Home » FULL CONTROL GAMES » JA: Flashback (Solutions. Tips. Spoilers!) » Maps in Flashback
Maps in Flashback[message #320881] Sun, 26 May 2013 12:42 Go to next message
Thor

 
Messages:433
Registered:February 2007
Location: Belgium
Is anything decided about how large the maps will be? I'm a bit concerned about this. The maps (that I have seen) in Frontline tactics seem very small and currently in Ja2 we are trying to get them even bigger in AIMNAS with the bigmaps (which I personally think is a good thing as it gives more strategic possibilities).

So, what are the opinions concerning this aspect of the game?
And what is already decided by the JAF team?

[Updated on: Sun, 26 May 2013 12:45] by Moderator

Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320882] Sun, 26 May 2013 12:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Shanga

 
Messages:3517
Registered:January 2000
Location: Danubia
They said they will vary according to sector type. Some will be huge, some won't... Which could be a nice variation from standard sizes.


Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320889] Sun, 26 May 2013 15:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Thor

 
Messages:433
Registered:February 2007
Location: Belgium
Can be nice indeed, if there aren' too many small ones Smile and if you can get (or even better assemble) enough info before travelling there...
Any news about vehicles in the game?
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320898] Sun, 26 May 2013 17:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JAFTeam

 
Messages:157
Registered:April 2013
The thing is... what do you need big maps for if the content just isn't there. It's not fun to run around in the middle of nowhere without a clue about what to do. Will a town be big? Yes of course. Will a crashed plane in the jungle be as big as the town? Of course not. So yes, it can happen that some sectors will be very very small (a toilette in the jungle anyone?) and other will be huge. We want to make sure that no sector gets boring at all but that also means that the size is based on the content the sector has. And we will definitely look into keeping the balance right.
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320899] Sun, 26 May 2013 17:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3809
Registered:July 2009
Remember that even the smallest and least interesting sector needs maneuver room if contact is a possibility.


Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320908] Sun, 26 May 2013 18:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
grim

 
Messages:319
Registered:July 2006
Location: France
If i understand well, you want to build sectors like Fallout ones, depending on the content. OK
Just a note: Jagged Alliance is a bit more tactical than Fallout. It's always nice to have some room to move and fight, to use the range of long barrel weapons, use cover to move around, ambush, retreat, etc. Even a toilet in the middle of nowhere can have some jungle around to maneuver (and avoid the stink and flies), a path to reach it (with some ennemy passage you can ambush), an underground conduct to some water dump (anyone want to go stealth?) Wink. By the way, i don't know if you will implement sector movable vehicules (i hope for it very hard!), but those need even more space. That would mean Fallout tactics sector sizes rather than Fallout 1 ones.

Anyway i trust you to make them balanced, and hope we'll reach the stretch goal to make our own (big) maps.

Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320930] Sun, 26 May 2013 20:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
EXile 150 Abyss

 
Messages:139
Registered:September 2009
As long as there are a couple of maps that give the possibility to let a sniper rifle stretch out and touch someone I'll be happy. ^^ Like Grumm (C1)
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320932] Sun, 26 May 2013 21:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Thor

 
Messages:433
Registered:February 2007
Location: Belgium
Maybe I have a wrong idea about what is meant here with small sectors, I hope I do, but the sectors in Frontline tactics or the diorama shot are really very small to me. Think that around villages or camps there should be enough space to manoeuvre in most cases and that's not what I saw there. Indeed, like Grim says, if in a small sector you meet an enemy patrol which isn't lying in ambush, you still want to be able to move around it... Avoiding tactics are very important tactics, hit and run also... Against oversized & overpowered enemies you want some breathing space and not end up in the middle of them immediately. You want to choose which side to attack from, choose your ground if possible, do some planning...

