Mega New Elk WIP

[Black_Elk]

ps. I haven't finished France and such yet, but here's a quick couple screens to show how it scales out. Even on the big one down to the normal mapviews 50% and out, I can still make them out reasonably well.

What I'd like to do for the units is to put a little more canvas so the unit number doesn't hit into the roundel. Or at least for the nations that have white in the roundel, since that can make it harder to make out the stack numbers say telling a if the roundel is tucked in too close. The number tends to position slightly lower and offset to the left.

It gives a pretty nice read though and isn't too distracting in the battle menu I don't think. Mainly the important thing is just to have all the roundels on the same side for the unit facing. If doing a roundel visual I would probably go all facing the same direction by team, as this will prevent the roundels from crowding when multinational stacks are on the same line, battle menu or overflow placement. If the canvas is large enough on either side though it's not too bad to do a mixed orientation. Just as long as they're not right on top each other seems to be fairly decent. I think I will do a sharpening pass like 5-10% for units upscaled to 120% since otherwise it kicks up a bit of blur, like on the purchase screen if playing at 1440p, but that should be easy to do once I have everything positioned on the canvas.

I think it looks kinda cool to have the Flag Puck oval in deep perspective for the Capital main map display, but then the more circular motif for the units on the board. Gives a nice little splash of color and makes it a bit easier to spot units at a glance. When I put them together I'll just do it for everything that I have that way it will be easy to swap for units with no flags, depending on player preference.

[TheDog]

@black_elk
In map.properties
units.counter.offset.width=30
units.counter.offset.height=60

These control where the stack counter numbers appear.

So no need for more canvas.

[beelee]

@black_elk

That yank LR Ftr looks pretty cool. Did you make that one ?

[Black_Elk]

@beelee Yeah that's a P-51. I wanted to use it for their default fighter initially, just cause it's pretty badass with the style points there, but it really doesn't come online until 42/3 for the X prototypes. Similar to the Brit Spit fighter, I chose a design more in profile with the fuel tanks for the LRA types so it would be easy to spot. I use the term 'make' pretty lightly, I think that was like a Revell model. I'm partial to the stuff they had in the 80s the cool boxes like model kit bashing hehe. Similar to some of the extra tanks and such, I think sometimes the later designs are more iconic, but the 40/41 start date recommended something a little earlier. We have that graphic in the GCD, comes online sorta midgame to endgame.

I used the standard roundel for USA here, since it's more familiar from OOB. Sorta same deal for all the factions favoring the cardboard from the boxes. By 42 the red dot in the center of the Star roundel was removed in favor of a design blue and white, then with the yellow ring towards the end of the year Torch operation. Bars with the red outline were added in 43, then later in that year the red was dropped in favor of blue again for the outline, which is the one I associate most like with the Hollywood movies. The current design still in use is largely similar to that one, it just features a thin red stripe in the middle now, but that's more like postwar or pushing up into Korean era conflict. We also have a P-38 Lightning and a few others. Sometimes I used the method of doing a lighter tint color for tech advances, just to fill in the gaps.

@TheDog Oh cool! I forgot we had a way to shift the counter number for the stacks. That should help then, cause most units are more like 68-84px wide only the larger/fatter ships really need the 98px max on that.

I wonder is there a similar property we can set for the large/small flag display offset? Because unlike the puck in deep perspective the standard roundel can just paint into a corner and probably would look largely identical to me adding them into the graphic.

Flags on/off would be optimal, since that's a view tab setting and because when the units display in the battle view menu or the notes or purchase screen would display just the unit graphic in those UI windows. Also I think it has to be a universal like from top/bottom left or center for both sides, rather than alternating by side or attack/defender orientation. I think flips are similar right now, where I can set a flip in the map props, but then it just applies to everything instead of by nation/team. For me the circular roundel is just more appealing if we're going to see the motif repeated for all units, it's also easier to flip that than a national banner.

Also a problem I feel with using national banners is that when a flag displays at a unit's feet, to me that looks like it's laying on the ground, or like sinking into the ocean, about to get run over by tank tracks etc. Whereas the circular design is a bit more abstract so I think it just looks a bit cleaner if it's going to present beneath the unit, rather than above the unit, or somewhere at their knees or whatever. Plus just looks more familiar to me from like Iron Blitz for the callback hehe. Sorta always my goal, just to find something a bit more Iron Blitz-y for tripleA hehe

[Black_Elk]

Here's the full set for Italy with all the tech stuff. I did a version of the commanders there at 54px, with like a 5-10% percent sharpening and some tweaks to the chroma. Seemed to hold up alright. Just to show how it would look and what the space would be, doing them for each faction.

