Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sleepingdragon]

There seems to be no 'new topic' provision anywhere in the mapworks section, so I'll post htis here; the moderators may want to post it elsewhere.

Please hold your comments if you would unitl I finnish the initial post, as it's time consum9ing to post these images. Ill let you know when it's done. thanx.

FIRST: I LOVE all mod guys and map makers,  and would give you all sloppy kisses IF you would shape shift into Beyonce or the equivalent. We could not afford your work if we had to pay for it, and I sacrifice two goats a week to the map guys especially.

BUT, would you please consider letting the FMB guys do most of the air base building, in MOST cases. I realize there are some very good examples based on historical photos etc, and there are maps like the Solomons that change for the time appropriately, but as an FMB guy, some of these otherwise magnificent maps are just unusable to me, whether for historical time period shifts, alternate history, or at all. The bases are just to jammed with infrastructure, sometimes unrealistically to such an extreme
that we just can't fix it. The STOCK Pearl Harbor is a good example of the problem.

[/img]
The Seaplane base I made just doesn't look right with that odd template of bldgs the stock maps use repeatedly. I wanted to buld this as close to the period photos as I could get, but it's impossible here.

Check thse hangars at the stock Hickam field. How can any aircraft be placed in these things. Totally unreallistic, makes it impossible to make the base even close to historical, or even practical. If somebody wants to do this for htier own misn for whatever reasons, fine, but we are stuck with it in the stock map.


And here is the area approaching battleship row in the STOCK Pearl habor map that the Kates must past over. Do I have to tell anyone that the place wasn't littered with shipyard cranes and open hangars in this manner. Sure they were there, but not like this. FINE if you wnat to build a setup like that, but it should be in a template or a mission. Makes my own version of TORA TORA TORA a bit difficult. Populating the area is great, but it should've been thought out a bit better here. Of course, they had to use Brit BBs since American corporate lawyers wouldnt let 1C use the correct ships they had developed. (They coulda dredged the harbor a bit to ).



Here is a real problem to me, a great map very useful in historical and alternate history, but in a primitive area where the bases just looked nohting like this, either US or JP. Speaking for myself (and a couple other FMB guys), this is just unusable. One msn blder is having to use a Soviet map for this area and make his own base.



Here is another base on the same map, and every base on it is similar. Again, an interpretation that is unusable to me. Check the two radars in line with hangars. They won't work like that. And those old stock airport terminals are so popular, but are totally out of place. They look like an MS flight sim airport, with Barbie and Ken sipping coffee in the lounge, which would be ok if it was 'slut Barbie' (a concept my female cousins strongly objected to when we were kids in the 60s). Please don't be offended, but P-40Es aren't gonna be intercepting Betties or Zekes from here in mid 42 (when my late uncle was there), and F-80As aren't gonna be launching from here to intercept TU-4s when the Berlin blockade turns into WW3.



Do I have to tell anyone why this kinda distracts me a bit? How u gonna park AC in there? If htey are a particular idea, then great. But the FMB is the place this is best done to this extent. Just suggesting this.



I had intended of making an alternate history cmpn of an F-86D squadron on that base (flown by chick pilots with built in life vests) fending off the Godless commies from North America in the 50s, but the squadron CO told me they don't like Barbie. They flew out of bases with a bit different style infrastructure that is well supported in all the mods objects now, but.........
She and her HOT squadron mates are taking thier dog Sabres to another map and another scenario. Maybe even another sim. 



This is another STock template that messes up every stock paved airbase in the stock sim. Just an expample of something that I recommend avoiding.


Another view of this oft used template in the stock sim that seems to have been used a great deal in a few mod maps. This limits the AC type we can place here; B-29s aren't gonna taxi well here. Illustrates a point about how this can limit the FMB guys.


This is a japanese base on another great map, and the revetments in the foreground might be ok in a JP base, but the metal ones in the background just are a bit out of place for what I'd have in mind. Keep in mind that the same base in 42 would appear much different in 45, and would really be different in 48 with F-80s fending off Soviet attempts to take the Kuriles in 48, or F-86s launching on long range escorts to Korea in 1950 etc. You see what I mean. Would be best left if the FMB.