Personally I don't mind big sectors at all, what a weird idea that they would be boring. You can use scouts, binoculars, vehicles maybe, snipers, heavy weapons, explosives... Preparing an attack is a big part of the fun, the distance and advantages of several gun types also. So, they are not boring, on the contrary. Okay, maybe to test a game that you know inside out it is boring as it takes a bit longer, I can imagine that. To find a last enemy can be a drag too, but there are other solutions for that as shown e.g. in Ja2 v.1.13 & AIMNAS. Anyway, I don't need to find every item in the sector either, that adds to replayability. I like it that you have to travel a long time sometimes... Jungles should be huge, even if there is nothing there to find or to meet. Even more exciting if you meet enemies there. Does anyone think it boring in JA2 AIMNAS? Don't think so... AIMNAS is very popular as far as I can tell and not for the least because of the big maps. I like the freedom of movement too.. Some mountain ridges, bridges, lakes, deserts, etc. are not only nice to look at, but they can give strategical advantage or disadvantage in a big map. A player also wants disadvantages to make something interesting but his approach should not be limited by the size of a sector in my opinion as it is a very unrealistic limitation. Maybe a stupid argument for a computer game, but in my eyes I rather think that is something cheap and not a map in which you can't find anything but some rocks and a casual tree.

I agree that you can have small maps like at the edges of the island or near inaccessable mountain ridges, in mining shafts, undergrounds, tunnels, caves, small islands themselves,... Even for an introductory mission. Otherwise I definitely prefer big maps so that you can decide which side you want to attack from. To surround a base or outflank enemy patrols and open fire from different corners to confuse, divert, and split troops.
Territory alone is enough sometimes for a map, it shouldn't be stocked with stuff either, it can be empty apart from nature textures at times, that's not cheap. It makes for advantages and disadvantages like in real life... The one who choses his ground well first gets the advantage.

You can have spies in remote sectors to see enemies approaching or passing by in order to have enough time to prepare your men and base. You can use binoculars and snipers in big maps, but what is that expensive sniper rifle good for if you can't make use of its extra range? Indeed, nothing... On the contrary, it's not only a disadvantage against assault rifles and smgs in a small thight-packed jungle sector with a toilet only Razz, but also in a small desert sector it would be reduced to "almost worthless". Big warehouses or appartment buildings are like 'small sectors' in big maps also.

Lastly, I'll give some nice example of hit & run advantage... Don't need Geronimo for that, maybe somebody remembers the story of the Horatii & Curatii.
Quote:
According to Livy, the Horatii were male triplets from Rome. During a war between Rome and Alba Longa during the reign of Tullus Hostilius (approx. 672-642 B.C.), it was agreed that settlement of the war would depend on the outcome of a battle between the Horatii and the Curiatii. The Curiatii were male triplets from Alba Longa and of the same age as the Horatii.

In the battle, the three Curiatii were wounded [in various degrees], but two of the Horatii were killed. The last of the Horatii, Publius, turned as if to flee. The Curiatii chased him but, as a result of their wounds, became separated. This enabled Publius to slay them one by one.
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320946] Sun, 26 May 2013 22:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Maalstroom

 
Messages:343
Registered:December 2008
Location: en route to San Hermanos
I'm still playing Ja2 because of the big maps! So don't screw this one! Small sectors for mines underground and yeah - TOILETS! But jungles should be huge as thor says, even if there's nothing to find. Personaly i liked the diorama and i wouldn't mind a bit to take a stroll through the jungle just to admire the scenery!

SO GO BIG ON THIS ONE!
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320952] Sun, 26 May 2013 23:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JP'TR

 
Messages:105
Registered:April 2009
Location: Germany
JAFTeam
The thing is... what do you need big maps for if the content just isn't there.


THE MOST sectors in JA2 are empty, just large woods, empty green fields, swamps or open deserts... if an enemy unit is present, and you don't know where they are located you have your content.

To be honestly, i'm a bit confused about this statement...

btw. if you think the work could degenerate... these open empty sectors don't need a special design like your diorama with ruins or other extras. I would say it is more important to have them big for a lot free movement instead of filled them up with very exclusive, hand designed and not repeating content.
Of course it must not be copy & paste, but just an empty wood with trees only is not wrong for a JA, taking care for snipers, mines, or just the search for enemy troops is enough content for these type of maps, off-road.

JA2 mapsize should be the minimum for every map.

[Updated on: Mon, 27 May 2013 00:02] by Moderator

Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320954] Mon, 27 May 2013 00:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lockie

 
Messages:3929
Registered:February 2006
Location: Scotland
I'm with all of the above , keep the map sizes the same , content of course can be little , but as everyone says , sometimes we like to roam around and encounter enemy anywhere .



Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320960] Mon, 27 May 2013 00:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:2020
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
Thor
Personally I don't mind big sectors at all, what a weird idea that they would be boring.


But too large sectors could be boring (and ugly if empty). As usual BiA can be the bad example for this: some of the road sectors where boring large in relation to the small area where the action took place.

So, IMHO a good relation between size and content of a sector is not too bad a thing. Yes, there should be room for manoeuvring and applying different tactics and ways of approach etc.
Variety is spice and I wouldn't mind if there were some sectors that provide for instant and intense "action" due to lack of space. And others, where you might exchange fire across some 100m, some indoors, some where you could sneak around a position or flank etc.
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320973] Mon, 27 May 2013 10:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JAFTeam

 
Messages:157
Registered:April 2013
Right. Take BiA as an example of empty sectors which aren't that much fun at all. Of course we'll leave enough space for complex tactics. And yet we will keep an eye on the size. Cause if it doesn't make sense to blow up a sector in size than we won't do it.
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320974] Mon, 27 May 2013 10:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3809
Registered:July 2009
I wouldn't even bash BiA that much here (did I just say that?). Their continuous travel system let you approach right to the edges of a hot zone and the large spaces between those were just the empty filler maps merged into one bigger sector.


Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320976] Mon, 27 May 2013 11:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JP'TR

 
Messages:105
Registered:April 2009
Location: Germany
Just found this awesome stuff.
So much "empty" large sectors between the towns, but thats not "missing content", it is a realistic design and i would not like to miss these spaces, for troop movement and exploration for hidden secrets. If everything without content is small, and no epmty large spaces are given, the exploration for special points is much smaller.

https://public.dm1.livefilestore.com/y2pfHEF8nJeLmlSGc29qAj-cy05ypDmZDqMta0ONhdp3-B8tc2ABziQsOuyFH6NLv0ScqoVxBRibb-oaicHnPsRNU0_H9Bcq-q-CDj9QKRagl8/WorldMap%20V3.jpg?psid=1&rdrts=44264390

[Updated on: Mon, 27 May 2013 11:07] by Moderator

Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320977] Mon, 27 May 2013 11:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gdalf

 
Messages:89
Registered:May 2013
I think we're more likely to agree if a sector is too small than if it's too large. In some of the JA2 sectors the minute you entered in could have a problem with rooftop snipers or something like that because it was crammed with buildings. Realistically there should be some minimum distance of approach for any sector, including urban ones. Especially urban ones in fact, given that snipers in tall apartments would be a real challenge that we never got a taste of in JA2. Larger sectors give more room for tactical variation if there's enough content in the middle.

A 'desert' sector which is large and realistic (where much of the action involves firefights against enemies several hundred meters away) might seem boring only if the tools you have for dealing with it are limited. Sand dunes, sniper rifles, mortars, binoculars/periscopes, weapons mounted on vehicles, etc would make a huge difference. But taking it on with just pistols and you basically have to run up to all the different enemies to kill them and that would be terrible.

As for the clearing-out-the-last-soldier problem, I wonder if this can be creatively addressed in some other manner? If you can't find them after a certain amount of time, let them escape (promote them to make them something you don't want to see in round 2) or become some kind of insurgent who wreaks havoc behind the lines?
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #320978] Mon, 27 May 2013 11:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SharkD

 
Messages:358
Registered:July 2003
Maybe a good comparison would be Silent Storm. Some maps were small, others were large.

I prefer JA2 sized maps though.
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321026] Mon, 27 May 2013 22:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
EXile 150 Abyss

 
Messages:139
Registered:September 2009
Well something like a stretch of road. the map could be stretch along the road and fairly narrow. In some maps in JA2 you had the road and huge tracks of unused land. And now if there are enemies you will have to "clear" the road and just the road. No wild goose chases into the shrubbery.
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321031] Mon, 27 May 2013 23:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Claudius

 
Messages:15
Registered:January 2004
Location: France
Having maps of different sizes can be interesting, not only because of memory constraints.