[Black_Elk]

Here's another reason why it would be advantageous to use the Flags on/off, if we could get them to orient dynamically by team/nation

Because it is possible to tell TripleA to draw the units at set dimensions, the game can transform the graphics to display within a square, even when the graphics provided have a different aspect. This will simply stretch or compress the images. This looks pretty decent generally, but not so much if the graphic includes geometric shapes, as these will compress or go oblong.

If the additional information of the roundel flag is added in after that transformation, with an offset, it will end up looking much cleaner. As opposed to a drawn on circular roundels becoming an oval, if that makes sense.

Here's a quick example of what I mean using the set from the post above...

[Black_Elk]

ps. To experiment with the flag display, here is a quick roundel set at 20px.

Right now flag display small will work for the map display in the corner of the unit canvas, but the stats menus are also keyed for an image with that label by 12px so it may clip in the menu if doing it that way. But basically you can see what I mean. If all units were facing the same direction I suppose it would be less of an issue, but they often face each other in which case it would be nice to have the roundel alternate or flip on the fly. I'm not sure that's possible in the current, but we have graphics at least.

ps. here are the rest and some alts

pps. Here is a zip with all those flag roundels together. I moved the others to a subfolder called vertical flags. I think this is more expedient than doing the drawn on roundel thing. I will still comb over the units and check the canvases for sizing but it's just way easier I think to use these for that. It has the substitutions for size small made to the labels...

flags.zip

Looks like so...

Soviet Engineer

and Rachel Weisz

[Black_Elk]

OK I found a batch editing solution for GIMP 3.0, I think it's comparable perhaps even better than BIMP for GIMP 2, but it's a bit of a pain to install manually right now. Similar to tripleA requires the downloading of zips and like saving stuff the right directories, as opposed to the super simple plug-in I was hoping for.

Ideally I would make a consistent edit to the entire collection of units all at once because it saves so much time on the backend, but I think for now it's probably more expedient to just deal with the more problematic units as needed. Example for units which use the 54x54px square, or the 54x60/72 px rectangle the drawn flag will sometimes clip into the leg, depends on the current canvas. So for Germany and Japan, they have a wider canvas on some units, their roundels hits a bit better for their Infantry units. For some of the others it's closer to Frostion's defaults there which are clipped to content typically right to the edge. If the units were flipped at whatever point that could be a factor as well since I often would try to arrange the unit towards an edge on the facing side, so the canvas might be longer on one side than the other. I think maybe to just go through and extend the canvas slightly for all units.

Also I think it might be worth doing a standard morph for all the ships so that the canvas is narrower. So say the current Battleship, Carrier, Cruiser etc use the full 98px, I think it would be better to warp those unit to something more like 84px and then extend the canvas back to 98px on either side. This will give some room for things like roundels or unit crowding/overflows, so the image isn't always right at the edge. Least for the width, height we can't really do much for that. Better probably to lock everything in at 54px there and just try to utilize as much of the canvas as possible for unit sizing the vehicles and such. Basically anything other than infantry can be warped slightly and the look tends to be unnoticeable, I mean as long as it's consistent.

In general for flips it's ideal if the unit image doesn't have directional information, so for example a symbol number/character which when flipped no longer conveys meaning, or essentially symbols that are asymmetrical or which look odd if displaying inverted as if in the mirror. This is why it's better I think for things like drawn on tech symbols (or drawn on flag roundels say) to use shapes that can easily invert, or morph and still look ok.

So for example USSR with the sickle/hammer motif or USA with stars in the upper left, when flipped those will give off a very backwards look. Whereas something like a star easier to flip. The alternative USSR symbol I threw together is a composite of the regular g40 chip, and a period image of the Sickle and Hammer since that design changed over time. Basically I yanked one from from the national banner. OOB doesn't use the star at the top but I kept it, since when reduced to the super tiny 20px scale it's more abstract. I don't see a real need for these beyond the 20px dimensions since the puck in deep perspective is pretty serviceable as the Capital marker and current turn. It also allows Large Flag on to give a different presentation, even if I think it's a bit rough on account of how those center inside the canvas.

