What areas and paths are recognized by bms?
-
And how is correctly?
-
And how is correctly?
experiment yourself, get the funnel to bridge right, get the bridge line right, get the roads right….it works!, I’ll take pictures sometime.
-
Mind your P’s&Q’s and SPANNING when it comes to bridge pathing. As well as the feature flags.
Hi Steve……demer
-
This post is deleted! -
experiment yourself, get the funnel to bridge right, get the bridge line right, get the roads right….it works!, I’ll take pictures sometime.
I have done it by the book by not by the book by my logic by other users logic that I could find on forums… Guess what… None worked.
-
I have done it by the book by not by the book by my logic by other users logic that I could find on forums… Guess what… None worked.
Then you’re doing something wrong….Period!!!
C9
-
@Cloud:
Then you’re doing something wrong….Period!!!
C9
Agreed……I believe we need to Spell it out…in Six languages…LOL!!!
Have at it…Period!
demer -
Guys let’s be reasonable… I don’t totally disagree that it doesn’t work… and period.
From my search and the info I could gather… also I posted here asking… a thread was started talking about the procedure and areas paths etc in none of the above there was a solution or details how it actually works…
If it exists somewhere please share it.As I said many times and we all know the info is scattered all over the place one bit here one bit there one went through and gone in a talk in TS channel in a totally different time zone… and so on and so forth…
We all know that to master the beast is a straggle… so when someone is on the cliff hanging, having a grip from the fingers only, let’s not go over him with a small hammer and see how quickly he will fall off by hitting his fingers gently with the hammer…
Mind your P’s&Q’s and SPANNING when it comes to bridge pathing. As well as the feature flags.
Hi Steve……demer
demer could you please be so kind and as I see u r not tired :lol: and shed some light what are the P’s and Q’s and the SPANNING? hmmm feature flags???
I know that the path’s and declaration and lines must be perfectly putted from the Terrain editor.
Lately there was a pic in screenshots thread of some vehicles passing a bridge. They where on the bridge but one was flying actually over the bridge… also the bridge IIRC had no gap underneeth between the bridge and the water… wasn’t a raised bridge… So at Korea at the red raised bridge (near Kimpo IIRC) if u set forces to pass over they will go over the bridge? Haven’t seen any pics of this…
@C9 ok m8 I take it that I’m doing something wrong… could u please share your resources as to read them and find my error? A period I don’t think it solves the error. Depends though if u mean PMS… then yeap one could take advantage from it and have spare time to work on the subject… :rofl:
Edit: I’m talking about this one:
and cause I saw it on my phone… now that I see it on the monitor… u can clearly see that they pass also and under the bridge… exactly what happened to my case.
-
Beautiful targets…!!!
-
Arty, their on the bridge!..…but yeah Arty sometimes they actually hover above the bridge too!, when they hit the bridge they jump to bridge level, and sometimes they jump higher above the bridge but who cares?, it still looks better than them surfing the waves.
In all honesty I’m probably not doing it right either!, probably could be better because this is all new to me, I just mess around and hope for the best.
-
@SgtMaddog316 The hover thing ain’t actually the issue. I believe this is done cause of having trouble by the code to distinguish the surface on witch is the path to follow as for height… The bridge u show has segments parts that u collide in falcon editor to make one long bridge. As I observed vehicles drop off at the joints and the they fly over where the bridge has an upper connection and probably cause of the hit box. They should stay in the hit box and not go off… on the other hand the hit box at the ends of the bridge is lower thus maybe confusing or fubared by the code. also the vehicles 3d boundaries might also have their part on the buzinca…
Also this could be cause the path they are instructed to follow ain’t perfectly aligned with the bridge. so the object sees it’s going to collide on one side and takes a buzinca trajectory.
If u put a more raised bridge u will see them travel over the water and jump on the bridge and above the bridge. If u had a clean bridge flat surface only, then u could have clearer observation. But this would need a new bridge, also I believe it would be better if the bridge was just one piece, and not a puzzle of pieces.
Now the problem is if they follow the path u set - want.
Paths go on vertical on the tile… like a cross and diagonal IIRC. If u follow that rule and place the bridge on that path they follow it… but if u place the bridge between the center and the margin (left or right side) of the tile they never go over the bridge, they just pass over the water even though u have all the paths and areas correctly.
If u don’t believe me just try it for your self.
Also another extension on the subject… add a one tile corridor of water between land (plains)… and place naval units and give them the path to sail that corridor… I’m sure they will never pass it. Like Gandalf is there hammers his stick and says YOU SHALL NOT PASS…
-
Well I’ll try other bridges and see what happens, or you can because after tonight I’m hitting the road for a few days, and tonight I’m just going to fly this baby and blow stuff up with my co-pilot (10 cans of Guinness).