Let's say you must attack an isolated farm. Is it better to have a farm rather large as compared to its sector size or a tiny farm in the middle of empty fields? Perhaps it is sometimes more fun to have a tiny sector and a large farm, thus being at risk to be shot from different angles ...

What about approach?

IMO, the key is to have a limited but adequate surrounding area where to place the mercs thus preventing an immediate contact. Of course up to the player to choose a good point Smile

Nevertheless, for some specific sectors an immediate contact can be intentional ...
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321034] Tue, 28 May 2013 00:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Thor

 
Messages:433
Registered:February 2007
Location: Belgium
Agree with DepressivesBrot... Okay, agree with most of ya... But to have room for manoeuvering when there is a possibility to encounter enemies is most important to me too... And I suppose that's how I understand the JAF team.

Even in canyons, tunnels, caves, that kind of sectors... especially in that kind of sector, there should be a possibility to scout first... Of course there can be ambushes and enemies behind-the-door-style-stuff, hidden snipers, etc... but like many people have repeated in this forum, this is not xcom where you can replace mercs without getting loyalty issues etc., so in most cases it should at least be possible to advance prudently... that you have a choice. This is a strategy game after all, right? Of course there will be times that there is only one way ahead... not talking about that.

And If it is clear which sectors are huge and which are smaller (could be general sector info), I guess it will be possible to plan a trip in regard to energy loss and that kind of things...

Maybe there are vehicles like in Ja2 to get to other sectors, maybe even more advanced than in Ja2... Although that is not the most important aspect to me, I'm curious. Smile

[Updated on: Tue, 28 May 2013 00:17] by Moderator

Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321058] Tue, 28 May 2013 09:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
EXile 150 Abyss

 
Messages:139
Registered:September 2009
Thor
Agree with DepressivesBrot... Okay, agree with most of ya... But to have room for manoeuvering when there is a possibility to encounter enemies is most important to me too...


Agreed there should be enough room to scout or flank the enemy.

But in the case of lets say a watchtower or something similarly small you don't need a huge map.
Though with something like an airport it would be cool is it stretches out to one side to accommodate for a "realisticly sized" airstrip.

The would be cool... Put the sniper along the edge of the runway and start popping off people in the control tower. Razz
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321061] Tue, 28 May 2013 11:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mauser

 
Messages:781
Registered:August 2006
Location: Bavaria - Germany
The main issue with map sizes, apart from maneuvering and flanking, is for me, that the player at least should have enough space all around to properly plan the approach on the enemy, because it makes absolutely no sense, if a group of professionals blunder into a location and move so close as to get into view range of the enemies therein. Jagged Alliance Online has this problem, where the maps are often so small, that you can see the first enemies right away, but also most often do not have many options of movement or approach, as most possible paths are barred somehow.

Also, there

☆★GL★☆
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321105] Wed, 29 May 2013 01:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hyrax

 
Messages:17
Registered:May 2013
Location: Harjumaa
I guess the map sizes depend on different other aspects. If there is going to be long range firefights (I personally like them), which JA2 didn't have because of LOS shortness, JA2 map size would be minimal. So I would say the JA2 maps were good in size (also liked the cramped fighting in basements like tixa jail), but need to balanced with parameters.

I think the problem with instant firefights when you enter a sector can be avoided with planning the sectors to have edges that are relatively safe (except city to city squares where it wouldn't make much sense).

Varying the size of sectors idea I like because this could be used to create atmosphere also. You enter a massive map and you just know that is going to be trouble. For instance, the idea (that was mentioned in the kickstarter) where you enter some kind of ruins and get suddenly surrounded by the enemy. With a big map this would be really cool to hold your position there, but with a smaller map this would not work so good.

Although, for the ironman mode, larger maps means more enemies (logical?) and that may result in battles lasting for hours and replays lasting for hours and hours.
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321114] Wed, 29 May 2013 07:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SharkD

 
Messages:358
Registered:July 2003
I think that having a lot of empty space around a target conveys to the player that they are in a remote location.
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321116] Wed, 29 May 2013 08:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mauser

 
Messages:781
Registered:August 2006
Location: Bavaria - Germany
Hyrax

Although, for the ironman mode, larger maps means more enemies (logical?) and that may result in battles lasting for hours and replays lasting for hours and hours.


