Maximum map resolution for new map

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
25 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Maximum map resolution for new map

Edwin van der Wal
Hi guys,

I am trying to export a map from another game, wondering what is the maximum size (pixels by pixels) for a decent performance of polygongrabber/centerpicker and the tripleA game.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Zim Xero
Not having ever made a map, I should not be answering, but I remember someone saying the max has not been reached in an attempt.  I know someone is working on a map that is 10,000 wide but not sure how well it works.  For speed and stability I would suggest staying under 8,000 x 5,000 in map size(under 40million pixels).  Hepster and Rolf could answer better I'm sure.  Decorations cause long map loading times, so take that into account.  Of course load time is based on file size, so a huge map over 100 million pixels might work if it has no terrain features or details.
'thats the way it is' makes it neither desireable nor inevitable
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Edwin van der Wal
Thanks,

I have a base export of 11000x6500 but at a playable zoom it becomes a bit too grainy (jagged edges), I guess that could be alleviated a bit by smoothing the image before breaking it up in tiles?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

hepster
T.W.W. has a map that is 4800 x 10480. and contains a full relief and decoration layer.

Loading the map takes a bit longer but I rarely see any effect during actual game play.

The larger map was done to allow all the unit images to be placed on the map at 100% magnification (most of which are 48 x 48 pixels) with few extension bars.  The map size was also done large because of the number of different unit available.

You can certainly "soften" the look of the map using the relief layer to add blended and thicker lines so that when you zoom out the image maintains more clarity.



     
“A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition”― Rudyard Kipling
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Edwin van der Wal
Could probably make the Atlantic smaller so I could get a better resolution with the same territories...
PNG_Unnamed.png
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Rolf Larsson
I like the structure of territories and seazones and the number of territories, but you should consider double or triple size for your map as well as shrinking the atlantic ocean.
I copied Denmark and placed a 48x48 square there, which is the default unit size at 100%. So I guess you end up with very overcrowded territories then. Maybe a question of ones taste, but I prefer much bigger territores, cause you can always zoom in, but never zoom out.


The map I use for Feudal Japan 2(if I should ever find time to work on it again) is 16000x7000, with much less territories and you can forget about exporting a screenshot due to java heap size, but it looks very nice.
Hope it helps, cause it is such a pain when you do a lot of work and recognize only after you spent a long time on it, that your territories are much too small.

We now have custom dice!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Edwin van der Wal
Thanks,

Well actually this is the actual gamemap from "Victory! Battle of Europe"  but then redrawn in a GEO tool, but for playability with the TripleA ruleset I will probably have to reduce about 8-10 seazones from the atlantic... because Victory uses double strategic movement vs. combat movement for ships.

I will ask the geo-guy to increase the islands in size, remove about 9 seazones wide strip from the atlantic and increase the size to like 100M+ pixels.

Nice thing though is I have most info on the map in a database so it is easy to export that info to a tripleA XML file.

I will have to code movement cost into the engine still but I did most prep work for that last year.

I will make 1 png with names and 1 without names so the centerpicker can be done easily as well as the polygon grabber.

Anyone vollunteering to run the centerpicker/polygongrabber part of the mapcreator since my mac still doens't run those right.. the xml stuff, terrains, resources and territoryconnections I can export from the database in xml
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Veqryn
Administrator
sorry, but i disagree with Rolf 100%

do NOT use the default size units (48x48 pixels)

for a map this big, you need to be using 50% unit zoom by default (meaning the units will appear as 24x24 pixels)

IF you go with 100% unit zoom on 48x48 units, you maps will be unplayable, and it will also force people to use the zoom out ability of triplea to be able to play at all.  and we all know how much the zoom out ability sucks after about 75% zoom out.


Follow the example of New World Order

do NOT follow the example of Global 1940 or TWW


Sorry heps and rolf, but i totally dissagree with your maps default zoom level.  And the zoom level of Global 1940 is the #1 complaint by all players, and some people at A&A.org refuse to use TripleA because of it (they stick with battlemap)

Maps should never be made with the intention being to view the unit art, no matter how good the unit art is. Players will get to see the units in their full size during purchase phase anyway (purchase screen).  Make the map with a zoom level that allows the player to see the most territories possible.  (especially important for a big map)

Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Veqryn
Administrator
In reply to this post by Edwin van der Wal
for the center picker, have you tried running it through command line?
(you can also run it through eclipse too)

java -Xmx1024m -classpath triplea.jar util/image/CenterPicker

same for:
PolygonGrabber
PlacementPicker
AutoPlacementFinder
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Rolf Larsson
I have to disagree with Veq here at 101%.
First of all it is a question of what youself prefer and how your map will look like in the end. The reason I do use the default 48x48 unitsize to have a look at how things could end is, that as far as I know the placement square for PlacementPicker and AutoPlacementFinder is always done with 48x48 no matter what default unitsize you choose (correct me if I am wrong).
Btw, the map size for TWW was never done for any graphics, cause as I started I used the default unitgraphics and for a long time we use 87.5% as the default unitsize.

For comparison using Finland north and east as a mark, images have been resized to 750 max to post here.

