on the map, it just makes distances between locations smaller because the coordinates have to be scaled to the 512p (for 5 miles) heightmap anyway.
At least, that's how it works for me, but I am still a novice.

Changing vertical scale shouldn't affect anything, all objects in PR6 can be arbitrarily scaled anyway.
Terrain sprites are scalable in gfx.csv but not on independent axes. The aspect ratio is fixed.

So, a "Single" man would occupy a single pixel standing up, and if it were laid down it would only occupy two pixels in length, correct?

No. He occupies as many pixels as is his original drawn size times the scale modifier in unitpack. He's like a house. His size doesn't change when UnitPerYard is changed.

Dis-Regard This Post!

davinci

Yeah, that post kinda epitomized your slogan:

"The only true logic is that, there is no true logic!"

Dis-Regard This Post!

davinci

Yes. It's like the start of Davinci Buddhism.
"Do not think about the white horse"