Jump to content

Question to ED and 3rd party map developers


Gierasimov
 Share

Recommended Posts

Caucasus, NTTR, Persian Gulf, The Channel, Syria. Those I own license for, and I noticed all share the same common issue. 

 

No flat terrain underneath structures. 


Serious question to ED and 3rd party map developers - is it the manpower, the process, or terrain kit limitation?

 

I saw many buildings built on hills in real life and I get it that certain parts of the building can sink into the slope, that is fine.

 

But what I see in all DCS terrains I own, with maybe NTTR being less noticeable, is that structures are placed in such a way that you can walk onto the roof from one end and see through the bottom of the floor on the other.

 

Roads, town squares, structures, military facilities.  Why not flatten the area where these are placed? I think Syria is the top offender, which I primarily attribute to its WIP status, but I see the same for Persian Gulf for instance. Marianas screens show these symptoms as well. 

 

Why?

 

 

  • Like 3
i7-10700K-490-H Gaming-64GB Vengance LPX-RTX-3080 Ti-VPC Constellation ALPHA-R + WarBRD + MongoosT-50CM3-non-VR-single player-open beta

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Gierasimov said:

Caucasus, NTTR, Persian Gulf, The Channel, Syria. Those I own license for, and I noticed all share the same common issue. 

 

No flat terrain underneath structures. 


Serious question to ED and 3rd party map developers - is it the manpower, the process, or terrain kit limitation?

 

I saw many buildings built on hills in real life and I get it that certain parts of the building can sink into the slope, that is fine.

 

But what I see in all DCS terrains I own, with maybe NTTR being less noticeable, is that structures are placed in such a way that you can walk onto the roof from one end and see through the bottom of the floor on the other.

 

Roads, town squares, structures, military facilities.  Why not flatten the area where these are placed? I think Syria is the top offender, which I primarily attribute to its WIP status, but I see the same for Persian Gulf for instance. Marianas screens show these symptoms as well. 

 

Why?

 

 


Flattening areas to allow for terrain/object seating may cause more issues than it may appear to fix.

It may cause unrealistic terrain profiles in heavily urbanised areas, and other anomalies.

 

Alien desktop PC, Intel i7-8700 CPU@3.20GHz 6 Core, Nvidia GTX 1070, 16GB RAM. TM Warthog stick and Throttles. Saitek ProFlight pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, G.J.S said:


Flattening areas to allow for terrain/object seating may cause more issues than it may appear to fix.

It may cause unrealistic terrain profiles in heavily urbanised areas, and other anomalies.

 

To the contrary:

Fact 1:

 

NOT Flattening areas to allow for terrain/object seating may causes more issues than it may appear to fix.

 

Fact 2:

 

It may causes unrealistic terrain profiles in heavily urbanised areas, and other anomalies.

  • Like 1
i7-10700K-490-H Gaming-64GB Vengance LPX-RTX-3080 Ti-VPC Constellation ALPHA-R + WarBRD + MongoosT-50CM3-non-VR-single player-open beta

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gierasimov said:

To the contrary:

Fact 1:

 

NOT Flattening areas to allow for terrain/object seating may causes more issues than it may appear to fix.

 

Fact 2:

 

It may causes unrealistic terrain profiles in heavily urbanised areas, and other anomalies.


Okay - love your attempt at being cute.

 

What I meant was, flattening the road networks for instance, into a more “doable” net to eradicate the sudden peaks etc, may be problematic beyond that which you hope to achieve.

Also, flattening terrain parcels around buildings etc may be problematic due to the knock on effect of also altering roadways in proximity.

 

Do you not think the respective developers had not already thought of these things? The fact that these alleged fixes or workarounds have not materialised is very likely due to “they will cause more problems than they solve”.

Alien desktop PC, Intel i7-8700 CPU@3.20GHz 6 Core, Nvidia GTX 1070, 16GB RAM. TM Warthog stick and Throttles. Saitek ProFlight pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terrains are usually created from a mesh of points with a more or less fixed density, and the surface between them interpolated. It's usually not possible to on-the-fly flatten part of a polygon between the grid points. That is usually the reason we see objects askew on tilted terrain (a good bad example: Haifa's southern ridge). The normal way to flatten terrain is by placing a static object (i.e. seperately modeled) over the terrain, which will siphon off CPU power for additional drawing, shading etc.

 

So is it possible? Yes, when you can place the flattened structures over the affected terrain. But it will cost you performance wise and doesn't always look good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hello, ok and that should look good? How are you supposed to play ground missions or partially helicopter missions. Sure it's always a matter of opinion, but that can't be the solution.

