[new layout Altis] Parokalos_Arrow (Lite)

Discussion, Help, and Mission Presentation forum for the PVP Warfare Mission Tool
User avatar
Dox
Donator
Posts: 114

[new layout Altis] Parokalos_Arrow (Lite)

Post#1 » Tue 07 May, 2019 11:06 pm

Layout:Parokalos_Arrow (Lite)
Author: Dox
Faction 1: opfor
Faction 2: blufor
Description: city of Paros and Kalochori become one large city , 4 flag inline short range , infantry focus , door by door combat , 3 long range flag to avoid deadlock



Image
updated - sp
Image
general layout
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image



other pics : https://imgur.com/a/aN0fcun
Last edited by Dox on Wed 08 May, 2019 7:41 pm, edited 3 times in total.

3Hugger
Community Member
Posts: 242

Re: [new layout Altis] Panochori_Arrow (Lite)

Post#2 » Wed 08 May, 2019 12:36 pm

Very interesting....

To start with the worry:
Connecting 2 decent sized villages/cities to become 1 big city may be overstepping for the balance (micro-stuttering and rubber-banding are almost an guarantee).
It already gave a screen freeze on the editor for me when I did load it (on a EVO SSD, 1080 Ti & TR@4Ghz), so I expect this can be extrapolated to causing problems on lower end / older systems).

But,.. if this wasn't case:
WOW that looks amazing!

Detailed feedback (besides the city objects/doors issue, which seems to be fundamental to the concept):
- The east base should be more in the SW corner of the Salt lake to provide a more fair equi-distance between the base and objectives. The Western base is about spot on, but the East base is too far from some of the immediate objectives.

- The airfield next to the East base should not have a repair point, as it provides an unfair repair location which is only available to the East base.

- The service point next to the objective needs to be father out, as it is now too close to an objective, also providing unfair advantage to the objective owner, practically being able to repair & rearm under spawn protection of the objective.

- Many objects are placed too high, without reason for it to be so high. Lowering buildings is required, so they have the least amount of steps on each stair. Some buildings placed can't even be entered, because they are placed too high!
The rule of thumb: place every object as low as you can afford it to be, swirl around every object for the full 360 degrees, to see problems on any and every side of the object, place the object as low as possible.

User avatar
Dox
Donator
Posts: 114

Re: [new layout Altis] Panochori_Arrow (Lite)

Post#3 » Wed 08 May, 2019 1:44 pm

[worknig]
Reply inline:

1)
- The east base should be more in the SW corner of the Salt lake to provide a more fair equi-distance between the base and objectives. The Western base is about spot on, but the East base is too far from some of the immediate objectives.
--- true but i place it a bit more far because move on salt lake is more easy that in the limni swamp for the west base faction, anyway can be moved.. but.. are u sure ?

2)
- The airfield next to the East base should not have a repair point, as it provides an unfair repair location which is only available to the East base.
---is not a repair point is a uav service point

3)
- The service point next to the objective needs to be father out, as it is now too close to an objective, also providing unfair advantage to the objective owner, practically being able to repair & rearm under spawn protection of the objective.
---yeah is a deliberated choice, who take the point take also a service point , free service point is in the north of layout. i would keave the service point as is ... otherwise the service point can be placed between refuge and telos camp

4)
- Many objects are placed too high, without reason for it to be so high. Lowering buildings is required, so they have the least amount of steps on each stair. Some buildings placed can't even be entered, because they are placed too high!
The rule of thumb: place every object as low as you can afford it to be, swirl around every object for the full 360 degrees, to see problems on any and every side of the object, place the object as low as possible.
--- i check again , usually i try to wal aroud with a player to be sure all work fine . Can you be more precise on area to check ?


i have concentrated all the new object in that area , so i hope can be not too heavy to play... but only play can give us an answer... Kavala for example is fat and heavy also without editor object, this layout in editor seems me more light than kavala itself... but hey.. server run differently i know..

work on point 3 e check for the point 4

Thank you

3Hugger
Community Member
Posts: 242

Re: [new layout Altis] Panochori_Arrow (Lite)

Post#4 » Wed 08 May, 2019 2:45 pm

1] I understand your logic, to which I agree, but:
The base on the Salt Lake also has a negative trait due to the open view area it is; the traffic either has to go over the North East OR it has to travel over a plain open area, while there are hills in the North overlooking with countermeasures. Despite the countermeasures the base is placed such that it kind of forces traffic over the open view plain field area.

So by placing the base more in the SW corner, it is more equal distance like the West base, and at the same time it makes the travel distance over the open view Salt Lake less intrusive.

2 & 3] Yes the UAV service point, basically only available to the East base due to the close proximity: It has to go, unless you find an equal counterpart for the other (West) base. Which is unlikely, so please consider removing/relocating the service point.

4 ] It is all around, just try to place every object as low as you possibly can. Drag it into the ground yourself, do not use auto-align functionality for object placement, as it is just as often wrong as it offers good results.

