Level Design Terrain scale in meters

[Six_Ten]

I have a digital elevation model of my battlefield.

The heightmap for RO measures 64 pixels x 64 pixels; each pixel represents 54.84 meters.

The real-world terrain covered by the model measures 3510 meters across.

One meter in ROEd = 60.352 uu.

The terrain ought to cover 211835.52 uu.

When I place my terrain in ROEd it looks "right" at about TerrainScale x and y 2048, or about 129024 uu.

Why the difference?

How do I calculate the right TerrainScale so the map accurately represents the terrain and distance?

 

[worluk]

i'd assume its the FOV which makes it look right in a different scale.

 

[Six_Ten]

Its not the fov; I meant that it looks right by the scale models i placed on it.

 

[Chernuk]

All you ROed numbers look good - if you know the real world you know the UU's. If a 129024 uu terrain fits the scale model, either your scale model is off or your real world terrain isn't really 3510 metres.

 

[Six_Ten]

Something is odd about terrain scaling:

The real world z-range is 17.57 meters. When I put 17.57*60.352 into the z scale on terrain, the result is obviously wrong; huge jagged peaks and pits. 17.57 on its own looks close to real.

Overlay of a cube brush measuring 3510*60.352 does not line up with a terrain scaled at 3510 x 3510. It is close, but even this doesnt match.

So something is off here. The terrain does not use the same scale as brushes.

Devs?

Screen Pixels: 64 x 64
Screen pixel size: 54.84 m
Every point appears 2.62 times
DEM=BFFORTRESSELEVATION40.TIF
size: 40x40
z range: 126.427277 to 143.997803 m
4-byte real , Elev units: meters
space: 90x90 m
UTM grid (zone 34) north at top of map
Display Datum: WORLD GEODETIC SYSTEM, 1984
DEM native datum: NAD83

 

[Six_Ten]

Has anyone worked with RO terrain and discovered the scaling?

 

[UncleDrax]

Has anyone worked with RO terrain and discovered the scaling?

What I usually do if I need an exact size is I put in a terrain scale.. then tape measure it to the size you need.

to small? up the scale.. to large. lower the scale.

Scaling the terrain just increases the distance between vertices on the terrain.. so it will exagerate any features you already have in it appropriately.
If you scale the Z axis, you will increase the sizes of your peaks/valleys.. I almost never increase Z scale when doing terrain. In fact I usually lower it significantly.

I'd suggest just play with it to get the size you need. I've never tried to science terrain ;]

 

[Chernuk]

Six_ten,

Do you know each heightmap pixel represents a vertex? As such, it is the the space between each pixel that represents distance. 64 pixels = 63 spaces. If you want the terrain to be 3510 meters square, each space will represent 55.7 meters. That's going to be really chunky terrain you are creating. At that resolution, your terrain scale will have to be roughly 3362.5.

Horizontal calculation: metersx60.352 = (resolution-1) x terrain scale.

Regarding hieght: haven't played with the z-scale but it should work per the terrain scale variable. The inputted number should equal the number of UU's each shade of grey represents.
So if you have a total height difference of 17.5, you have 15 grades (think of them has the spaces between the 16 shades of grey). So each shade should represent: 70.4 UU's. In other words the z-scale should be 70.4

Calculation: metresx60.352 = 15*z-scale.

This height calculation is totally speculative. Let me know if it works for you.

Also, double check that you heightmap is in g16 format. If it isn't I don't know how well z-scale will work. If it works directly, you'll have 7 grades to work with so your z-scale would be: 151