Mapsize100% both, NWO with Unitsize at 50%, TWW with Unitsize at 87.5%
Having a look at both, I see a few more territories in NWO, but identifying units???


So what options do I have to adjust the visuals to my personal preferations?
- For NWO zooming in map, would make it worse, lets say unitsize at 75%
- For TWW zooming in map at 60%
 

Mapsize NWO 100% with Unitsize at 75%, Mapsize TWW 60% with Unitsize at 87.5% still

I see the units a little more now in NWO, but what is going on there? 0 options left to adjust anything in NWO.

In TWW I see a lot more territories now, with a minimal loss in graphics due to mapzoom, but units are a little small now... so just change unitsize to 125% ...


Mapsize 60%, Unitsize 125%

Good overview, with every single unit beeing identifyable, still beautiful, so a good option imo.

To sum up:
Sure you can make things very tiny to see a few more territories and leave people with no options to change this fact, but especially Europe focused maps should use Europe beeing made larger on the map itself.
Again, it is a question of preferations, but I prefer to at least have the option to change the visuals, even if it means I have to zoom the map in and it makes it look a little less good.

Hope it helps your decision.




 
We now have custom dice!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Veqryn
Administrator
Rolf Larsson wrote
That as far as I know the placement square for PlacementPicker and AutoPlacementFinder is always done with 48x48 no matter what default unitsize you choose (correct me if I am wrong).
Actually they work using the size in your map.properties thing.  So if you put 50%, they use 24x24 pixels big.

Also, you can use command line to send specific size arguments, if your size is non-square.

For example, I just ran the AutoPlacementFinder to make a map skin for global, using 22x17 pixel big placements.
Then i went back, loaded the placements into the normal PlacementPicker and redid a couple territories (just redid the ones that didn't have enough placements, like islands and the uk / belgium).


For your pictures, you choose a screenshot of NWO is mostly ocean.  How about you do it again using a screenshot showing the entire european theater?

Also, NWO is a lot more dense.

In NWO, the UK is 11 territories, and France is 15 territories
In TWW, the UK is 4 territories, and France is 5 territories

Despite NWO being approximately 2-3 times bigger, you can actually see more of what is going on, and get a better big picture view.

Based on his map, if he makes the territories any bigger, he will not be able to see anything outside the UK, when he is looking at the UK (his UK is 28 territories big).  That is really bad for gameplay.

Example screen, both maps at default settings:
(nwo 100% zoom, 50% units size.  TWW at 100% zoom, 87.5% unit size)
(picture is reduced by 50% to fit onto the forum)


Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Veqryn
Administrator
or without scaling the picture

Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Veqryn
Administrator
This post was updated on .
In reply to this post by Rolf Larsson
i hope you know this is friendly critism rolf,
i totally respect you and hepps, and tww.  you are both doing a great job with it.

and my critism is not just directed at TWW, but at all maps where the territories are too big, and that includes basically all my maps

the 1940 maps (global 1940, pacific 1940) also suffer from this problem, and I made those.


anyways, I honestly think that 75% zoom level for units should be the default.  75% happens to look good, with no fuzziness in the units.  Plus it creates maps where you can see a lot of stuff still.

For a map of Edwin's size, I would definitely go with 50% unit zoom, because his map is freaking huge.  


Also, you need to consider how many units are generally in territories on average.  There will always be a territory or two with "every unit in the game" in it, and you should not worry about trying to fit them all.  Instead, If most territories have only 2-3 units, then plan on fitting 2-3 units (with the placement picker, not the auto thing).

In general, I think a good strategy is to make territories fit around 4-5 units, then make sure that the scale of the map allows you to see multiple theaters of action in 1 view without zooming (ie: you can see london, germany, moscow, and rome, without zooming).

A map like TWW has more units that sit in a territory on average (cus of infrastructure), so it may need to fit around 7-9 units per territory.  But even then, that just means that you need to a smaller unit scale, that way you can still achieve the goal of viewing more action without zooming.


can fit 13 units in denmark island, at 24x24 pixels (0.5 scale):

Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Rolf Larsson
Veqryn wrote
i hope you know this is friendly critism rolf, i totally respect you and hepps, and tww.  you are both doing a great job with it.
absolutely, it is really just my personal preferation (maybe smaller screenreslutions have to be considered too), but I prefer the option to just be able to change view; don´t know if a zoom up to 150-200% could be done easily to solve this problem at all.
 
Veqryn wrote
can fit 13 units in denmark island, at 24x24 pixels (0.5 scale):
So this is possible, having 24x24 squares with placement picker at 0.5 unitscale? Would even make autoplacement finder more attractive by just selecting 0.66 for it and later have .75 unitscale or similar. For so many territories doing all placements manually is a horrible task. Yes, for Edwins map here a smaller unitscale seems better. I suggest to try some territories and units with the desired scale by just placing those in your graphic prog and have a look at it with different zooms, before continuing the work.
We now have custom dice!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Veqryn
Administrator
Here is the process I follow:

Use the AutoPlacementFinder first.

THEN when it is done, use the PlacementPicker.  After you start the placement picker, click file -> load, and load the placement file 'place.txt' that the AutoPlacementFinder created.

