DCS WW2 - terrain

It is kind of a bigger deal than first meets the eye.

no it's not.

no it's not.

LOL!

Well, if that doesn't settle the argument, then nothing will!

:doh:

I want curvature of the Earth. Without that, the maps can never be very large or very accurate. The name "DCS World" should be "DCS Limited Linear Approximation" until they model the Earth correctly and make their maps merely a small patch of details on the much larger globe. With a global model, as the library of maps grows, you slowly fill in the entire Earth. With flat maps, navigation can never be modeled correctly.

no it's not.

Actually, yes it is a big deal. :)

no it's not.

How big of a deal it is depends upon how big the map is and what you are trying to do on it. For a close quarter infantry map, earth's curvature will never matter. If you just want an instant action dog fight, it's not a big deal either. Curvature distortions will become more and more prominent the further you get from the center of the map, which matters on long distance flights, or if you want to have contiguous terrain over a large distance even if you don't plan on crossing the entire map in one flight.

Choosing the projection is not necessarily straight forward either. Depending upon the projection you choose and where you are from the map origin. The nice square Philadelphia city blocks might end up being parallelograms, or maybe you compromise and the city limits don't match the proper coordinates anymore.

Lets say we like simple, and go with the very straightforward equirectangular projection where latitude and longitude coordinates map directly onto X and Y coordinates. You get this:

The dimensions of this map are pretty close to 1 to 1 near the equator, but there are a few problems with this map. First, and most obviously, the further from the equator you get, the more things get stretched horizontally. Greenland is not nearly that wide, and the North Pole is the "North Line". Second, if you draw a perfectly straight, diagonal line across the surface of this map, it would actually be a curved line across the globe, so this map is basically useless for long distance navigation, and you end up somewhere you don't expect to be. Third, what happens if you fly off the West side of the map? Ending up on the East side makes sense right? What about flying off the North side? Should I end up in Antarctica now? Then do I teleport to the other side of the map or end up on a new copy of it?

Let's fix the North Pole problem. I discovered that you can fly circles around the North Pole in DCS, so someone suggested this projection to me.

Now if you fly over the North Pole from the Black Sea you will end up around Alaska, even better, the equator is continuous, so you can fly circles around the middle of the planet without worrying about flying off the map. You will have to constantly turn to stay on the equator though, even though in real life you would be flying straight across the surface. Even worse, the stretching gets really bad in the southern hemisphere. Antarctica encircles the entire planet in a great ice barrier, beyond which lies nothing. So this map isn't very good for navigation or modeling the entire world either.

I discovered You can actually fly circles around the south pole in DCS too though, so maybe it has this projection?

Maybe, maybe not. Now what if you want to fly from China to Australia? The direction you need to fly to get from point A to point B depends upon what projection DCS uses, where the origin of that projection is, and how the edges of the map are handled. As far as I know, only ED knows which speicific projection they use, and I can tell you that polar circumnavigation from Batumi to Batumi does not get you back to Georgia (also, some of the navigation instruments start to fail before you get back). You can see this projection, and EVERY projection for that matter (there are lots), has its own share of problems. This makes creating a proper "world map" like FSX or X-Plane have basically impossible even with an SDK and infinite time.

Now for a couple other problems caused by earth curvature not being modeled: In naval warfare, how far away you can detect enemies depends upon the horizon. (at lower frequencies or higher altitude, the "horizon" is further away.) In DCS, the horizon is infinitely far away, so if you put a high power telescope with negative elevation capability on top of a tall mountain, you could see most of the surface of earth, even if it is on the opposite side of the planet (not obstructed by another mountain.)

Also, I mentioned before, orbital mechanics doesn't work around infinite 2d planes, and the rotation of earth cannot be properly simulated. This means DCS: Orbiter, or DCS: ICBM are not possible, and it will cause errors any time you are flying at high speed and high altitude. This even significantly effects the shell trajectory of the Paris Gun from the first world war (If you aimed at a large Battlefield 3 sized map, you would completely miss the map.).

A final point. Last time I checked, there was a bug with the sun angle (and possibly star positions) when flying over the north pole caused by the flat earth representation. When you fly over the north pole, the sun will actually switch sides.

If all you care about is blowing stuff up, then you are right, it doesn't matter.

(P.S. Cool coincidence: On my browser, if you open and close the second projection with the third projection open, the north pole for both projections ends up in the same spot on the screen (may depend on screen width and zoom))

Actually, yes it is a big deal. :)

:megalol:

no it's not.

Yes it is :)

Long post.

You made some right points, but remember that actual DCS World engine simulates magnetic variation, so I am sure that navigation-wise they thought the thing pretty good.

About target spotting at sea level (and long air distances for what that matters), that's another story!

I would like to know the official word by ED about this subject.

