D-Scythe Posted January 21, 2005 Posted January 21, 2005 First of all: I am NOT asking for a full-scale terrain expansion. There are several airbases in Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria that is on the Lock On map (albeit not in the "worked on" sections). I was just wondering if it was possible to add only a few of these - if only ONE for turkey if nothing else - so that it provides a bit more options to the mission builder. IMO, if any hypothetical war was staged in the Black Sea between NATO and Russia, Turkey would be the main base of operations for NATO. Again, I am NOT asking for a terrain expansion - merely just some more places to land :) Airbases (places already on map highlighted): Bulgaria Romania Turkey
VapoR Posted January 21, 2005 Posted January 21, 2005 This is actually a VERY good idea!! Just a base or two across the Black Sea to fly from, maybe it would even be possible to complete about 10-20 sq miles around the base, just so it would look like the rest of the map.
Alfa Posted January 21, 2005 Posted January 21, 2005 Yes a NATO airbase in Turkey would be a very good idea :) I agree that if a conflict broke out in the Black Sea region, NATO air contingents would almost certainly be stationed at Turkish airbases. In addition to the realism factor, there is the question of taking full advantage of the actual map size.....I often hear people saying that the current Black Sea region is too small for this or that, but I am willing to bet that most people only use a fraction of its size - i.e. the areas currently modelled. By positioning airbases in Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria as D-Scythe suggests, the scenario could be spread out over a much larger area and a feature like in-flight refuelling come to its right. :) JJ
D-Scythe Posted January 21, 2005 Author Posted January 21, 2005 By positioning airbases in Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria as D-Scythe suggests, the scenario could be spread out over a much larger area and a feature like in-flight refuelling come to its right. :) My thoughts exactly 8)
Octav Posted January 22, 2005 Posted January 22, 2005 By positioning airbases in Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria as D-Scythe suggests, the scenario could be spread out over a much larger area and a feature like in-flight refuelling come to its right. :) My thoughts exactly 8) I support the ideea... Gues why .... :D Octav
MBot Posted January 22, 2005 Posted January 22, 2005 A realy good idea. This would be a true gamplay multiplier for the current map.
ThirdELTPoznan Posted January 22, 2005 Posted January 22, 2005 Yeah... The idea is really great!! GROM- Grupa Reagowania Operacyjno Manewrowego
504MrWolf Posted January 22, 2005 Posted January 22, 2005 great work D-Scythe !!! This is a fantastic idea esspecially when they make the F-16 flyable for turkish op's cough ** ;) www.VVS504.co.uk www.lockonskins.co.uk
S77th-Dante Posted January 24, 2005 Posted January 24, 2005 greece, moldova romania turkey usbekistain? ukraine (kiev odessa demetipresgrov ) having the ability to Add an airport to the map even with out terain would open up the game to some wicked scenarios. 8) Savage 77th Squadron 'S77th' http://www.s77th.com The Lomac League, For Squadrons & Single Players http://www.LomacLeague.com
F l a n k e r Posted January 24, 2005 Posted January 24, 2005 Great idea! Someone knows how the map is generated in the Lock On engine? Is it impossible that we can add some terrain in the map?
192nd_Erdem Posted January 24, 2005 Posted January 24, 2005 It looks great,I would love to take off from my country's(Turkey) airfields.
