Artillery

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » May 14 2004

"ranges but on a 60km hex I think artillery will fire more than double their true range" :(

But what about realism?

Is there there no way to make the world map with about 30km hexes?

Post by **Balthagor** » May 14 2004

Unlikely due to total map size.

The world map is going to be a more strategic map then smaller maps. That is one of the reason for various maps. The smaller maps will be the more tactical.

The exact km/hex has not be decided yet. There are discussions of something between 60km/hex (~600 hexes accross) and 40km/hex (~1000 hexes across).

Post release we might look at something with smaller hexes but this type of map seems to be the most "playable".

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » May 14 2004

What exactly is the problem when using a huge map with a low scale?

prime_642 · Post by **prime_642** » May 14 2004

The problem is that the hexes no longer accurately represent terran, after all, not all forests are 60 kilometers wide, and neither are many cities 60 km wide

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » May 15 2004

Right this another problem when using "big" hexes instead of small ones (thats what I meant in my post before).

The game is only loosing detail when "big" hexes are chosen.

Vesson · Post by **Vesson** » May 16 2004

This is probably going to sound stupid... but why can't hexes just be used to place buildings, and gather forces?

For example, if I have a tank, an arty, an infantry vs an enemy of the same... why can't the game just make the units points on the map rather than hexes on a map? That way they move within their hexes, but are actually completely independant of them in the end... Then you don't need any range enhancement that blows realism and strategy.

Post by **Balthagor** » May 16 2004

Why the game was built with fixed hexes is certainly a question for George but off the top of my head I can think of a simple reason. CPU cycles. The game is constantly checking every units range of attack for possible opponents by scanning the hexes. If it had to scan on a pointer basis you talking for a 25km hex map 25 times squared the number of positions needed to be checked. The game would need a terahertz processor.

I'm hoping that George will give us more info on the possibility of a smaller scale world map but I do know that performance is a likely issue. Simple stuff like the terrain layer file that is ~1-2mb for the average map could top 10mb for maps with 2000 hexes across. If all the associated mpa files get too large you could see performance hits.

In my opinion, when making decisions on the world map we need to first be thinking about the campaign version. In the campaign, when you reach the world level, you'll never be controlling anything small. Usually, you'll be in control of a continent. I believe that playing continent vs. continent should be a much more strategic game.

A large/small scale map would clearly be built for singleplayer scenario or multiplayer so could be done post release.

prime_642 · Post by **prime_642** » May 16 2004

Question: Are the ranges of units adjusted for the sizes of various hexes? For example would an artillary piece that fires 40km fire 2 hexes in a 20 km scale map and 4 hexes on a 10 km scale map?

Post by **Balthagor** » May 16 2004

yes, but it's a curved bonus. You might get something like 3 hexes at 10km, 5 hexes at 20km and 7 hexes at 30km.

Vesson · Post by **Vesson** » May 17 2004

While I'm sure it can't be changed now... just food for thought... Couldn't hexes just be scanned, then if a unit is detected in the hex, then scan further?

Post by **Balthagor** » May 17 2004

... that's the cpu cycle consuming part. But by doing hexes, you scan in 20-30km slices.

Post by **George Geczy** » May 17 2004

There are many reasons for the uses of hexes instead of a 'completely flat map', both technical (as Chris mentioned) and also to make things a bit more understandable for the players. Players need to know "is this city mine, or not". With the fact that we have issues like production, ownership, zone-of-control, etc, we really need to have some physical division of the map to make it all possible.

The technical considerations are not to be dismissed either - we allow the creation of larger maps with more units than any other real-time mode game that I know of. Combine that with the types of calcs we do - long-range unit targetting, line of sight range and strengths, etc - and it is quite a mix that you just wouldn't be able to pull off without something to divide the map up a bit (ie, hexes).

Regarding the large world map, the main problem that I see with a world map with smaller hexes is the sheer size of the map - at 60 km hexes, we are 600 hexes wide. That is a HUGE map. You can barely see the rectangle on the mini-map at normal zoom. At 40 km hexes, we'd be at 1000 hexes wide. That sort of size makes it hard to get around the map, see what is going on, etc.

It would certainly be way too big and cumbersome to play in multiplayer, but I suppose an argument could be made that it might work in single-player as a 'long' version of the world map.

-- George.

PS - Regarding the range modifier for artillery units, once again it is useful to mention that for 'realism' it will be possible to turn off the modification in the game settings.

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » May 18 2004

"Regarding the large world map, the main problem that I see with a world map with smaller hexes is the sheer size of the map - at 60 km hexes, we are 600 hexes wide. That is a HUGE map. You can barely see the rectangle on the mini-map at normal zoom. At 40 km hexes, we'd be at 1000 hexes wide. That sort of size makes it hard to get around the map, see what is going on, etc. "

As far as Im concerned I would rather have a huge map to navigate than limited tactical options.

Sooner or later players can learn to use a huge map,but the tactical details will stay limited.
Besides,the UI is quite good a locating the necessary upgrades and units so this is also a great help to the player.