Maps, an opinion

[c200k]

As Catalavos said, the game engine has limitations. But I would like to see larger maps too, with open terrain and a high level of details. If you want an historic map, there is no need for a topographical terrain in full scale in my opinion, it would be too much for the game engine or you have to give up a lot of details.

Strategic or tactic?! I don't care. I want to see the Sd.Kfz. 251 and the StuG in the wild!

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

As just stated, the engine has its limitations and while large maps can be created, you don't want to see vital terrain and cover elements get culled out of view because you have to keep the maps optimization realistic.

It would take some clever manipulation of the terrain and its slopping to help keep view distances from being so extreme you have a severe frame rate drop.

 

[c200k]

I use multiple terrains (2 at the moment, 1 big terrain, and a small "patch" for the trench area) as workaround for the patch size problem of a big map. So you can keep the fps high and cut trenches in terrain. You don't see a difference between the terrains in game. Up to now, I couldn't find any disadvantages for this solution.

Does anyone have experience with it?

 

[TrOOper]

Ya know, i could be quite happy with bigger combined arms maps, usable transports, a few more different tanks and the IOM whitelisted.

 

[ro2player]

Strategic or tactic?! I don't care. I want to see the Sd.Kfz. 251 and the StuG in the wild!

c200k,
Dude...with 32v32 max...How can you have strategic game ??
With 32v32 scale of game is tactic.

Ya know, i could be quite happy with bigger combined arms maps, usable transports, a few more different tanks and the IOM whitelisted.

Panzer III J and T 70

 

[G_Sajer]

One of the better maps fitting the criteria suggested in the OP was I believe Berezhina, or Berezhina River. It was an RO1 map which was very popular. The Germans had to attack and capture series of objectives in a linear but wide map.

There were villages, fortified bunkers, underground bunkers, bridges, and a collective farm with fields.
In limited numbers there were tanks, halftracks, and one or two fully operational
AT guns in dugouts. The flanks were porous in certain areas and could not be ignored. There were two river crossings. This was a heck of a map. And it is my hope it could be replicated with the next major update.

 

[MurcDusen]

After playing quite a bit on the DH GoodGuysGaming combined arms server, I'm really not too eager to get back to RO2. If you want big, open maps, then play that, or ArmA, maybe Forgotten Hope 2 or Project Reality. I'm still hoping that with the next update and the transports bigger maps will be made, but those will probably just be custom maps, and it's hard enough right now to get to play one of those. And even then I'm not sure whether RO2's gameplay is even very well suited for long-range combat.

 

[Giuliano]

OP, you'd definitely like the ARMA series. If you do look into them, try out ACE mod for ARMA 2. You were in the military so you'd appreciate how in depth the game is on a strategic level. Tonnes of players, ginormous maps and in depth teamwork is required if you're playing with dudes like Shacktac or United Operations.


RO2, even though it has a few realistic features, is an arena shooter. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Jpz38 Hetzer]

I would recommend insurgency, its pretty awesome and has tactical infantry only combat. Maps are smaller then most of Red Orchestra's but there is plenty of tactical combat.

 

[Cwivey]

RO2, even though it has a few realistic features, is an arena shooter. Nothing more, nothing less.

I disagree. There's more to it than that.

 

[oldsoldier173]

If you are fighting in a designed 'bowl' what else would you call it? Very centralized 'funnel' into immediate 'action' maps, where at times you can not even get out of your spawns.


I would call it an 'arena' shooter as well. Good term never thought of it that way.


Give us the ability to free flow the entire map, open them up so if you take this or that the enemy can still counter attack from the rear. The leaving combat area, and spawn protection really narrows the current maps.

 

[Cwivey]

Arena shooter goes way-back when to the days of Quake. Bunny-hopping and blasting things with rocket launchers on an indoor map.

There's a good amount more freedom in RO2, even if some people feel that it is still restrictive.

I'm not one for a five minute slog across an open field to get anywhere personally. Nor a five minute drive when it comes to it.

 

[Jank]

Personally, I never EVER even have trouble getting out of my spawn area, to say nothing of "not being able" to get out.

Sometimes I get killed coming out of spawn. Once. Then I do something different.

 

[Twrecks]

I use multiple terrains (2 at the moment, 1 big terrain, and a small "patch" for the trench area) as workaround for the patch size problem of a big map. So you can keep the fps high and cut trenches in terrain. You don't see a difference between the terrains in game. Up to now, I couldn't find any disadvantages for this solution.

Does anyone have experience with it?

Look at Yakovlevo, I used mulitple terrains with no problems (as long as they don't cast shadows on eachother). Yet as stated, this adds to the file size. Keeping the draw calls under 2000 was the hard part, and means fewer detail meshes. With my abandoned RSTE-Makin this was the death blow because the landscape was a large flat island and no way to seperate the battlefield to limit draw calls.

Next generation of video cards my solve the draw call limits. Heck, back in the Unreal 99 days a map with 200+ BSP polygons visible at any time was almost uplayable by the masses. A lot has happened in the last 15 years, chances are we'll have to wait another 15 for Epic battlefields that take literally years and an army of level designers to build.

 

[Drecks]

With some smart placement of meshes and work on the MaxDrawdistance one can make a good detailed map on this game. I could have added much more detail to Rakowice, but for some reason I wasn't awake back than.

Bataan had much more detail and if I'm correct nowhere got over the
1950 drawcalls which is under the desired 2000. Most areas it was half the desired drawcalls.

Its all about how you set up your objects like buildings and smaller meshes. I was used to manually set the MaxDrawDistance for each object or groups of objects.. Its more work but pays of in the end. Well not always

P.S. Am I the only one who experience a very slow forum ?

 

[c200k]

@Twrecks & @Drecks:

How do I see the current draw calls in PIE? I mean, I use "stat fps" and "stat engine" for performance optimizing, but is there any value which shows me the current sum of the draw call count?

 

[PsychoPigeon]

paste stat d3d9rhi

 

[c200k]

paste stat d3d9rhi

thank you Psycho

 

[GRIZZLY]

I agree with OP...

I like some close engagements, but it's a shame that there are so few opportunities to flank and maneuver in this game. I'd have to agree, if you play the game for a couple hours straight - you're more like to have gained ground by simply out gunning the opponent than by out maneuvering him.

I guess "this is Stalingrad not Steppengrad" is a valid point... but you could still push the map boundaries a bit and move the spawns so that we at least had some breathing room (even if the maps were identical with expanded perimeters). Hopefully RO3 is an Ostfront game with both varied steppe, city, village, etc. maps.

 

[Drecks]

I agree with OP...

I like some close engagements, but it's a shame that there are so few opportunities to flank and maneuver in this game. I'd have to agree, if you play the game for a couple hours straight - you're more like to have gained ground by simply out gunning the opponent than by out maneuvering him.

I guess "this is Stalingrad not Steppengrad" is a valid point... but you could still push the map boundaries a bit and move the spawns so that we at least had some breathing room (even if the maps were identical with expanded perimeters). Hopefully RO3 is an Ostfront game with both varied steppe, city, village, etc. maps.

Wider maps with more breathing room and longer spawndistance would been a valid request when the infantry could jump on a transportvehicle. A GAZ Truck for Soviets and a Halftrack for Axis. As a gamer I simply don't like to spawn and walk for 75 to 120 seconds to arrive to my objective to get shot and walk the same distance again. As I mentioned in this already heroic topic . Adding transportvehicles to this game would have increased diversity in maps and gameplay and the experience of this game would have brought a multitude of players to this game.

These transportvehicles will arrive this month, could be next month you'll never know, but will appear in excisting maps. I did not tried them in B