Here's a nice base on a great map, but It's a bit crowded for what I would have in mind. The big hangar and a few of the other bldgs are nice, but I'd have preferred to have finished it myself; the two large hangars at the back rt are not positioned for AC to enter, so I'd like to position those myself in the FMB. Not a disaster, as this is not very distracting and the rest of this base however is not very populated and is very usable for me, just making a suggestion. Maybe upload a template with this instead of putting it all on the map itself. I understand getting carried away.


Here's an example (using the Stock Pearl map) of how shipcranes can be used, as in this NEAT interpretation of the Drydock with USS Penn. and DDs Cassins and Downes at Pearl, by the evil genius BeeBop. HOWEVER, that stuff in the background crowds the accuracy of the scene. There's several aerial shots of the area that are available. We could have used those in the FMB, but kinda limited now.


And I will end with this shot of IWO JIMA, an interpretation that would be ok in a misn, but is a bit distracting once the P-51s start operating out of there and B-29s make emergency landings. GREAT work on a GREAT map, but this would be better left in the FMB for those of us who are a bit OCD in the FMB, BTW.


Again, I am just pointing out some things that should be considered a bit more in making these amazing creations. Absolute works of art, that I could never even begin to do, but I do use the FMB, and have contributed in the past using that,and intend to again. I (and several other FMB guys) can make works more worthy of your efforts if we can just have a bit more leeway in building the bases.

Not complaining about the great cities, ports (mostly), and fantastic airfields themselves, but it's kinda like your girlfriend in a mini skirt and low cut stuff etc. U may like seeing her wearing that (I know I do), but are you ok with her doing the Brittany Speers thing getting out of the car with all those photogs around? I like racy chicks, but just how slutty do you want? I mean, some of these bases have way too much make up on. That analogy may make more sense to some than others.

I might suggest uploading templates with a simple misn for your maps, as I know you guys are creative and have these great ideas. But, in one of the bases above 1000 miles from pearl harbor, the Hickam field gate objects were randomly placed near a runway, not even near each other. I didn't want to embarrass anyone, so I didn't post it. Thanx for all your work, and I PRAY nobody is offended or discouraged by this.

Going to go sacrifice a goat to you guys now.............

IM DONE> You can raise cain now in your replies. Please be gentle......don't forget the vasiline. 

 

[Sleepingdragon]

Yessir, I appreciate that suggestion and will try that as soon as I get my damaged warp nacelles repaired (damn Borg). I hope I have time, as it's getting pressed. I mainly posted this hoping that map makers will realize the problems that FMB guys have that limit thier projects. The same applies to harbors as well. A nice harbor is great, but there should be some room left for the FMB to use. Alot of room. I'll check that out. 

(later.......)
Well that's a bit involved for what I want to do. I really just need the standard air bases that we have in the mod maps to be open to more modification and custom fitting out. We are just so limited in  many maps, although we can hide some stuff, it would really help the quality of our FMB products if most airbase equipping and sometimes much of the harbor equipment could be left up to the misn/cmpn builder. Gonna be a while before I can get into actually doing the mod thing itself, and will rely on you guys to make the stuff we put to good use, better use if we can build the bases. I hope I have time to learn all that at some point. Thanx though, some incredible work you have done.

[Dunois]

All this is true, but to solve the problem I customize my maps, and specialy the bases I will use using unlocked FMB, and saving my modifications.
This method is easier as all objects appear with their name unstead of a number thru the normal FMB. At the beginning I was using this normal FMB to improve maps, but it was time consumering to identify by a single number the desired object among thousands others!
And also this method allows infinite changes as new and better objects appear.

[vpmedia]

SD, your idea would not work because loading objets from mission files can kill your loading speed to a point where you have to wait 1-2 minutes for all the objects to load. Dgen would not generate out these templates either, you would be left with partial populated maps.
But you yourself got the tools to change any map or qmb template so instead of complaining you can take action and proove that you can put things in practice. You can rebuild any map and release it as your own version, same for mission templates.

Cheers

[Dunois]

Vpmedia also point this last problem at the beginning I faced framerate problem with all this objects I added, so the best solution is to use the unlocked FMB.
But I use this as I alway fly offline, on this customized maps.

[Sleepingdragon]

  Thanks for your input guys, and VP, I sacrifice at least one goat per month to you, as I've used many of your creations.

  "A man has to know his limitations." - Dirty Harry. I'm an FMB guy, and totally mess up when I get into the guts of this sim, limiting the use of modding tools.

