PDA

View Full Version : The Slot Map Needed



VF-51-Dart
03-01-2006, 09:02 AM
Sure wish Oleg and Co would do the Solomon Island chain/ The Slot for inclusion in the next add-on. The PTO really needs it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Doug_Thompson
03-01-2006, 09:05 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

VF-51-Dart
03-01-2006, 09:54 AM
bump http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Tully__
03-01-2006, 10:29 AM
Indeed the PTO would really benefit from it, but on the other hand the game might suffer with maps that big and with that much detailed land area.

VF-51-Dart
03-01-2006, 11:58 AM
Break it down into sectional maps then. However done, it's a glaring omission from a sim with the title of Pacific Fighters IMHO. I understand the level of detail could possibly make FPS an issue if it was done full size, but perhaps a little sacrifice on detailed palm trees, etc. would more than make up for having this vital area of the PTO conflict mapped for Pacific Fighters.

VF-51-Dart
03-01-2006, 12:34 PM
Anyone else think we need this map?

TgD Thunderbolt56
03-01-2006, 12:40 PM
I do.

Tully__
03-01-2006, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by VF-51-Dart:
Anyone else think we need this map?
Search for "slot" in the PF forum, everyone else thinks we need the slot map, they've just already posted as much at least 6 times over and don't want to get banned for spamming http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

TgD Thunderbolt56
03-01-2006, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by Tully__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VF-51-Dart:
Anyone else think we need this map?
Search for "slot" in the PF forum, everyone else thinks we need the slot map, they've just already posted as much at least 6 times over and don't want to get banned for spamming http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


bully http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

VF-51-Dart
03-01-2006, 02:36 PM
I saw the post that went down the tubes with hijacking, so I thought perhaps we could actually get back to the question/request without all the vitriol. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

vocatx
03-01-2006, 03:58 PM
I would love to see it, but I think we are about the end of the road on new content, maps included. Reading Ian's posts it is obvious that making a map takes a LOT of time. I've got an idea for a campaign (assuming we get a certain aircraft in one of the patches) that would greatly benefit from having a map of the Slot.

As far as frame rates, I wouldn't expect it to be much, if any, worse than the Finland map. There wouldn't be too many objects on a Slot map, other than palm trees. Most of the island would be jungle with a few streams meandering through.

VF-51-Dart
03-01-2006, 05:47 PM
Yeah, I've no doubt it takes a lot of work to produce one of these maps. I'm just hopeful they end with the inclusion of this area since it was such a big part of the Pacific conflict. It would be a real shame to not have it in this sim.

Thud_vols
03-01-2006, 06:13 PM
Bump! There is always room for improvement and I think this is one of them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Enforcer572005
03-01-2006, 10:36 PM
yeah, weve cried over htis before many times, and i dont think it would be that tuff to add a bit to the northwest of the biggest version of the guadalcanal map that has so much ocean in it. Santa isabel and the russells were pretty close by and saw much of the fighting in the air. The jpanes built a base on Munda, and id settle for one that wasnt totally detailed just to have a base for the japanese to op from.

A guadalcanal map without santa isabel and the russell islands isnt very useful actually. In CFS2 we had all the slot, and made misns for the japanese coming all the way from rabaul...when you could get the lousy MS misn blder to work.

The lack of any islands NW really limits the use of hte guadalcanal map.

Stigler_9_JG52
03-01-2006, 10:39 PM
Once again, I'll have to say it:

It doesn't do much good to have a postage stamp sized map, scaled so far down that the distances and tactical considerations of fuel and endurance don't matter. You know, like what Oleg's done to butcher the "N. Africa" map. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

If you don't have the scale, you simply don't have the map. Sectionals won't do it. I mean, what part do you cut off and pretend doesn't exist? You've got Rabaul and Guadalcanal on either end...those are both pretty important.

This sim is just not designed to do justice to the S. Pacific.

WholeHawg
03-03-2006, 07:57 AM
Yeah The scale issue is a problem to be sure, and no matter what he does Oleg will take flack but It might be nice to take a stab at it anyway.

Am I correct in assuming that there is no 3rd party map making ability in this sim?

Tully__
03-03-2006, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by WholeHawg:
Yeah The scale issue is a problem to be sure, and no matter what he does Oleg will take flack but It might be nice to take a stab at it anyway.