Then, one by one, click on all the islands and really small territories, and redo the placements just for those.

The AutoPlacementFinder does a good job with most territories, but really sucks at small territories like islands.  That is why I redo all islands.

I also redo some capitals, like uk and italy, because there are usually lots of units in the capitals.


In total, it shouldn't take too much time.


Also, if you send the autoplacementfinder and the placementpicker arguments, it will use any size you want.

For example, in the map skin I am making, the units are exactly 20x15 pixels large.  Because they take up the full space of the 20x15 (ie: there is no transparency around the edges, like normal units), I told the placement things to use a size of 22x17 pixels, that way there would be 2 pixels of transparency around the edges.

I ran it through the auto first. Most came out good, but i had to redo italy, the uk, germany, and all islands.

See example result:

100% zoom of 20x15 pixel size units.  (22x15 on the placement size, so that there is some space around their edges)


The skin above is Global 1940 using battlemap units and battlemap's map.  
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

hepster
This post was updated on .
At the end of the day its really about personal preference.  Whether you want to shrink all the units down in scale to be tiny or whether you want to increase the map scale to allow for larger unit images and use zoom to see more of the map.  Both have advantages and disadvantages.   In the end the real key to a successful design is ensuring that the map you design has enough space for all the units within the majority of the territories.

P.S. IMO the ABattlemap unit images are hideous!  I personally think the measure quality of a game is in both the mechanics and the visual quality of the game.  Incorporating such basic graphical representations is a step backwards in my view.  But I also understand that you did that to try and draw the ABattlemap players out of the dark ages.
“A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition”― Rudyard Kipling
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Veqryn
Administrator
yes, i am doing it purely to prove to the aBattleMap players that triplea is just an engine, not a map

i keep getting complaints on A&A.org from a lot of different people that they refuse to use TripleA, or used it a lot but are quitting it, because the map is too zoomed it (they are referring to the global 1940 map).


anyway, the absolute best scaled map I've seen is NWO, and I think of it as a the golden standard when it comes to having good scale, good unit art, being able to distinguish everything, and still be able to see as much of the map as possible
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

hepster
Veqryn wrote
yes, i am doing it purely to prove to the aBattleMap players that triplea is just an engine, not a map

i keep getting complaints on A&A.org from a lot of different people that they refuse to use TripleA, or used it a lot but are quitting it, because the map is too zoomed it (they are referring to the global 1940 map).
Yeh, I kinda already knew the complaints.  I personally don't understand it.



Veqryn wrote
anyway, the absolute best scaled map I've seen is NWO, and I think of it as a the golden standard when it comes to having good scale, good unit art, being able to distinguish everything, and still be able to see as much of the map as possible
I think N.W.O. is a well done map.  But I find the units and the territories way to small.
“A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition”― Rudyard Kipling
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Edwin van der Wal
In reply to this post by Veqryn
Thanks for all the comments (and discussions :)

I have "ordered" a new export from the map guy, it it enlarge increase the territorysize (pixelwise) about 150% (makes the atlantic smaller, remove some unplayed Saudi and eastern Russian territories and then scales to about 110M-120M pixels)

Unitstyle will be counters (with counterstacking option turned on to see the stacksizes) see my avatar as an example.

1) I should make sure about 4-5 units fit into each territory and scale the units accordingly ( Will try it in a image editor first)
2) I Should make sure that at default zoom level, you can see a complete theater of war (from Berlin to Moscow... or from Berlin to Spain

Veq: I can run the Pickers / Grabbers from the commandline (creating the placement.txt centers.txt files etc), just never figure out how to get a Map-Folder that actually works out of it... missing some magic the mapcreator wrapper does.

As soon as I have the new map I will start picking centers and grabbing polygons and when I am stuck I will call in the cavalry.

Hopefully there is someone (that is willing to make the map pretty and most importantly draw the terraintypes on top of it)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maximum map resolution for new map

Veqryn
Administrator
that windows only map creator doesn't do anything special

all part 1 does is creates the map.properties file, then run the command line things for you

of course, part 2 is special, and it has a super useful automatic territory connection finder, which rocks.  but part 2 only handles the game xml file.


basically, before you begin, you should do these things:

in your /users/yourname/triplea/maps/  directory (folder), you want to make a new folder with the name of your map (no special characters please)

then, inside that folder, make a few new folders:
units
flags
games
baseTiles
reliefTiles
misc
PUs
dice
resources
territoryEffects

(you do not need to create them all, but the "games" and "baseTiles" folders are required)

next, you need to create a map.properties file in the main folder.  just copy the one from pact of steel, and then change the stuff in it to match your map

next, put your map's png file into this folder (i am trying to encourage people to do this, to make modding and future modding easier)

next, run the command line utilities in this order:
center picker
polygon grabber
auto placement finder
placement picker
basetile breaker
basetile breaker again (for the relief tiles [do not use the relief tile breaker for anything])

when you are done with this, contact someone on the forum and they can run the 'part 2' for you to give you the game xml, which you can then modify to actually make your map run

Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
12