Roads leading to bridges are very steep

Hi,

 

Just curious why this is the way it is:

 

It seems that every DCS map (from the old Caucasus to the very new Syria map) has the same rather steep ramps that lead onto road bridges. Railroad bridges are usually more realistic in that aspect.

 

The perceived angle of these road ramps looks like this:

 

 

 

While it should be more like this:

 

 

What is the reason why DCS roads generally are are using short, steep ramps getting onto bridges in DCS?

 

Case-in-point, here's an example from Wag's excellent Syria video from Aug 8, 2020:

 

 

Thanks.

Because it's a flight sim not ARMA.

 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

It’s a representation and not a replica.

Some of them do look a little garish, but I'm afraid just making them longer causes problems in some places, where there just isn't enough space. Not sure if the terrain engine is capable to finding where the next road node would be.

OP raises a very valid point, sometimes the bridges are too steep and vehicles get trapped.

 

Its an issue for Combined Arms and needs resolution.

"This is a flight sim" is no excuse, especially after ED's Channel Map "British Pathe" video.

 

Those ramps should have a proper angle and actually even some curvature. With all the details around, you simply can't put a <10 poly ramp there and call it a day. Probably every single friggen lamp post has a lot more. It's like having old Flanker 2.5 Tu-95 models still in there today...

 

And CA is very much another perfectly valid reason to have that addressed.

"This is a flight sim" is no excuse, especially after ED's Channel Map "British Pathe" video.

 

Those ramps should have a proper angle and actually even some curvature. With all the details around, you simply can't put a <10 poly ramp there and call it a day. Probably every single friggen lamp post has a lot more. It's like having old Flanker 2.5 Tu-95 models still in there today...

 

And CA is very much another perfectly valid reason to have that addressed.

"This is a flight sim" is no excuse. It's a reason. You think most of us sit their staring at angles of roads and stuff? No I focus on the flying.

 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Because it's a flight sim not ARMA.

 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

Candidate for 2020 most useless comment contest... :huh:

 

 

 

Anyways... I agree with the OP that it would be nice to see these 40%+ steep ramps get fixed at some point down the development road.

 

Sure, you hardly notice it at 20k ft while looking through your tgp, but when flying NOE in a chopper these ramps look plain silly

This is an exremely valid point! What I'd suggest in this case is posting in Urga's Syria Map forum section, provide the video and time stamps. Whilst I'm sure they're not blindly making these maps, I dred to think how much the team has been staring at the map and sanity checking it.

+1

More shallow ramps and complete overhaul of Combined Arms human controlled vehicles. Some of them can climb mountains like Mountain Goats, some of them can accelerate against even slightest slope...(Reported but still without any comment from ED side).

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=274211

 

Will not talk here about different surfaces and its friction properties under different weather conditions (dry/wet, snow, sand, rocks).

Great examples from OP!

 

I also wondered why we would see such steep ramps in an otherwise extremely detailed scenery. IMO it's not that much of a big deal, but it sure would be nice if this was addressed somewhere down the road (pun... intended, actually :D).

Thanks for the feedback so far.

 

I could have sworn I saw a note of someone on the forum that mentioned that the reason for these kinds of steep ramps is that DCS maps are built directly on top of the water that represents the ocean, instead of using elevation maps for the region. Can anyone confirm?

 

The only reason I started this thread was because I thought that Wags mentioned that Syria uses ED's latest terrain tech, and I assumed these steep ramps were a thing of the past.

suspension of disbelief is one of the pivotal things in simulation. Steep ramps are not contributing to it. So yes, very valid point from OP.

"This is a flight sim" is no excuse. It's a reason. You think most of us sit their staring at angles of roads and stuff? No I focus on the flying.

 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

When doing ground attacks on vehicles it is an issue. When flying a helicopter close to the ground it is an issue. When doing JTAC (CA) in a vehicle it is an issue. When trying to get AI vehicles across bridges in mission building it is a potential issue... so while it is a flightsimulation first, you are not just flying around at 20.000 ft doing dogfights.

The question is how difficult/how much effort it is to address this?

This

 

Thanks for the feedback so far.

 

I could have sworn I saw a note of someone on the forum that mentioned that the reason for these kinds of steep ramps is that DCS maps are built directly on top of the water that represents the ocean, instead of using elevation maps for the region. Can anyone confirm?

 

The only reason I started this thread was because I thought that Wags mentioned that Syria uses ED's latest terrain tech, and I assumed these steep ramps were a thing of the past.

 

This is true for all maps so I think it is the engine limitation.

Thing is that in DCS rivers don't seem to have proper riverbeds defined and the water surface is almost even with surrounding terrain with some exceptions. It does look like The channel is a little bit better in that regard as well.