 

 

Screen_210618_234240.png

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I agree, map technology in DCS World seems a little behind when compared to other digital worlds. And obviously performance is an even bigger issue.

 

My question to ED and its map makers is aside from other performance enhancing techniques they may be using, how much do they consider over use of static objects?

 

I fly/drive a lot on Normandy for example, and the impression I get is that they could probably decrease the number of trees significantly without affecting the overall appearance of the map both in the air and on the ground. And I know others have also pointed out excessive quantities of static objects on other maps like boxes, cars ect...

 

You don't have to spend too much time flying/driving around Normandy before you find large clumps of trees that look completely out of place. Not sure how big the effect would be, but the impression I have is we would probably see a decent performance boost by cleaning up the maps a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately there is not that much of terrain improvement in Marianas in terms of object placement. I appreciate that a bug can slip in, but honestly as this is supposed to be the best map produced so far for DCS World.

With 2021 being primarily focused on helicopters, with beautiful new ground units that encourage low level missions and content creation, a map that has got sinking or floating buildings just ruins the experience.   

Well, maybe one day it will improve. Time will show.

  • Like 1
i7-10700K-490-H Gaming-64GB Vengance LPX-RTX-3080 Ti-VPC Constellation ALPHA-R + WarBRD + MongoosT-50CM3-non-VR-single player-open beta

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/20/2021 at 3:27 PM, Gierasimov said:

Unfortunately there is not that much of terrain improvement in Marianas in terms of object placement. I appreciate that a bug can slip in, but honestly as this is supposed to be the best map produced so far for DCS World.

With 2021 being primarily focused on helicopters, with beautiful new ground units that encourage low level missions and content creation, a map that has got sinking or floating buildings just ruins the experience.   

 

Agreed, and there are plenty of issues with the geometry, when compared to RL data.

 

In some instances, it makes things very difficult in terms of setting SAM systems up, where areas that should be flat, aren't.

 

On 9/20/2021 at 3:27 PM, Gierasimov said:

Well, maybe one day it will improve. Time will show.

 

I hope so, especially seeing as the Marianas was supposed to utilise the newest technology.

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV-2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/bG9bBc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

the terrain technology does not support flattening the terrain to that detail. you'd have to flatten a large swath of the terrain which will be unrealistic. this engine needs to make it possible to change elevation of terrain within 1 meter resolution. then it will be possible

On 7/16/2021 at 6:31 AM, Mab8 said:

Hello, ok and that should look good? How are you supposed to play ground missions or partially helicopter missions. Sure it's always a matter of opinion, but that can't be the solution.

 

 

Screen_210618_234240.png

the terrain engine is not remotely detailed enough for ca, this was my initial consternation regarding a whole module dedicated to ca, when at the time, the map detail was even lower than depicted in your screenshot. it's just an incredibly bad project. not to mention no track physics and vehicles skid around like hovercraft. i wish they never started that priject and instead put all the time and resources to develop the terrain first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/17/2021 at 1:57 AM, odrin said:
the terrain technology does not support flattening the terrain to that detail. you'd have to flatten a large swath of the terrain which will be unrealistic. this engine needs to make it possible to change elevation of terrain within 1 meter resolution. then it will be possible
the terrain engine is not remotely detailed enough for ca, this was my initial consternation regarding a whole module dedicated to ca, when at the time, the map detail was even lower than depicted in your screenshot. it's just an incredibly bad project. not to mention no track physics and vehicles skid around like hovercraft. i wish they never started that priject and instead put all the time and resources to develop the terrain first.

CA was based on a JTAK UK Army desktock trainer, approved and licenced to release on the entertainment market. That never was planed as a realistic tank, vehicle simulator.

ED has plans to improve the track and wheel phisics on de core someday. Meanwhile the Terrain develop kit (TDK) expected get improves on a future to build betters maps plus the "whole world" technology.

Enviado desde mi RNE-L21 mediante Tapatalk
 


Edited by Silver_Dragon
  • Like 2

More news to the front

My Rig: AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Eight-Core  3.60 GHz / Crosshair VI Hero / Corsair H115i / 48 GB DDR4 RAM Vergance RGB Pro / GTX-1080 8 GB RAM / HD 1Tb / SSD 2Tb/2x1Tb / Warthog / 2 MDF / TFPR / Track Ir V / Logitech G633

DCS: Roadmap (unofficial): https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

DCS: List of Vacant models: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4076891#post4076891

Silver_Dragon Youtube

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...