Larger maps

[Soldier_Fortune]

Hi all!

IMHO the added B-24D diserves a map according with its operational story, where long range bomb missions might be done.

Actually the largest map we have is "Gulf of Finland"... but that region never was an operational scenary for the Allies.

I've found this map named La Chute (The Fall) which is tailored to those requirements... for the WTO, at least.

This map covers from W of London to Berlin and Dresden, and from N of London to S of Paris, including Belgium, Netherland and S of Denmark. Its design is mainly focused on long range bombing and it has a lot of potential targets.

This weekend I've used this map to fly a B-17 (v4.12.2+HSFX 7 mod), taking-off at Raydon (England) to bomb Berlin, and RTB.

The complete mission lasted about... 6 hours!!

The idea was to test my skills on air navigation in as most realistic conditions as possible: no waypoints at all; instead, using printed maps, beacons, my own preflight planning and an E6B 'whizz wheel' for inflight calculations; windy and cloudy weather conditions.

In short: the experience was very close to what many crews of bombers told. But more comfortable ... you know: drinking a beer, or ordering a pizza... all what a real crew couldn't do while they were flying.

This map also could be used for to design LW missions over London, Coventry, etc. (Battle of England); or for a fictional operation Sea Lion; or for Overlord; or for whichever mission/campaign that a creative designer could imagine.


Perhaps TD could ask to the map's author (Spit973) his permission to add 'La_Chute' to the set of maps with the next patch.

[Nil]

This is really a nice map for heavies bombers like the B24, good point!
It would be very nice to have it on the next patch

[Monguse]

Originally Posted by Soldier_Fortune

Hi all!

IMHO the added B-24D diserves a map according with its operational story, where long range bomb missions might be done...

SF, actually that's one reason the New Guinea New Britain map is in 413. B24's operated from the Northern Territory (Australia), Dobodura as well as later from Nazdab. If you really want to try out a long mission, take off from Dobodura with B24D to bomb Wewak or Rabaul then land back home.

[Soldier_Fortune]

Originally Posted by Monguse

SF, actually that's one reason the New Guinea New Britain map is in 413. B24's operated from the Northern Territory (Australia), Dobodura as well as later from Nazdab. If you really want to try out a long mission, take off from Dobodura with B24D to bomb Wewak or Rabaul then land back home.

Hi Monguse:

Of course, I've played some long range missions (made by myself) to enjoy the B-24, flying that map.

But IMHO New Guinea - New Britain is amazing for air-naval engagements, envolving a lot of warships, land and/or carrier based airctafts, and flying boats.

For strategic bombing, NG-NB map has too few and too small targets. Rabaul, i.e., only has a bunch of houses and an airfield: good targets for B-25s or A-20s if they had sufficient range.

Really I miss a map like La Chute by two main reasons:

- Fun: This map may be used almost endlessly. It has many big cities (London, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Anthwerpen, Koln, Dresden, Hamburg, Berlin, etc), and a lot of small cities and towns which had factories historically targeted by Allied bombers; and also it has strategic targets like Peenemünde.

- Epic and realism: of course, all military veterans deserve the greatest respect. But, IMHO, the strategic bombing campaign in the Pacific lacks the epic of similar campaigns in the ETW. USA counts 407,000 military KIA only in Europe, and UK counts 403,000; over 100,000 of them were Allied bomber crewmen, and 12,000 bombers were shot down. Certain statistics are very impresive: the Tour of Duty for all the heavy bombers along the war (30 missions) did produce 71% of KIA/MIA; for medium bombers (50 missions) did produce 48% of KIA/MIA.
A map like La Chute can give us a more accurate idea about the difficulties, risks and dangers those guys faced to reach their targets and come back in one piece.

But only it's my opinion and my taste.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Soldier_Fortune

But, IMHO, the strategic bombing campaign in the Pacific lacks the epic of similar campaigns in the ETW.

That's the inherent problem with the game - it's at base a simulator best designed to model low altitude, short range, tactical missions on the Eastern Front. High altitude operations are tacked on, and strategic bombing is an afterthought at best.

I'd love to have a 21st century update to the old Microprose game "B-17 Flying Fortress" that accurately models all the complexities of flying strategic, high altitude, heavy bomber missions in the ETO, including things like human factors (frostbite, hypoxia, frosted up windows, guns jammed due to cold, panic, getting lost, crew experience).

I'd happily alternate between running a bomber crew, flying escort fighters, and lining up my staffel to try to knock down a few "dicke auto."

Sadly, nobody seems to want to make that sim.

Originally Posted by Soldier_Fortune

USA counts 407,000 military KIA only in Europe, and UK counts 403,000; over 100,000 of them were Allied bomber crewmen, and 12,000 bombers were shot down.

A trick question: Which US service lost more men in WW2, USAAF or USMC? (Mostly) guaranteed to win bar bets with Marines.

[Soldier_Fortune]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

...

A trick question: Which US service lost more men in WW2, USAAF or USMC? (Mostly) guaranteed to win bar bets with Marines.

Asking your question, I've found these statistics:

From the USMC website:

KIA: 19,733 (22.7%)
WIA: 67,207 (77.3%)
Total casualties: 86,940 (100%)

.......................

