CharlieB Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 Using fortifications end to end, a reasonably effective A/Tk ditch can be created. Have not yet tried bridging it... but the CGF were not impressed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 I think you can have issues with the current terrain model where scrapes placed on ridges aren't always that deep. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieB Posted October 20, 2016 Author Share Posted October 20, 2016 indeed, but until we get the ability to dig ditches etc and fill them in with AEVs then it is a starter for 10... I am curious to see what will come in the future with the change of terrain 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 Sure, If it is too shallow, you can always make it a better obstacle by creating a zone and have vehicles allocated a X% chance of becoming immobile (say damage track) if they enter it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted October 20, 2016 Members Share Posted October 20, 2016 Why not place dragon teeth, really. This is crazy. Heck, you could also use some of those concrete "Bremer walls". If you use half height, defenders can still shoot over them. Abusing emplacements for this is bad for the frame rate, bad for future compatibility of such scenarios, etc. I understand that there is a need for excavated obstacles, and you'll get them, once that the new terrain engine has been successfully implemented. Once that it is there we'll start working on dynamic terrain, and that would include the ability to dig trenches of any size. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rotareneg Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 Quote ... dig trenches of any size. Bagger 293 confirmed for SB 5.0! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieB Posted October 20, 2016 Author Share Posted October 20, 2016 SSnake, as ever thank you for the pearls of wisdom. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkAngel Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 Why not make a terrain item as a wadi. Make your "Moat" Then put Dragons teeth at the bottom of it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 I think CharlieB was trying for a Mission Editor based solution, rather than a Map Editor based one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieB Posted October 20, 2016 Author Share Posted October 20, 2016 You are indeed correct - I will need to remind myself with respect to which obstacles can be effected by what. I seem to recall that Dragons teeth cannot be budged. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkAngel Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 Nothing stopping you from doing it in both the terrain map and a scenario. Just make a copy of the terrain map in question and do the wadi on that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieB Posted October 20, 2016 Author Share Posted October 20, 2016 good point. the Maps are now embedded into the scenario are they not? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 10 minutes ago, CharlieB said: You are indeed correct - I will need to remind myself with respect to which obstacles can be effected by what. I seem to recall that Dragons teeth cannot be budged. Yep they aren't cleared by miclic, roller, plough, etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieB Posted October 20, 2016 Author Share Posted October 20, 2016 Nuc? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 5 minutes ago, CharlieB said: good point. the Maps are now embedded into the scenario are they not? Yes, but it will mean the scenario file is bigger than a purely Mission Editor based implementation. This will be more evident in the new terrain model - at least as its currently planned to be implemented. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted October 20, 2016 Share Posted October 20, 2016 (edited) 26 minutes ago, CharlieB said: Nuc? Well unless its a massive fortification (West Wall, etc.) then the amount of engineering effort would limit the length of the obstacle belt. So you should be able to go around - of course that might be the intent of the obstacle though. Edited October 20, 2016 by Gibsonm Typo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieB Posted October 20, 2016 Author Share Posted October 20, 2016 Cunning things obs, turning, canalizing, Blocking etc etc 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted October 20, 2016 Members Share Posted October 20, 2016 18 minutes ago, Gibsonm said: it will mean the scenario file is bigger than a purely Mission Editor based implementation. This will be more evident in the new terrain model - at least as its currently planned to be implemented. a) currently, it's not. A "wadi" terrain type is only that, a tile like water, except that no water surface is rendered (and that vehicle engines don't stall by driving into them. As each terrain map is ALWAYS embedded in the scenario, this doesn't make a scenario larger. b) Wadis will be discontinued in future versions. We'll still support them when importing legacy scenarios and legacy maps of course, but the option to mark a terrain type as a wadi will be replaced by a functionality to simply dig them into the terrain profile. Functionally they are then identical to any other trench, except a different cross-section profile, of course. For the moment however they would be a quite legitimate way to visualize an anti- tank trench. What you lose however is the ability for the exercising students to set the trench during the planning stage. Rather, the mission designer needs to create a scenario based on a copy of the intended map (in anticipation of the students later setting the location of the obstacle); then adjust the terrain map according to where the students indicate that they want to have the AT ditch; then perform a map refresh on the scenario, and finally distributing/publishing the scenario file for the exercise. So, you lose a bit of flexibility c) The new terrain model will be implemented in a way to retain this flexibility in map adjustment for scenarios by introducing "delta maps"; maps will be organized in folders, "map packages", which contain the immutable base map ("immutable" as in you'd need to save it as a different base map before you can make major changes to it), and files that describe just the modifications to the original map; in addition there would be other files that belong to the map data preprocessing (computationally/memory intensive operations that are stored, so that they need not be done every time that you load a map - like navmesh generation). You could have several different of these delta maps in a single map package (but no deltas of deltas; that would quickly become a recursive nightmare). The scenario would then specify WHICH delta map were to be applied to the base map; if the local copy of the map package doesn't contain the required delta map, the host could then pass on just the missing delta map to the client. That way the amount of data transfer can be minimized. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieB Posted October 20, 2016 Author Share Posted October 20, 2016 (edited) Sounds like progress to me. Many thanks SSnake Edited October 20, 2016 by CharlieB 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashdivay Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 wow Snake , you just gave us peasants hope , now we expect greatness in future. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpabrams Posted October 21, 2016 Share Posted October 21, 2016 On 10/20/2016 at 8:47 AM, Ssnake said: I understand that there is a need for excavated obstacles, and you'll get them, once that the new terrain engine has been successfully implemented. Once that it is there we'll start working on dynamic terrain, and that would include the ability to dig trenches of any size. Sweet, spider holes, trenches and improved positions for the foot mobiles will be an awesome addition. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.