Just as a quick reference from 1 of your images, most of the red circled objects can be (and should be) lowered. But it easier to check in the editor/game.
Image

3Hugger
Community Member
Posts: 242

Re: [new layout Altis] Panochori_Arrow (Lite)

Post#5 » Wed 08 May, 2019 3:02 pm

Rough indicator, without actual measuring:
Image

User avatar
Dox
Donator
Posts: 114

Re: [new layout Altis] Panochori_Arrow (Lite)

Post#6 » Wed 08 May, 2019 7:37 pm

1) moved HQ east (2° img first post)
2) deleted Uav SP near hq east , relocated @ 3 airfield in total
3) vehicle SP south relocated (1° img first post)
4) lowered almost all structure as terrain allow to do

3Hugger
Community Member
Posts: 242

Re: [new layout Altis] Parokalos_Arrow (Lite)

Post#7 » Thu 09 May, 2019 11:43 am

I am checking your layout atm, so you do not need to fix anything anymore, but as general feedback:

Disabling simulation only needs to be done on interactive objects (so objects with animations like interactive doors or a gate that can open, etc.) and objects that can be moved (physics), like chairs and tables, etc. but these then needs to be carefully placed and is recommended to not use these at all. And NEVER on any other object, so H-barriers do not need to be simulation disabled, as there is no animation.

Buildings with simulation disabled,.. won't have functional doors, while the user still gets the 'open door' icon, if you did not LOCK the doors as well.

You may not placed objects on top of other objects: planks or timbers from 1 building to an other may end up floating if the building is damaged. The same counts for scaffolding: if you place 2 on top of each other, the upper one may stay around floating, while the lower is damaged.

Objects like tents and bungalows, etc. should not be crossing fencing or other default BIS objects (causes micro stuttering/lag). The hospital has ground visible in the building through the floor, it has rocks and bushes clipping into it, etc. these should be avoided (hide the BIS objects, or relocate the building).

You forgot / overlooked some objects' heights still, the buildings NW of Paros for instance.
The factories (2 at 1 spot) were still having entrance elements, which should be closer to the ground. Gas station pumps were floating a little. Some of the office buildings could be lowered still.
A crane was having the stairs too high to access them, etc.
Etc.

Advice: the most buildings have a visible line around the entire construction, either a notch, a granny or nook, which gives a clearly visible border which should be around ground level or a little above ground level. If you place the corner of the building of this ground-indicator at just touching the ground at highest point of the ground, then rest is hopefully okay, then check the lowest point of the ground, whether this is functional. If not reconsider the entire placement.

I opened the tents on the south of the city, so they could actually be used to hide from darters (for as long as they don't get destroyed). Also hidden the unnecessary details of the tents (solar panels/logo).

I also locked various doors, in attempt to lower the load on the server.

You made a very beautiful detailed surrounding, yet everything is placed far too coarse and requires more polishing. Make sure you place everything SPOT ON. Within the time (this entire morning) it costs me polishing the details, I may have made the majority of the mission myself in similar amount of time, while now I still may have missed something (well that probably happens anyway). :biggrin:

I expect to finish polishing this layout and if so place it as recommendation for a potential integration in a future rotation (which is not a guarantee it will make it, depending on many variables).
The current rotation (Set A) may be swapped out with a next rotation set (B), which already is complete. Putting your layout on the list as a potential candidate for a farther future set, (say Set 'C', which does not exist yet).

Concluding: I consider this layout an interesting concept, however it is breaking the guideline of expanding a city (or in this case even connecting 2 villages), I will propose this layout anyway, as exceptional test case to see if you have pushed the boundaries and found an acceptable exception. 8-)

As emphasis: the guidelines are in place for a reason and are only becoming more strict, exceptions are highly recommended to be avoided, as like this layout, it does not meet the guideline and usually it would be ignored for that reason alone. This is an exception for test purposes only! :wave-1:

3Hugger
Community Member
Posts: 242

Re: [new layout Altis] Parokalos_Arrow (Lite)

Post#8 » Thu 09 May, 2019 3:28 pm

After some further tweaking and the removal of 1 objective (due to the spawn distance around objectives, the center 4 objectives were too close, hence one of the middle two is removed and the other remaining objective is relocated to the center).

It believe this is a great concept, let's hope it will work out under testing & live conditions as well! :bigthumb:

I have pushed it as recommendation for inclusion in a future rotation.
As the current Set A is being replaced by the already finalized Set B, the recommendation is for the Set following up after set B (to be rolled out 'soon').

User avatar
Dox
Donator
Posts: 114

Re: [new layout Altis] Parokalos_Arrow (Lite)

Post#9 » Thu 09 May, 2019 3:48 pm

Niceee

i dont knew the problem about "disabling simulation" , i remember wrong an old guide line... sry for the time loosed

can you post a pc of the reworkd layout ? im curious

im happy you enjoy the concept behind

Thank you

BR

3Hugger
Community Member
Posts: 242

Re: [new layout Altis] Parokalos_Arrow (Lite)

Post#10 » Thu 09 May, 2019 4:21 pm

First impression:
Image

Most of all: object states were set, many objects were realigned with the ground and various other bigger and minor tweaks.

The result so far:

Few tweaks, most important the removal of 1 objective in the middle.
Image

Added some cover to the Eastern base:
Image

Added spawn cover
Image

Only set some 'states':
Image

Lowered many objects & altered many states:
Image

Image

Image

The new location of the center objective:
Image

Added some spawn cover, relocated the flag a bit, tweaked the tents and various other objects and added spawn cover:
Image

Overall appearance:
Image


It will be challenging, but who knows, it might make the cut.
Let's hope for the best.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests