Mapping - Open vs Wooded Runability
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
4 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Mapping - Open vs Wooded Runability
Isn't it a bit odd that there are 4 degrees of runability for forested terrain and only 2 for open terrain?
-
mharky - team nopesport
- Posts: 4541
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:39 pm
Re: Mapping - Open vs Wooded Runability
You can add stripes to make it walk (or slow).
And fight is fight whether forested or not.
And fight is fight whether forested or not.
- MIE
- green
- Posts: 370
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:05 pm
Re: Mapping - Open vs Wooded Runability
I think I would reverse the issue. The green screens 406/408 are about reduced visibility due to tree density whereas 407/409 are about undergrowth in good visibility terrain - but the screens cannot be used together (for obvious reasons). But, increasingly, with warmer weather and the spread of undergrowth (brambles) in wooded areas, where you need a visibility screen and an undergrowth screen, which takes priority? As a mapper, I have chosen whichever seems to be the more prominent to the competitor (which might mean showing slow run forest as white so an undergrowth screen can be added, or ignoring undergrowth) but that does affect map consistency. Open areas are, I think, catered for.
- ianandmonika
- red
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:03 pm
Re: Mapping - Open vs Wooded Runability
If the area has both reduced visibility AND undergrowth then map with a solid shade depending on the overall runability. For example if a pale green area became even slower due to seasonal undergrowth it might justify a darker shade of green.
- pete.owens
- diehard
- Posts: 752
- Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:25 am
4 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: GML and 191 guests