What happened to the SAAFOPS theater
-
Amphibious landings can be done quite easily. Just designate some of the coast and sea tiles as plains (land) instead of water then add dot paths. We did it in Guam. The question is only how far out to sea you want your beach invasion to start. Also, make sure the cam files have one way links so that units don’t try to retreat back to sea and set the final objective for assaulting forces well inland.
-
Amphibious landings can be done quite easily. Just designate some of the coast and sea tiles as plains (land) instead of water then add dot paths. We did it in Guam. The question is only how far out to sea you want your beach invasion to start. Also, make sure the cam files have one way links so that units don’t try to retreat back to sea and set the final objective for assaulting forces well inland.
It would be great to see a video tutorial about is.
-
One way links, path dots, battalions with amphibious only , one bit of Plains tile for invasion area! Well look forward to some costal invasions!
Guam has done a bit of everything , I should have known.
I could record the process.
Cheers
-
During my ‘Apprenticeship’ in Guam, I witnessed Demer928 do an amazing number of ground breaking development. Guam is kind of like an Area 51 of Falcon development where we could try advanced concepts and see how they worked without wrecking out base BMS install. Dot pathing came from GUAM. A huge amount carrier code updates like the meatball, lights were originally created in Guam. Another Demer928 breakthrough is creating the wireframe infused with satellite images. This way, there are no tiles in the terrain and all land is photo realistic. While in the Guam development group, for every one hour of contribution I made, I got ten to twenty hours of learning. All of the theatre development I do now was learned in Guam. Demer928’s Guam theatre subforum puts out a lot of information on what he is doing. Its all there for everybody to learn.
-
Dot pathing came from GUAM.
This is by no means any so called “breakthrough” in development. Simply put, this is bogus and another way to cheat the code, that should not be lauded about in my opinion!!!
No only that, it makes a mess of the terrain tiles.
And yeah, some of these “things” were attempted at FreeFalcon, good thing monkeying around was not included!!
C9
-
If we make a set just for invasion area, the code cheat could be minimized to that single spot. And then the rest of map could run on regular paths and links. I think the one way links will keep any bad counter strikes from driving out into the ocean. I know it’s not perfect , but it seems the best option besides forgoing coastal invasions. I really want to try it out.
-
If we make a set just for invasion area, the code cheat could be minimized to that single spot.
There’s no reason to have it anywhere! It has absolutely nothing to do with coastal sea invasion or otherwise. The same can be accomplished with regular paths!
C9
-
I could do that, make a set of tiles for beach and ocean with regular paths on them, just no roads on the tile. And set as Plains.
I see what is most unwanted is the dot only right? -
I had it functional years before Guam (water network). I had regular routes on plain tiles with water texture…and vector water areas later (to see splashes around vehicles). Player had no chance to realize its not sea tile. In AF, vehicles were able to drive through waters if ground tile with vector path present.
I guess Demer did dot-paths becouse its visible on ground radar? So dot is better than lines I guess. Dont know if its still a issue today. -
BTW I would not call it hack or fake if used for amphibious operation. (we are not mixing vehicle classes - APC is ground vehicle, castline hoovercraft can ba considered ground capable too…and these few landing crafts…they can even be static ships if desired…
But I was so happy with it, I did independent “shallow” route for gunboats, missileboats…upto corvette size. These were manageable, part of campaign, can take objectives. This could be considered “fake ot frankenstein”, but funny fake.
-