SwingKid Posted January 24, 2005 Posted January 24, 2005 I also think Lock On needs a good NATO airbase for believeable immersion, but I'm not sure I'd favor most of the ones D-Scythe has highlighted. In-flight refuelling notwithstanding, they are very far from Lock On action. Try flying a mission in Lock On now over undetailed "flat" terrain at those distances, and you might agree it's pretty dull. I'd rather see effort expended where it will better improve gameplay, e.g. actually doing the work to extend the terrain into Georgia and Turkey, and adding new airbases there. Having a NATO airbase in "flat" terrain is not compatible with enemy strike aircraft using terrain masking against NATO SAMs when attacking. But I certainly agree with the general frustration of having nothing but "Russian-friendly" airbases to use for the past seven years. The Turkish F-16 base at Merzifon would be really cool (note black European asphalt vs. white Russian tarmac): http://www.terraserver.com/imagery/image_gx.asp?cpx=35.53278006147517&cpy=40.83420916497273&res=15&provider_id=340&t=pan ...but this is a particularly difficult choice - it would require a huge amount of terrain to be added for just this one airbase. Putting it in the middle of "undetailed" terrain would require the user to imagine a lot of mountains while flying over nothing. Merzifon's airbase area is shown in the little red box in the middle: IMHO a better choice would be to have the civil airport at Trabzon (red box at right edge of image above) "commandeered" for NATO ops: http://www.terraserver.com/imagery/image_gx.asp?cpx=39.78213&cpy=40.99275033&res=15&provider_id=340&t=pan It's closer to the action, and since it's on the shoreline, including the surrounding terrain would be less "expensive" than for Merzifon: Would this be believeable? -SK
GGTharos Posted January 24, 2005 Posted January 24, 2005 Sk, I don't think the terrain itself is a large issue as such (I could be wrong!) but rather any cities/villages etc which require meticulous placement of buildings ... the terrain itself can be imported from a DEM and texturemapped relativaly quickly, AFAIK. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
D-Scythe Posted January 24, 2005 Author Posted January 24, 2005 I also think Lock On needs a good NATO airbase for believeable immersion, but I'm not sure I'd favor most of the ones D-Scythe has highlighted. In-flight refuelling notwithstanding, they are very far from Lock On action. Try flying a mission in Lock On now over undetailed "flat" terrain at those distances, and you might agree it's pretty dull. Well, Swing, most of the current (believable) conflict scenarios are based around a Ukraine and NATO force against Russia, right? And bases in Turkey, like Merzifon, or Sinop, are right by the ocean anyway. So most of the time the player would not be flying over the generic, unmodelled terrain, but rather, over the Black Sea during ingress. As I said, it won't improve gameplay directly, but offer more options to the mission and campaign builder to construct some truly believable scenarios.
SwingKid Posted January 24, 2005 Posted January 24, 2005 Sk, I don't think the terrain itself is a large issue as such (I could be wrong!) but rather any cities/villages etc which require meticulous placement of buildings ... the terrain itself can be imported from a DEM and texturemapped relativaly quickly, AFAIK. Yes and no... The texturemapping for The Caucasus terrain took a significant time for Lock On and went through more than one iteration, whereas populating villages was once described to me as "semi-automatic" (emphasis on "semi"). The biggest time-consumers were not the towns but rather the airbases themselves - I was surprised by how long they took, but realized they are not really "static" objects like towns - each airbase needs to have individual taxiway, anti-collision and parking route logic programmed for AI aicraft of different sizes that might use it. If ED is going to set aside the time to create new terrain and another airbase, it doesn't cost very much extra to sprinkle a few "semi-automatic" villages and forests around, since it's the airbases themselves that are most meticulous. Ever since ED introduced road and rail networks to support moving vehicles, there wasn't time to build up Caucasus towns to the same precision as Crimea (largely imported from Flanker 2.0). I used to make similar suggestions to "cut corners" with map building to satisfy our desperate need for a NATO airbase, but having now seen the airbase creation in action, no longer believe it would be so easy. Hence my eagerness to discuss map questions in a broader context (e.g. "Lock On Sequel" discussion). The work is inevitably going to take time. The sooner ED decides on the long-term plan, the sooner they can get started. -SK
SwingKid Posted January 24, 2005 Posted January 24, 2005 Well, Swing, most of the current (believable) conflict scenarios are based around a Ukraine and NATO force against Russia, right? And bases in Turkey, like Merzifon, or Sinop, are right by the ocean anyway. So most of the time the player would not be flying over the generic, unmodelled terrain, but rather, over the Black Sea during ingress. Merzifon is a good five to ten minute's flying from the coast, let alone crossing the Black Sea - not close enough, IMHO, for close air support - and Sinop is too small for jets. I like Trabzon, or airbases in Georgia proper, but then, that might be because I prefer "Russia vs. Georgia" missions to "Russia vs. Ukraine". It's difficult for me to imagine Russians bombing their own friendly bases in Crimea. Just my opinion. Why Romania or Bulgaria though? Hey, are you really Alfa? Planning some naval ops sim in disguise? :) -SK
D-Scythe Posted January 25, 2005 Author Posted January 25, 2005 Me, Alfa? Haha, flattery will get you no where. Seriously though, I'm not JJ - I just share many of his opinions, that's all. So SK, since airbases require all that programming of AI, placement of objects, etc., do you think it would be possible, as an interim solution, to just 'clone' some of the existing airfields, like Kerch or Saki, as opposed to creating a completely new airbase from scratch, and then have ED work their way from there? And the point of having bases in Romania and Bulgaria to fly from is that so some long-range missions could be flown across the Black Sea. IMO, currently there really is no need for the Midas and Extender tankers, as you could just land and rearm/refuel on the go, even repair your jet if need be. Still, I think adding two or three more bases around the Black Sea would present more options in terms of gameplay that would prove to be well worth the investment.