If I taxi in my F-84 past a hickam gate that is randomly by its lonesome, and a couple of radar objects are placed on either side of what looks like a super8 motel, it's just gonna......well I don't have to explain that. I can't help but wonder Why on earth are some of you guys doing this? It's like Da Vinci putting Spongebob squarepants next to Jesus in the "last Supper". ??? Or a hot chick with all those nasty tatoos . Yeah, they can laser remove the tats sometimes, but it's easier just not to get those things in the first place.

    I'm an FMB guy, not a modder. I hate going into the sim itself to do what is much easier to do by just improvising a bit, or just picking another map. I can use the FMB far more easily than the ingenius tools you guys have made for modding. 

Here are some screens of a mulit yr 1948 project using the stock Kyushu and vladivostok maps, made with the old AAA mods including VP's static plane mod and many skins made for this project.This was done when 409 was the standard, before the current F80Cs etc. I had to improvise a great deal, as we all do. 

Notice this stock Kyushu base as my P-80 (YP-80 standing in for F-80A) taxies by burning bldgs. Stock base in back, mine covering the some stock ones mixed with stock in the foreground. But you can't tell which is which. Though i had to change them, they were reasonable enough to let me work around them and use them, without having to take time using a map tool that I could spend on the project.



Here's a look at the same or similar scene. Note the stock template hangars taht are used on nearly every stock paved base in 409. I had to add hangars on the right to the stock crappy bldgs, one of which can be seen connecting the hangars I placed. I also modified some other stock objects to fit in. Looks far more correct for a period base.



This base was modified by incorporating the two stock hangars and covering some in the background with ones I wanted.


Here the RAF Spit (flown by Aussie pilots as they were then) taxies past the B-29 ramp; the area is lined with stock hangars in the back, but I covered them with a several properly spaced large hangars. I could do this because the rest of the base wasn't covered with a totally untenable amount of objects inappropriate for ANY era, to use an analogy. I could work around it, though actually it still had too many objects, but not so many that it was unusable.


This parking area of the base had reasonable metal revetments already installed on one side, but this side was clear, lettign me place a large open hangar with a cement floor that fits in well with the paved area OFF of it on the edge, allowing more area for B-29s etc. I couldn't hvae done this if it was lined with hangars or bdlgs, radars, trees, etc already. The designer of hte base was reasonable enough to let me do this. He didn't place so much stuff as to destroy the immersion or totally gag me.


The side of the above hangar is to the left, while a white base bldg (as usually used then) is alongside the taxi way. VP's static plane skin mod works well here btw. The fuel tanks in the back rt are stock. They are not my idea, but they are not distracting. Reasonable.


Another more primitive base on northern Kyushu. I built my own base using matting, and over the progress of several misns improved it with another strip, facilities etc. Here I use a stock revetment by putting an invisible runway on it to take off as an F-80 is worked on. I added the red T-hangar beside it. There's also a combo of stock and added objects in te background. I incorporated the stock into mine.


This is one of the mod maps I showed above as an example of unusable to me, or anyone else who wants to be even remotely realistic in any era. This kinda furniture is everywhere on the base. The only room left is in a totally unrealistci area, and this is just too distracting. No way one can feel like a P-38F pilot launching to intercept bombers in a historical cmpn, either offline or online. If you just want to do some dogfight misns it may be ok, but there's many who like realism and immersion,both on and offline. If the mapmaker wants to limit the use of his hard work and talent this way, then ok. I'm just pointing out those limitations.
   Misn blders and campaign writers should not have to spend time and effort makign thier own map, and jam-packed bases do that. Is a great map....but can't use it as equipped.


As I pointed out above, there is just too much stuff here. I can't do anything with it. Where am I going to put my hangars for B-17Es, B-25Ds, or P-38Fs? They didn't have any of this in 42. Where can I put my T-shelters for the F-86D,K, or F-84Gs? it's a question of where does mapmaking turn into misn blding? There should at most only be 20% of what's here, and it would help greatly if we could pick most of the hangars and bldng placement. No way I can build and airbase or increase this. Can't put more runways or parking areas here without going into the mapmaker/modder aspect.
    It's easier for the mapmkers to get into our perspective than it is for the FMB guys to be modders. It's also much easier for the mapmakers to increase our ability to use these creations than it is for us to use the tools you use. I have never had a Frame rate problem with any of hte extensive bases I've made by modifying any map. I'm asking for you to let us be the ones that determine that, and leave us enough room to do so.