Not necessarily Hyrax. Even a relatively large map can have comparatively few enemies, concentrated in one or a few locations, making for either well paced and segmented or concentrated and intense battles. Just imagine a large Farm, with the enemies concentrated around and inside the main buildings and maybe the main road nearby, with plenty of fields, hedges and woods all around. A few enemies could be patrolling the perimeter, whilst some sleep in the barn and others drink in the main house, some guarding the road etc.
You would have plenty of possibilities to attack them during night and day, stealthy ones and brute force ones.

For example, you could choose multiple directions of approach, maybe through the woods, maybe through the fields.
You could either stealthily scour the surroundings and dispatch of the patrols, before attacking the main force, or sneak a merc to the barn at night, mining/booby trapping the entrance, then set fire to the barn or using gas to dispatch the sleeping enemies siletly, whilst your snipers stay out of sight, waiting in the dark on a nearby small hill or within haystacks for the enemies to run into the light as they come to fight the fire, including the patrols who come running back to the main force etc.
Or maybe have a map where you

☆★GL★☆
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321130] Wed, 29 May 2013 18:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hyrax

 
Messages:17
Registered:May 2013
Location: Harjumaa
Aaah yes Mauser, you are correct. I was thinking more in the JA2 universe where enemy positions and numbers were not that enjoyable in ironman mode. If JA:F would have intelligent enemy positioning (not randomly scattered or sitting in corners all the time) then ironman would be more enjoyable on larger maps.

I just realized that JA:F should have enemy moral also. Mercs have moral, but the enemy never seems to want to retreat or surrender. This should be tied to the amount of soldiers on both sides (taking account the soldier experience levels also) and current outcome.

I think a good approach on maps would be outline the distance of the sniper/long range weapons and fit the maps to accordingly to this. On a large map and medium map firing a sniper rifle from one end to the other end seems not so good practice. For small maps - caverns, basements and so on it is not important as I doubt that using a sniper rifle there would be wise.

In my opinion, a good example of a map I enjoyed in ironman mode was in JA:UB. The first patrol station you were forced to take had a cool layout. You could attack it from different sides, move your men around the station and the small range elite sniper with the VAL sniper rifle was lethal on ironman mode.

Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321145] Wed, 29 May 2013 21:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Cyborg

 
Messages:38
Registered:November 2006
Location: Europe
I think "optimal" map size is heavily dependent on sight range, weapon range and move speed.

The higher the above are, the bigger that maps can be. They really have to be pinned down before one can discuss what map size is practical.

That said I agree that map size:

- should vary according to terrain type and objects of interest
- allow some tactical options in the approach, so always needs some space on the edges
- there can still be plenty of generic wilderness maps like in JA2


It also has to be kept in mind that in theory 6-12 people should be able to sweep a map within a practical time period, i.e. not spend hours getting from one side to the other searching for one enemy. A fleeing mechanic like Hyrax mentions, maybe combined with such fleeing individuals going independently back to friendly rallying points (f.e. bases or checkpoints) might help in this respect. Otherwise you end up with 1-2 enemies (leftovers from previous fights) in every sector, forcing you into combat. Even so, wilderness encounters between patrols also has to be kept in mind.

Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321155] Thu, 30 May 2013 00:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
EXile 150 Abyss

 
Messages:139
Registered:September 2009
What I am wondering is; how will the strategic map look with the different tactical map sizes.

- Will they make the sectors all the same like in Jagged Alliance 2?
- Will they make it all fit together like a huge jigsaw puzzle?
- Or will the put some empty space between sectors just to make it easier to fit them?
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321162] Thu, 30 May 2013 00:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:2020
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
They could take BiA as example, this time for a good one: There were different sized/shaped sectors fitting together. And the part of the travelling system, were you had some time to spent between the "hot spots" of two neighbouring sewctors wasn't too bad either. IMHO.

I could even imagine borrowing from some fantasy RPGs where you set travel route on the map from A to B and if you encounter a yet unspotted enemy group some sort of random sector is loaded to let you play the fight.