At the moment we are using a flat earth. How will the situation change with EDGE I do not know. I did not develop EDGE. I do terrain. And let's talk about terrain and Normandy.

alrighty then.

About the terrain; how far inland will you go? I know you will start out on (either Southern England or) the beaches, but how far inland will the map go?

Yes it is :)

No, it's not :lol:

alrighty then.

 

About the terrain; how far inland will you go? I know you will start out on (either Southern England or) the beaches, but how far inland will the map go?

now planned to more than 100 kilometers from the coast

At the moment we are using a flat earth. How will the situation change with EDGE I do not know. I did not develop EDGE. I do terrain. And let's talk about terrain and Normandy.

With the SDK release coming to backers soon, presumably lots of people will attempt to create their own terrain.

What can you tell us about the workflow for terrain creation? What's your source material, how much manual work is needed, what file formats and programs can be used, and so on?

With the SDK release coming to backers soon, presumably lots of people will attempt to create their own terrain.

Luthier touches on this a little around 8:45. No detail about trees or curving the "world" but my guess is its still to early to tell. My take on it is they will get a base map up and let the map guys go at it with SDK, working with the team to "fix things or add to it" I like in the end he talks about next year addressing the B-17.

Almazi, this may interest you

http://www.ronaldv.nl/abandoned/airfields/FR/index.html

Airfields constructed by allies immediately after d-day, aerial photos and diagrams of field and runways, some construction photos. See Lower Normandy.

Almazi, this may interest you

http://www.ronaldv.nl/abandoned/airfields/FR/index.html

Airfields constructed by allies immediately after d-day, aerial photos and diagrams of field and runways, some construction photos. See Lower Normandy.

Thank you.

Hi Almazi,

Is there anything could I read up on/study to better prepare for the release of the SDK? E.g., what is the general architecture -- aside from Photoshop/image creation -- does it use lua or some other interpreted language, or is it "purely" creating images?

Thank you.

More reading for you :D

http://www.dday-overlord.com/eng/bocage_war.htm

The hedges in 1944

The very nature of hedges in 1944 is not the same as today. At the time of the Normandy landings, the hedges are an average of five meters high, a size smaller than today. Particularly well maintained, they have a dominant economic role in the region, which has largely disappeared today.

Hi Almazi,

 

Is there anything could I read up on/study to better prepare for the release of the SDK? E.g., what is the general architecture -- aside from Photoshop/image creation -- does it use lua or some other interpreted language, or is it "purely" creating images?

It should also start working on the junior level with the interface of 3ds max 2010 x64

should also understand the basics of mapping and work with satellite photographs. (Global Mapper, Google Earth, SAS Planet)

More reading for you :D

 

 

http://www.dday-overlord.com/eng/bocage_war.htm

 

 

The hedges in 1944

The very nature of hedges in 1944 is not the same as today. At the time of the Normandy landings, the hedges are an average of five meters high, a size smaller than today. Particularly well maintained, they have a dominant economic role in the region, which has largely disappeared today.

Ooh, I read a lot and watched movies about Normandy. Sometimes in my head was a real mess. But I hope I did not miss anything really important. :)

Terrain features inland from Omaha Beach:

 

There is plenty more where these came from with walls of text that explain every detail:

 

Omaha Beachhead (6 June - 13 June):

http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/100-11/100-11.HTM

Utah Beach to Cherbourg (6 June - 27 June):

http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/utah/utah.htm

 

Get to work RRG, and bring us the most detailed, good looking and authentic Normandy combat-area in gaming history!

Almazi...if you have a minute to spare could you watch this, maybe make a comment:)

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=115419

At the moment we are using a flat earth. How will the situation change with EDGE I do not know. I did not develop EDGE. I do terrain. And let's talk about terrain and Normandy.

afaik you were "land master" under your avatar pic few years ago

i hope you can answer but were you who developed the georgian or the crimean map for ED earlier ? so you left ED and now works for RRG ? :dunno:

Almazi...if you have a minute to spare could you watch this, maybe make a comment:)

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=115419

Luthiers answer on the Kickstarter Page regarding Truesky:

Also, trueSky looks really cool, but we're far too commited to making our own clouds and weather system to switch horses mid-jump.

Hopefully the stuff you'll see there will compare favorably to that video.

Almazi...if you have a minute to spare could you watch this, maybe make a comment:)

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=115419

beautiful. But we have to develop our clouds

afaik you were "land master" under your avatar pic few years ago

i hope you can answer but were you who developed the georgian or the crimean map for ED earlier ? so you left ED and now works for RRG ? :dunno:

Now I do not work in ED. It`s true.

I'm not sure if it has been stated yet but there are some Google Earth overlays of Normandy that seem at least somewhat helpful. Just a thought.

LINK