 

Yes, DCS map is built on top of the water body and do not expect this to change soon I guess.

Most of the rivers in DCS don't even have appropriate embankments that would make bridge steep slopes gone.

Hi,

shagrat nailed it. To make things worse in many a chopper mission a part of your tasks is to either land on or inspect a bridge by hovering from each side, or you escort a convoy crossing these bridges along the way, that's fairly popular. In a helicopter you enjoy these ramps quite often. The ramps themselves look severely funny at some places, but watching civil traffic 'negotiating' those ramps hurts your eyes even more :)

 

rrohde mentioned 'latest terrain tech'. I heard about it, too (probably in some Youtube interview with somebody from ED). Anyway, even if the new 'tech' is already there (huray if so!), I guess the maps won't magically adjust to it, but instead scenery people would have to come and modify all the bridges by hand. Ouch! But that's just my not overly educated guess.

 

YES, I KNOW, bridges are not the most important part of DCS, so there's no reason for global hysteria, but still... it doesn't add up to immersion too much, does it? ;)

 

Other quirks in this department (I'm talking about Caucasus exclusively, haven't flown much in Nevada/the Gulf yet):

1. Trains can go backwards and they can pass one another on the same track (I mean pass from the opposite directions). The latter is quite a spectacle, I almost crashed my Huey when I saw it for the first time :)

2. I'd swear some buildings are just not to scale (too small). I saw at least one in Batumi (it was a block of flats) and... somewhere else, can't remember where.

3. This auto-gen civil traffic are devils! They turn or even U-turn without slowing down. Can do other tricks, as well.

4. There are 'sunken' streets and other partly sunken objects in the scenery. For example, you can have street lights planted along a stretch of grass instead of a street, so my guess is that the street is actually there, but covered with higher elevation grass - hence 'sunken'.

 

Again: YES, I KNOW these things are not a priority in a flight sim and no, I don't want my fps to drop by half due to sophisticated railway and road traffic simulation, sure thing. However, all these things do stab your eyes badly if you fly helicopters (or Combined Arms, which I don't do myself), and besides - number 2 and 4 in the above list have nothing to do with CPU power. Trouble is, Caucasus is free, so... yeah... fortunately I love the nature - those mountains, forests, lakes etc. :)

 

 

Note: DCS today looks amazing either way, if you ask me. The last time I saw Caucasus by ED was in LOMAC, around 2005 I think, and with GFX sliders down because my rig couldn't cope with it. The difference is huge, so I'm happy regardless of all the above.

Edited August 12, 2020 by scoobie

This is true for all maps so I think it is the engine limitation.

Thing is that in DCS rivers don't seem to have proper riverbeds defined and the water surface is almost even with surrounding terrain with some exceptions. It does look like The channel is a little bit better in that regard as well.

 

Yes, DCS map is built on top of the water body and do not expect this to change soon I guess.

Most of the rivers in DCS don't even have appropriate embankments that would make bridge steep slopes gone.

 

 

^^^^ This is exactly it. Thanks for putting that into words as I wasn't able to put my finger on it. :thumbup:

+1

I don't see any engine limitations. Look at Colorado canyons in Nevada map. We have dams on most maps so the water can have different elevations. There are already some good looking mountain roads or the ones near dams.

I'd call it map bugs that no one wants to fix now.

It would be interesting to see if this could be resolved with the updated game engine

Please place a unit on the location and attach the mission or track and we will report it to the terrain teams.

 

That's a great idea, thanks!

 

I'm sure there'll be quite some feedback once the map is released. ;)

 

For instance, I spotted another very steep bridge-entry in one of the latest videos in Haifa. But to be honest, most of my time was spent dropping the jaw further and further towards the floor, this map looks so stunningly beautiful in the preview screenshots and videos! :thumbup:

Guys, if you want to check every existing bridge in the Caucasus map, you can easily find all bridges here. Zoom a little and they will appear as black rectangles. Good luck! :)

Looks as if Ugra Media already has tweaked the bridge I used as an example in the first post somewhat:

 

New (see here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4455529&postcount=147):

 

Old:

 

 

Credit where credit is due - awesome job!

And then, there's this (from Wags' recent Ka-50 Syria video):

 

 

Perfect for these guys:

 

 

:D

Edited August 18, 2020 by rrohde

+1 Agreed, same with some tunnels actually, but they're less noticeable.

 

It's especially glaring when you see a train suddenly climb a ridiculous incline up to a bridge.

 

The Caucasus map has a fair share of them, the Channel has a lot less (maybe a couple that I've seen). The bridge in the Ka-50 video above kinda looks too tall for the river that it's built over, and that incline... :fear:

Edited August 19, 2020 by Northstar98