Just throwing ideas in ...
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321163] Thu, 30 May 2013 00:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3809
Registered:July 2009
No random sectors. I hated being "ambushed" on the same 5 7.62 maps over and over and over again.


Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321205] Thu, 30 May 2013 17:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mauser

 
Messages:781
Registered:August 2006
Location: Bavaria - Germany
DepressivesBrot
No random sectors. I hated being "ambushed" on the same 5 7.62 maps over and over and over again.


True. But what about sectors with randomly varied elements to make them less repetitive?
Instead of just spawning enemies or loot, why not spawn buildings, walls and fences, trees, rocks, traps, minefields and light sources too semi-randomly, in order to bring a sense of uncertainty and variation into some sectors, which also allows for new tactical possibilities with each playthrough?

Generally it would be awesome to have maps where you can spawn dynamical structures permanently, as to build additional fortifications etc., so why not use this to include dynamical additions to certain maps, which can be shuffled with each new playthrough from a predetermined set of possible elements and layouts? Which also could be linked to certain script triggers, so maps change with certain quests, actions or progress.

This way, the player gets much less repetitive playthroughs and the mappers can add lots of variation without having to completely build a map from scratch each time.

☆★GL★☆
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321206] Thu, 30 May 2013 18:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3809
Registered:July 2009
That's ok. A bit of an evolution of our alternate maps. Just don't give me the same generic wood map three times traveling from "Drassen" to "Balime"*

*just for scale reference


Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321208] Thu, 30 May 2013 18:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
gdalf

 
Messages:89
Registered:May 2013
+1 for procedurally generated maps
-1 for set piece maps distributed as random encounters (like in Fallout 1/2)
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321209] Thu, 30 May 2013 18:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:2020
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
JFTR: That's what I meant; not randomly pick from a selection of premade maps but rather random generated maps. More precisely, a combination of both like what Mauser described as purely random generated maps would likely be an unplayable mess ...
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321215] Thu, 30 May 2013 19:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dethica

 
Messages:40
Registered:September 2009
I am a supporter of JA2-styled sectors. Even if some sectors are just woods or wasteland, it would still be better than randomized sectors. I don't see how making tons of sectors would be too time consuming - if the map editor they use is any good at all, then making many sectors should not be a problem. The empty sectors do not have to be very detailed and unique. Look at JA2's forest sectors, for example.
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321221] Thu, 30 May 2013 20:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Slax

 
Messages:1448
Registered:July 2006
Location: People riding polar bears...
A highly modular mapping engine is a must. Allowing for set maps/sectors and various sorts of generated things. Speedrunners probably won't enjoy randomly generated places a whole lot but the modders... mmm, yes. Very Happy

Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321225] Thu, 30 May 2013 22:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Shanga

 
Messages:3517
Registered:January 2000
Location: Danubia
Dunno how big the world will be but two things they gotta avoid:

A) The linearity of JA2UB.
B) The "travel to mission" system "The Fall" had.

But they already mentioned you can spend as much time as you want freelancing around the map, so I guess they'll give some love to non-quest sectors too.


Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321231] Fri, 31 May 2013 04:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SharkD

 
Messages:358
Registered:July 2003
So it's been confirmed that there will be an overworld map in JAF?
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321240] Fri, 31 May 2013 12:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
grim

 
Messages:319
Registered:July 2006
Location: France
Confirmed, i don't know, but at least, it was announced in the KS page:
about the base
Quote:
It functions as a hub between missions and provides you with a map over the game world, it is also where you recruit, customize and take care of your mercenaries.

And here is a concept art on the page:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/ksr/assets/000/516/245/20afff164453ee3a657905267ea7b62c_large.jpg
Re: Maps in Flashback[message #321255] Sat, 01 June 2013 07:40 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
SharkD

 
Messages:358
Registered:July 2003
So you can't simply walk across the map... or can you? I'm confused... :crazy:

I was hoping it would be possible to create a standard CRPG (albeit one with a very detailed set of combat rules) using this engine.
Previous Topic: Morale
Next Topic: CONTEST TOPIC: Spread the Word Campaign just got more kickass!
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Dec 16 21:58:10 EET 2018

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01755 seconds