Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !

[PlasmaKrab]

While we're nagging about terrain and talking about eye candy, there's two types of terrain that have been a pain due to their absence (only two, promise).

-Undergrowth, shrubland, chapparal, call it what you like. The idea is something intermediary between grass and forest, made up of tangled man-height tree saplings that make passage very, very hard for both infantry and vehicles. As I see it, it would restrict movement and visibility more than high grass, probably somewhere in the level of rough. As such, it would be a nice alternative to full-out forest in dryer climates (e.g. all around the Mediterranean, in most of the Middle East and southern Africa), and be more credible than high trees in desert maps.
In the case where forest can be superimposed on it, it would become undergrowth proper, turning a nice clean forest into a tangled vegetal mess with trees sticking out of it.
I know there have been discussions here in the past about the movement ratings of forest terrain, mostly boiling down to different people having different experiences of their local forests. As such, if you have a dedicated "undergrowth" terrain, you can use it for unkempt, impassable forest, while the "forest" terrain alone or with "forest ground" would stand for well-mannered forests with nice straight trees planted wide apart like apparently in some places in Finland.

-White rough. It may sound silly, but I've bumped head-first into this one every time I tried to map the Mediterranean coast (again). The current rough palette is excellent for sand and rock desert, including a very nice red desert ground. [self-advertisement]see my CWM Chadian campaign [/self-advertisement]
Grey rough and impassable are far too dark and best suited for northern climates, off the cuff I'd associate them with Scottish or Norwegian shores.
Just for the look of it, I would really like a lighter rocky terrain, maybe with some inbuilt vegetation.

Without both of these how am I supposed to map this or this kind of places?

Disclaimer: I have no idea if the game allows for more terrain types, in code, type or interface, I'm just bouncing ideas.

[Marek_Tucan]

PlasmaKrab said:
this kind of places?

's not Rough, 's Impassable

[Marcello]

"-Undergrowth, shrubland, chapparal, call it what you like. The idea is something intermediary between grass and forest, made up of tangled man-height tree saplings that make passage very, very hard for both infantry and vehicles."

That sounds like a good idea.

"Just for the look of it, I would really like a lighter rocky terrain, maybe with some inbuilt vegetation."

There is already a rocky terrain with some built in vegetation: summer rough. Nothing whitish but as it has already been noted what are you looking for is actually a white impassable.

[Marcello]

"Nothing whitish but as it has already been noted what are you looking for is actually a white impassable."

On a second though however "winter rough" comes quite close to simulate what you are looking for. A bit crazy perhaps but it should work.

[PlasmaKrab]

Marcello said:
"Nothing whitish but as it has already been noted what are you looking for is actually a white impassable."

On a second though however "winter rough" comes quite close to simulate what you are looking for. A bit crazy perhaps but it should work.

Good point, gotta try that. I just hope there won't be a 'winter rough' tag showing up.

[RecruitMonty]

So let's see if I can summarise this again:

# Sand Berms (Small/Intermediate).
# Walls (Colours?).
# More "cosmetic" damage to lighter (at least) houses when hit by heavy/medium mortars and arty. Something cosmetic on the ground too (if possible).
# Shrubland.
# Different graphic for the wooden bridge.
# A better graphic for the dug-in tanks.
# More varied sounds.

Thats about it isn't it?

[PlasmaKrab]

RecruitMonty said:
Thats about it isn't it?

You don't really want us to exhaust all the ideas hanging around, do you?
I know I could go on for days about ERA classes, active protection, EW effects, unit classes...
I know 90% of this is unfeasible at any rate, but isn't all we already said here?

[Marcello]

"I know I could go on for days about ERA classes, active protection, EW effects, unit classes..."

Then start.

Maybe there is something else we can find a partial fix for.

[Marek_Tucan]

Well, as far as partial fixes go, short-ranged TI system (say for Eryx or TI infantry scopes in general) may be born by getting system similar to AAA fire control - ie say vision of 20 would be normal, vvision of 120 would be TI with range of 20. However, whether it is code-wise possible is in the stars and I won't consider it as priority.

[RecruitMonty]

Sand berms, sounds, walls and cosmetic enhancements are not beyond the game engine. The existing terrain and OOB features suggest that much.