Anyway, I will try to knock something out just because it effects the unit place the width of the canvas and how that's set. For now I'd just look to see where the units with the 20px roundel like clip off a leg or things of that sort, and then just extend the canvas for those units to the next up, so like if inf standard 54, then they become 68 or whatever for some room on either side. It'd be nice to get the roundels for the battleships and such not to be all right on the nose, but for that I think they'd have to warp a little.

Here's an example less extreme than putting them into squares, but sorta the same principle going on. As long as the morphs are consistent, so it produces a similar angle. Here's an example using USA and USSR battleship and transportsOr like one time when Rachel Weisz defected and met up with the USA engineer I guess hehe. Basically the side on which a tech or unit type symbol is placed would sorta key up to leave on empty spot on whatever side, depending on how the unit is facing...

[Black_Elk]

For the canvas and flip etc stuff

Maybe for some tech variant units having brightness applied would probably the simplest. Basically the stuff covered in the pos props. Then for the canvas stuff to work with the flips, basically I was just trying to get something that would play alright with this part...

#units.transform.brightness.<player> (optional) allows the brightness (-100 to 100) to be adjusted when units.transform.color is set
#units.transform.brightness.Russians=25
#units.transform.flip.<player> flips the player's units horizontally
#units.transform.flip.Russians=true
#units.transform.ignore provides a comma delimited list of units that aren't impacted by the above units.transform properties
#takes the unit's name and applies to all images shown for that unit including damaged or tech improved images
#units.transform.ignore=factory,fighter

For the blend options available I think alpha f2 was alright for something subtly lower contrast

map.mapBlendAlpha=0.2f

That's a pretty easy one to add, like just from editing a line in the map props, but sorta the rationale behind choosing those pretty high saturation defaults for the hexes and such. I can't remember what the default is no blends, but it's basically similar to alpha f5 I think maybe?

For tripleA to do all units as a square, say 54x54 px applied to everything pretty sure there is a way to do in the props or game, but I can't remember what exactly it's called. I've done it by accident before where everything will go to the 48px default size, or I think if the graphic is way oversized it may then morph it to fit the standard square, but couldn't figure out just now when messing around lol.

Pretty sure there's a way though if one wanted to do a standard warp for all the units at once, though it's not a view setting on the fly.

Anyway I think should be enough room for the flags on/off option to show alright if I just add a sliver of canvas for some of the narrower units, like if clips too hard into the unit, but for the most part seems to work ok.

ps. Just to further clarify. If we include the Alpha channel blend this can be used to make the map more/less pastel incrementally. Example alpha 0.02f shown above that can be set 1-10 so 0.0f or 0.1f look very close to the default (highest saturation.)

0.2f or say 1.5 f or 2.5f those will pass through white making it more pastel. 3-5f is brighter etc. In the PoS2 props the first mentioned is linear light, but linear light is effectively a monitor setting now, I mean it's just reducing the brightness bascially. Alpha channel blend is more modular and more useful. I think the only other candidate worth the mention is overlay.

Overlay will essentially double the opacity while preserving the brightness. Multiply will do the same but reduce the brightness, they're largely similar. These are not really set to be modular in the way the alpha channel is though, so you can't really increase or reduce the "pastel" effect with the different integers there. The image produced is also quite different, because it's taking the relief layer and essentially layering that again on top of itself a second time. Here is the resulting image for that...

It's kinda cool, but I don't know if most would prefer that. To choose a blend, this would be an entry in the map properties txt. Like just added to the bottom. I would add the Alpha in as the default. This means user can click blends and it will show a slightly lighter version of the default. And if users wants it more low contrast they can increase the Alpha channel to crank that, basically like adding white in heavier amounts to the colors as they paint.

oh here's that one dude for Japan just so I don't forget added him to the big folder

[beelee]

@black_elk

Hi Elk

I added the flags zip from above but I'm getting the vertical flags

I put the old flags in a new folder and then added the flags one . I removed the vertical folder too but I can't get the pucks to show up.

Do you know where I'm screwing up ?

Edit
this is the flags folder

this is right before it with the vertical banners being moved out of flags and a folder with the old ones too

Edit 2
uggh I'm in the wrong map. I need to add changer for boxes. brb

Edit 3

Edit 4
I switched the rising sun. He's a little blurry but not too bad.