I can work around this by putting a couple of big hangars etc there maybe. Easily worked around, because it's not littering the base. I can always destroy some of this stuff and make it easier to hide. Easier and quicker than using a tool to clean 150 objects etc from teh base.


I can't work around this; much work and sweat that the map maker didn't have to do. Leave most of that to us. Moderation in all things. Lots of moderation here. The location and history of the location should be considered, as it often is, but research will lshow that this base never had more than a small fraction of htis, regardless of side.
    I recommend blding a base at teh earliest time of its hisory and letting us develope it when the base is expanded. OR do what the Solomons map maker did and release several versions as the war progressed. My fav collection of a very accurate map. Still leaves room to add on stuff.

I wanted Kyushu to be relatively like it was when USAF radar stations were scrambling fighters against the constant Soviet recon flights. The RAF/RAAF was also there.

I was able to make an RAF base on Kyushu using a large stock one and incorporating teh stock Map's layout. This map allowed me to do so without having to use a tool to open the FMB, while still equipping the airbase. I'd prefer nothing but runways, but I can easily improvised if left room to do so.......realistically. The number of FMB guys using your maps is going to be severly limited if they have to use a modding tool to use them. Trust me.

You see what I'm trying to do here.


Here I used the stock revetments provided in this stock map, and placed matt runways and added some more objects.



I was left enough leeway to work around and with the static objects on this stock map. It's not covered with stuff. Check the background (copy the shot and magnify it). please Let us put most of that there.



Some F-80s launching on a stock map, with matt runways added, and stock objects already supplied being incorported. Note the runway in the background launching Tempests. I couldn't do this if it was covered by assorted hangars taht would not fit intothe story. The base was equiped but left me with room to work.
 

Some of Beebops skin work here. I put some matting down and added my stuff. Only about a fifth of what you see here was in the stock map, but I could use it. Didn't have to open the FMB or mod it. We FMB guys are used to improvising (ie Beebop).


Here B-29s are being transferred to Okinawa under Gen. Curt LeMay's order to save them. IN the backgroound I was able to cover up most of the stock stuff on a parking area/taxi way, but B-29s were never able to taxi there, so I had to put them down this end to stand by, then taxi back down to the other end on the side. Online, this could be arranged, but would have been easier if the stock template polluting that side of the base had not been use as much. I still worked around it though.


The green revetments are stock on the map, but they don't interfere. I added big hangars over small ones in the back. The rest is mine. I had room to work.




I was able to work around the stock stuff and create a period appropriate, hastily improvised base that the allies put in place on a Vladivostock map grass base. I was left room.


Here's the same base, utilizing the provided stock objects and improving on it. A look around the base externally or taking off won't destroy the immersion. It was much easier for me to do this than modding the mod. I can assure you that most misn blders will feel the same and and avoid overstocked maps for historical or realistic projects.


And please don't forget the harbors and ports. A nicely equipped port is great, but leave us a bit of room please. About 1/3 of this is mine, but the landlocked shipcrane is not. Isn't worth taking time to remove because we have room to work. Beebop is a master at harbor improvisation, but it can be hampered by too much stuff.


This mapmaker equipped the bases but left plenty of room to work around. I'd have preferred a bit less infrastructure, but could easily improvise. The objects I add don't affect the FR at all in my experience, but I do have some experience at this. It's the number of TYPES of objects that affects that.

I have several yrs of using the FMB and understand the FR problem, but a more conservative approach is all i'm really asking. Besides, I've equipped many airbases on some maps, but used techniques to insure good FR, like limiting the TYPE of objects on a base, but not badly limit it. Would you put static P-40Es on one side of a runway and Mig-17s on the other? (I've seen something similar to this).

I used the Pearl map as an example. I assure you guys that Beebop or I could fully and fairly realistically equip all of Oahu and not get bad FR on older computers. I did it. I added all kindsa stuff to all the other airfields on Stock Oahu that fortunately I could modifya bit, despite the butchering done to the stock Pearl harbor itself. Im going to upload the misn set I made soon I hope.