SUBS17 Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Its a pity someone couldn't copy the airfield and paste it there. That would be cool for MP. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
SwingKid Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 So SK, since airbases require all that programming of AI, placement of objects, etc., do you think it would be possible, as an interim solution, to just 'clone' some of the existing airfields, like Kerch or Saki, as opposed to creating a completely new airbase from scratch, and then have ED work their way from there? After checking some satellite photography, I discovered that Lock On's "Razdolnoye" airbase doesn't exist - probably some mix up with all the other little Razdolnoyes in fUSSR. Maybe we could ask ED to relocate that base as is, to Merzifon's position in v1.2? -SK
F l a n k e r Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Interesting satellite view of Crimea: http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/gallery/?2002111-0421/Azov.A2002111.0850.250m.jpg
355th_Thomp Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 Merzifon is a good five to ten minute's flying from the coast, let alone crossing the Black Sea - not close enough, IMHO, for close air support - and Sinop is too small for jets. -SK Well, it would be cool to have one base in Turkey. And the distance factor would just have to be calculated in. I mean, for example in Kosovo the A-10's would take off from Goya de Colle or Aviano in Italy, fly over the Adriatic for an hour and a half to get to Kosovo, do a tanker refueling to top off and then ingress to Kosovo to do some damage. So, a long distance is definately do'able for CAS missions. But this scenario just presents two questions 1. who would want to fly for an hour and a half in a game to get knocked out by a SAM once you get to the target area. And 2. would the refueling bug in MP games be fixed if the bases were added? Food for thought... -Thomp
GGTharos Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 I wouldn't mind flying that long on some missions ... it owuld be nice for the option to be there. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
D-Scythe Posted January 25, 2005 Author Posted January 25, 2005 1. who would want to fly for an hour and a half in a game to get knocked out by a SAM once you get to the target area. And 2. would the refueling bug in MP games be fixed if the bases were added? Options, people options ;) If you don't want to fly that long, either start in the air or out of some airbase in the currently modelled regions. And besides, I'm pretty sure AI wouldn't mind flying that far - imagine taking off from the Crimea in an F-15C to escort a flight of B-1Bs or Tornados operating from Turkey 8)
S77th-Dante Posted January 25, 2005 Posted January 25, 2005 And 2. would the refueling bug in MP games be fixed if the bases were added? i dont think mp refueling was ever official supported it however can be done fairly easily in multiplayer both F-15 & su-33 http://www.s77th.com/modules.php?name=coppermine&file=displayimage&album=topn&cat=0&pos=7 for a pitcure refuling in S77th 's Server during a large MP Session perhaps the coders can take Sochi-Alder and dupe it to act like a kuznetsov type object with multipu;l instances. Savage 77th Squadron 'S77th' http://www.s77th.com The Lomac League, For Squadrons & Single Players http://www.LomacLeague.com
SwingKid Posted February 24, 2005 Posted February 24, 2005 Terrain hacking discussion: http://lockoncampaign.com:8811/board/index.php?a=topic&t=60 Experimental "airbase relocation" screenshots: http://www.waves.utoronto.ca/~pavacic/lomac/theater/ScreenShot_113.jpg http://www.waves.utoronto.ca/~pavacic/lomac/theater/ScreenShot_112.jpg Downloadable replacement Razdolnoe.rn file to be unzipped into Bazar/Terrain/Vpp folder (remember to back up the original!): http://www.waves.utoronto.ca/~pavacic/lomac/theater/merzifon.zip EDIT: Link replaced to new version 0.02. See below. Limitations: (1) Can only be used with AI aircraft, (2) AI aircraft will only land here, not take off. If you want your AI aircraft to use it, set them to start the mission already in the air. (3) No textures, shelters or other objects - Merzifon is a "stealth" airbase and totally invisible. All map objects, and even Razdolnoe's F11 Tower view remains as it was. (4) This will probably not work very well with any previous missions that use Razdolnoye airbase. Have fun! -SK
Recommended Posts