-
Also this could be cause the path they are instructed to follow ain’t perfectly aligned with the bridge. so the object sees it’s going to collide on one side and takes a buzinca trajectory.
These are the only paths ground units will follow on any given terrain tile, regardless of how you draw them on the terrain tile, they enter at the center of the edge of the NSEW sides of the tile and exit at the same points, it’s not the paths that need to be aligned with the bridge, it the opposite, the object(bridge) needs to be aligned with the path, dictated by the code(see below)):
East/West road/bridge paths:
North/South road/bridge paths:
Now the problem is if they follow the path u set - want.
Refer to pics above, you can’t dictated the path, the code dictates that.
Paths go on vertical on the tile… like a cross and diagonal IIRC. If u follow that rule and place the bridge on that path they follow it… but if u place the bridge between the center and the margin (left or right side) of the tile they never go over the bridge, they just pass over the water even though u have all the paths and areas correctly.
There is no diagonal, there is only N/S-E/W, of course if the paths only are drawn from the North edge to the East edge they will follow that, but that is more directed by the campaign file ground links, in conjunction with the path dictation of the code. Actually, you only have to draw a small path to represent a ground/river/bridge path, 8 bits and that will suffice. But to facilitate that your links are correctly built and can be viewed in Terrain editor with ease, they should be completely drawn so you know exactly what is going on in with the paths:
Drawing a billion little paths to try to match the art file of a road or river is not needed, the code does not require that and it actually causes FPS issues when you have a hundred road/river paths on tiles as it increases the amount of info in the bin file which has to be constantly loaded by Falcon.
If u don’t believe me just try it for your self.
This is something you seem to not understand.
If the bridge is not centered in the DB, like in this pic, the ground units will never pass over the bridge, they will follow the road/bridge path centered in the terrain tile, like they should, dictated by the code:
If the bridge object is placed correctly with the middle of it centered at X=0/Y=0 in the DB like this, which is compatible to the paths via the code, then the ground units will certainly pass over the bridge(little hard to see the bridge(red) but it is under the orange bridge path:
Also another extension on the subject… add a one tile corridor of water between land (plains)… and place naval units and give them the path to sail that corridor… I’m sure they will never pass it. Like Gandalf is there hammers his stick and says YOU SHALL NOT PASS…
Once again, you cannot dictate the movement of naval units. The code dictates this.(Although I know there is some experimenting going on with this ATM) The only thing the end user can do for sure is make them stationary.
C9
-
It’s worth remembering to paths played a dual role once upon a time, that being the defined paths being nice and squiggly and matching the roads and rivers drawn on the tiles were projected onto the AG radar display. I for one hope to see that feature return to BMS one day…
-
Good post, C9.
BTW: I would add that tile painting also is important. Transition road by river is always in the center.I see some work for me
Eghi
-
Good post, C9.
BTW: I would add that tile painting also is important. Transition road by river is always in the center.I see some work for me
Eghi
Correct……BTW, that’s one of your tiles from Kurile theater!!
EDIT: Not really sure if you did it or it was residual stuff from others but that’s what’s in the current install.
C9
-
This is from my old Europe (Poland) Theater. I have PS templates, so I can make the correction. No problem M8 :).
-
Well this is what I was saying.
The “thing” is that this nsew works without any path. So why bother?
And the biggest thing is that the same nsew procedure kills the terrain accuracy to real look alike… Also for AG u know for the next 1km they will go straight as they go most of the times.The way it works is known. The rest to become better and even more realistic needs tons of code.
I’m happy with it… But am sure many theater devs will not be.
Any input on the water corridor and naval units?
IIRC there was some post saying that the code check the distance from land and prevent units to come close. Maybe and a solution so not to see Nimitz going up the river?
-
Well this is what I was saying.
The “thing” is that this nsew works without any path. So why bother?
And the biggest thing is that the same nsew procedure kills the terrain accuracy to real look alike… Also for AG u know for the next 1km they will go straight as they go most of the times.No it doesn’t, you for some reason just don’t GET IT. Whatever. I’m done here on the subject. Figure it out yourself(Obviously that will never happen in the near future….PERIOD)!!
C9
-
C9 what do you mean I don’t get it. I now the paths areas etc.
I accept the fact that u know more then me.In my observations I removed the paths… set the troops to pass as it was with the paths and I saw them pass. They didn’t stop or scatter or something strange.
Ain’t this telling me that troops follow just the links?
If u look at the links they follow just the same rule nsew. If I remove a link on the same area then I see the troops doing a circle to go to the way… and if your tiles are easy to see their boundaries u can see the troops pass from the middle and follew that nsew path. The only way that they deviate from that path is if they are fired upon so they scatter away like a defense mechanism…Another thing I did I set a link passing over the sea from Greece to Turkey… They took it. No paths no nothing.
I’m not saying that what I say is totally true… just what I observed… but sorry I just can’t find the right way somewhere and follow - test it.