Am I correct in assuming that there is no 3rd party map making ability in this sim?
Not quite. The 3d software required is expensive and written for / documented in Russian language. It's hard to use and takes a long time to learn.
In addition, the standards that must be met for maps to be included are far more technically stringent than for aircraft models as map building requires the builder to know and understand a variety of rules used by the AI in their landing scripts and spawn behaviour. As described by Ian Boys who did a couple of the most recent maps and is working on the Norway map, the process is multistage and takes about 1600-2500 man hours per map. Ian and the team he works with (credits in the readme of the last patch to include a map IIRC) are the only 3rd party team that 1C:Maddox will even consider accepting maps from and due to the overhead for the development team in training a new team to use the required software and what needs to be allowed for to make the map useful in the sim, no further map modellors will be accepted.

For the upcoming BoB sim, avenues are being investigated to allow users more input in this area but for the IL2 series we have to accept the current status quo and hope that those already involved have time to do some of the stuff we might be interested in before the total end of development in this series.

I'd recomment not pestering those involved as they already are working on projects that will continue to keep them busy for the next couple of months and longer. Ian posts regularly at SimHQ so if you keep your eye out there you'll see what's going on in this area.

|CoB|_Spectre
03-03-2006, 06:06 PM
Very insightful, Tully. I'd known for some time that the map-making tools were powerful, but not intuitive and required significant assistance before Luthier and Ian could work autonomously. I had no idea the manhours were so high. There are 2080 hours in an 8 hour a day/40 hours a week, work year. Kind of puts it into perspective, doesn't it!

VF-51-Dart
03-03-2006, 09:03 PM
Good to know Tully. Thanks for the explanation. Guess I'll just keep my fingers crossed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

darkhorizon11
03-03-2006, 09:43 PM
how about a 75% slot? I know its not 100% full real but better than nothing..

Stigler_9_JG52
03-03-2006, 10:33 PM
Or 33%? Or 75.235%? Or 2%, like lo-fat milk?


If it ain't 100%, it might as well be a fantasy map. Range was much too important a factor in the Pacific Theatre. If you're happy with "just" dogfights and arcade action any map'll do. If you like your action historical, it's got to be close to the real numbers, ranges and conditions, or it's a useless exercise, and you can't explore the conditions or attempt to get a taste of it.

Lil-Pup
03-04-2006, 04:17 AM
A 1:1 scale Slot map would be just plain stupid because its completely impractical to fly 8 hour returns. This isn't MSFS and there are precious few of us interested in simulating actual long haul max-conserve sorties. What we need is the basic island shapes in an accurate orientation with no more than 10 minutes of open water between Bougainville and New Britain. Something practical... that we can actually use.

"Oh awesome, there's Guadalcanal, what a great four hour flight this was... is that flak?" *blam* PK'd / Refly.

VT-51_Razor
03-04-2006, 05:50 AM
I would say there is room for compromise between the two positions stated above. How about a map with Guadalcanal in the lower right hand corner, and we settle for whatever ends up on the upper left hand corner? If the islands were placed just a few miles closer together than reality, I doubt anyone would notice.

The Slot would definitely be my choice for another map if that were ever a possibility.

joeap
03-04-2006, 06:18 AM
A real map would be ok if we had a real warp feature. Now how to make a warp feature unlike the MS-CFS and the "black screen" PF one we have now?

mandrill7
03-13-2006, 03:25 PM
Given the large areas of essentially "nothing" that a SW PTO map would entail, I wonder if we aren't just as well off adapting the New Guinea map we have now. Flying times are an hour or so from Buna to some of the offshore islands NE and there's not a helluva lot down below, aside from the occasional village and airstrip. If you were to have the whole north coast from Wewak to Milne Bay, that would be too much real estate for any but the most extreme immersion fanatics to want to fly over.

It's not a bad compromise retitling Milne Bay as Buna and calling Buna Wewak and setting up missions accordingly. (Realism fans can kick me.)

mandrill7
03-13-2006, 03:27 PM
BTW - cool link:

http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/rdunn/248th/248th.htm

BaldieJr
03-13-2006, 04:42 PM
im just glad that slot-whinings have become fewer and further between.