  I know there are tools availible, but I've been looking at that, and I just don't have time for modding. It's either misns OR modding, but not both, just not enough time. It's taking me forever to learn all this new FMB stuff and the mods etc. They are not as easy to use as the FMB and require modifying files and getting into the guts of the sim. Having to do that much to make a map usable in a desired project will be discouraging to many users. 
   I do a bit of photography work (commercially) on my computer etc, taking my extra time. It's far easier to find another map to improvise; the level of realism is a balance between using a proper map, or reasonably passable airbases, ie immersion.

  Please consider moderating the increasing over stocking of airbases if you would. Those of us who use the FMB regularly can easily better equip them with not loss of frame rate. 

Thanks for your reading this. I apologize for it being a bit long. IM DONE. gonna work on my misns.

[X-Raptor]

Hi Sleepingdragon, let tell me : You are an Artist!.I appreciate a lot your ability to create good WWII ambience airport. I also work till 6 years on FMB , but never I had the stuff like you have. I hope one day you will release some maps made with the integration of your good airbase stuff. Keep on this good work

My best regards.

[Sleepingdragon]

Thanx sir. I will try and get into the unlocked FMB when I can, but in the meantime I'm gonna use the destruction tool a bit more like I did yrs ago, but it can reduce many objects individually to sticks and a dark splotch, but pretty time consuming itself. I keep seeing amazing work in the maps I'm exploring.

Basically all I'm requesting is that the map maker guys leave us a bit more room to work in the FMB, and consider the long time periods that these bases would be used in, allowing a bit more room for change. I'm greatful no matter what comes along though. 

Now I'm encountering the biggest FMB blasphemy one can commit ???; I've found some posted mins that were never even test flown , couldn't have been. Was on a new map with great airbases though. Strange what you can discover, and I like to try and fix stuff like that. I'll even try to fix a couple of the bases I illustrated above, which are extreme examples. Maybe I'll make it a side project, with my 4000 other side projects. I think I need to clone myself.  ..............(wait, could I stand a copy of myself......?)

[tomoose]

Sleepingdragon;
I agree that some of the maps despite being extremely well done have overlooked some of the aspects you mention.  I experienced something like that when I tried to use a map for a heavy campaign and found no multiple railways in any city (i.e. no railyards) and no way to create railyards unless I was an experienced map maker/editor.  A small thing that was overlooked and yet had an impact on whether I could use the map or not.  Not exactly a "realistically" laid out airfield problem but a similar issue.
It's not my place to complain as I'm not a modder by any stretch but hopefully this is taken as constructive criticism to improve future maps.

[Sleepingdragon]

Thanx sir. I'm not criticizing thier fine efforts either, but hoping to help them and the community of oddjobs that enjoys this stuff (me especially)  .  There seems to be a growing number of us FMB guys with OCD tendencies of making the most accurate or at least believable subjects, and these map creations reallly help expand that. I'm hoping these issues I'm pointing out will help us with our little maniacal projects that we really spend way too much time on.

If I'm gonna spend that much time though, I'd like to make the best product I can. I've seen so much innovation and engineering with what's available, and with a return to at least the level of room we had in most of the stock maps (except for stuff like Pearl Harbor) we can exploit the work in these new maps that much better.

 If you look thru the objects, you may find some stuff to simulate a RR yard, simulating a track from the air. Then you can place train objects that won't move. U just have to search the objects. There are all sorts of bldgs and other objects that you can improvise into such a target.  ???

[vpmedia]

In map builder mode you can remove one object group (hangars for example) from the entire map with few clicks.

[Sleepingdragon]

Oh I am definitely gonna get into that tool when I have time comrade VP, I just gotta get time. I will use that when I can.  In the meantime I just hope the FMB guys get a little more leeway and room. A FEW examples above were a bit extreme, and I was showing what we could do with what we got if we had a similar amount of room to work, if we have to.

Yeah, I gotta put a high priority on getting into that tool. I just hope the manual with it includes how to get into map making mode to accomplish what you spoke of. Simple instructions to do fairly simple things would really help more guys get into using some of this. 

I'm had to put getting DBW operational due to my not changing some files correctly or something, as I apparently am misinterpreting some of the installation procedures. The map tool will be my highest priority now however.

Thanx for that little bit of simple info that I couldn't find in the posts I saw on it.