From a .pdf document [USAAF Casualties In European, North African, and Mediterranean Theaters of Operation, 1942-1946: Final Report 1953]:

KIA: 33,802 (71.1%)
WIA: 13,727 (28.9%)
Total casualties: 47,529 (100%)

For all Theaters:

KIA: 44,785 (70.9%)
WIA: 18,364 (29.1%)
Total casualties: 63,149 (100%)

...............................


Well... these numbers are showing the USMC had more total casualties than the USAAF. But they also seem the air warfare was a more deadly job than the fighting in the jungle.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Soldier_Fortune

Well... these numbers are showing the USMC had more total casualties than the USAAF. But they also seem the air warfare was a more deadly job than the fighting in the jungle.

Not to get off topic, but factoring in non-combat deaths, the USAAF lost more men. Flying was a (relatively) dangerous business in the 1940s, and learning to fly was even more risky.

But, in terms of battle casualties, I'd have to give the USMC the edge.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Soldier_Fortune

Actually the largest map we have is "Gulf of Finland"... but that region never was an operational scenery for the Allies.

That depends on your definition of "Allies" - there were a few Soviets fighting in that area, although they were mostly skirmishing with the Germans in the far eastern portion of the map, near the the mouth of the Neva river.

Originally Posted by Soldier_Fortune

This map covers from W of London to Berlin and Dresden, and from N of London to S of Paris, including Belgium, Netherland and S of Denmark. Its design is mainly focused on long range bombing and it has a lot of potential targets.

It's up to the modder to submit the map to TD for inclusion in the game. As long as the map meets the quality standards, there's nothing inherently wrong with having a "slimmed down" map of Northern or Western Europe at 1:1 scale.

Maps that would really work well for the B-24D would be those that mostly feature large stretches of ocean with bits of land at the edges. For example, the North Atlantic from Scotland/N. Ireland to the tip of Iceland, or the tip of Cornwall to the Northern end of the Bay of Biscay.

[Soldier_Fortune]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

...
Maps that would really work well for the B-24D would be those that mostly feature large stretches of ocean with bits of land at the edges. For example, the North Atlantic from Scotland/N. Ireland to the tip of Iceland, or the tip of Cornwall to the Northern end of the Bay of Biscay.

Why...?

AFAIK, the B-24s were used to close the North Atlantic gap against the U-Boote, and they were equiped with surface radars to spot them. (Not with bombs).

The only reason I can guess for not to do big land maps (about 1000 x 600 km) is a technical limitation: more land means more objects; and such maps may takes ages to upload in the FMB. And, when a player would try to play it, he could get a CTD. A big surface of water solves the problem because it is only a flat texture.

But the guy who has designed La_Chute, has solved that problem in a smart way: the most of the map is only texture: also cities and towns.
He placed objects only in few points, but he didn't populate the whole map to avoid instabilities.

At ground level or flying at very low altitude, the visual effect is like if a city is "painted on the floor". But if you are flying over 3000 m or higher, you will see the city with a realistic appearence. [Maskirovka...!!]

A mission designer only would need to place the relevant objects using the FMB, according to his mission script. For buildings, the mission designer only need to choose any which fits the "coloured shadow" of the ground texture among those of the Objects list.

As I told in my first post, La-Chute may be played smoothly with the highest graphic settings. I used many planes at the same time, and several of them were activated by triggers...

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Soldier_Fortune

AFAIK, the B-24s were used to close the North Atlantic gap against the U-Boote, and they were equiped with surface radars to spot them. (Not with bombs).

The Atlantic maps I proposed were just examples. The idea is that if you want a large map, it loads quicker and is easier on framerates if it's mostly filled with empty water.

Equally legitimate map choices might maps that includes a bit of Queensland, AUS and parts of the southern coast of New Guinea, Okinawa to the southern tip of Kyushu, or Tunisian coast from Tunis to Sfax then east to Malta and the southern coast of Sicily.

As for anti U-boat operations, the B-24s (and other long-range patrol craft - like the Sunderland and Wellington) were equipped with a combination of depth charges (and/or bombs, sometimes rockets), plus surface radar and occasionally weapons systems light Leigh lights.

Originally Posted by Soldier_Fortune

But the guy who has designed La_Chute, has solved that problem in a smart way: the most of the map is only texture: also cities and towns.

The problem is that, by official IL2 standard, that's "half a map." You can't just create city plates and forest textures and then not include cities and forests. I think that's an artifact of IL2's heritage as a low-altitude "mud moving" flight simulator.

It would require an executive decision on TD's part to allow maps that favor high altitude long-range bomber ops, but at the expense of having "empty" cities and no forests when you go down low.

Personally, I think that such maps would be a good idea, now that we've got planes like the Pe-8 and B-24D to play with.

If we ever get proper night fighter ops in the game, TD is going to have to think pretty hard about this issue, because for night fighter operations the important things are effects (lights, flames, flares, radar ops), loiter time (often over a large area) and traditional "eye candy" scenery just isn't as important.

The only other way around the map size issue would be for the game to somehow recognize when aircraft are moving off one map and automatically load up the map of the adjacent territory. But, that would require huge amounts of development work, plus all new maps of consistent shape and size.