Large looks pretty cool

[Black_Elk]

@beelee Interesting it seems like it definitely needs a sharpening pass, I suspect this is an issue with the font scaling/ui vs map display, or maybe cause I edited the images on that 1440/1600p display laptop in GIMP. Or maybe the image attachment to the boards, cause I think I swiped a couple from other threads from a while back. I was trying to check for the upscales (like font at 125% or 150% what that does to the images inside the tripleA UI). I think this happened once before when I was doing the heads for the commanders, where like all the Italians suddenly had different interpolation applied when downscaled/upscaled. To me the rising sun/small ussr alt small flag roundels also appear to be larger in px tall/wide than some of the others, by like 1 px difference, but it's noticeable to me at 20px. This happens a bit when I check the stats screen/stats bars where the graphic will rescale slightly depending on how compressed the windows are there. Basically the roundel image sorta floating. Sunburst design also had a different crop from the left, rather than the OOB roundel which clips the sun at the halfway point and has fewer rays. Probably just needs to be a less involved design so it holds up resolution wise. I think I recall the same when trying to put the label graphics for the other one at those different sizes, so it wouldn't go jank like either jagged and pixely, or extra blursy blurs hehe.

I think I have to get a set for those flags in the roundel style that are all keyed together at 1080p. It's easier to use a single transformation from larger images to the downscaled/upscaled final size. I tried 20px initially but 22 or 18 might work better. I think I'll just have to do them more manually instead of with the batch resizing from the old GIMP/BIMP. I couldn't get Batcher to install into GIMP 3.0. So probably not too tough. It's just kinda funny cause the purpose of doing the higher resolution map or upscale with larger graphics images for units and such, but then for the UI and all the rest tripleA is sorta 1080 at the tops regardless lol.

The Bung's work alright for this purpose at 1080p maybe, the only issue there is that with the upscales or using a larger version (the bung roundel size large say) it will introduce an additional color into the image from the black borderline that is on all those images. Means that when you go up or down in size, and interpolation is applied, that black tends to drift into neighboring pixels and changes the color information a lot in the border areas between pixel colors. Then, because the OG roundels are cropped to content (right to the edge of the visible canvas), this will bunch up pixels near the edges, making the roundels appear more geometric - or like an octagon basically instead of a circle, from the black added around the perimeter of the roundel. At scale that line was more 1px, but when reduced it becomes a series of grays, so needs to be drawn in after scaling or it will sorta bork out. I was hoping to just get away with removing the black line entirely. But it's a similar sort of thing for the edges of some of those colors.

So like where the final pixel of the circle is touching the edge of the canvas, that tends to go flatter when downscaled/upscaled, whereas if I leave that pixel blank it will scale better. Sometimes I've seen the same on units, if I don't leave that 1px gap. But when there are only like 12 or 20 px to work with gets harder. It might be that the 18px image on a 20px field ends up displaying better than trying to max it to the edge, in GIMP I mean when I save out the images.

I'll try it later tonight and switch my display to 1080/1200 to see what's going on there. At 1440/1600 seemed clean, but maybe it's just off slightly because at that resolution the blur applies a little bit differently to the very tiny images. Especially for the shapes that are more rounded, or right on the edge of a curve. Even a straight line like the cross in the German roundel seems to have just more fuzz than it should. The standard G40 smalls would probably be almost good enough for units there in the regular UHD if running it at a lower res screen. It's been a minute since I tried that, since we first switched over the vanilla stuff into that package. I mean they may show smaller, but would probably look sharper on the final display, than these which appear slightly larger but sorta blurred out.

Probably I just need to rerun them all through the GIMP 3.0 and make sure something didn't weird out on me when I saved em initially or zipped em up. Got distracted last day or so, haven't had much time, but I can probably get it sorta this weekend

ps. Did you have any luck with the blends stuff? I was messing with that a bit as well under a couple monitor settings, to see what help up. Even 2F still felt a bit chalky to me for alpha channel, but could just be cause I've been looking at the high saturation version forever now lol. Something 1f to like between 1 and 2 might work better. I had a tough time deciding. It basically switches the contrast units to background, from something where the saturation is more backgrounded and the units pop because of the lower saturation, whereas blends is effectively the opposite of that. But I think it holds up ok. Just sorta depends on how the player prefers their contrast usually. Standard Units are pretty high saturation, I think just because the colorizer defaults to a more high sat/high chroma HEX. Not sure what's best, but I think as long as there is a more low contrast version (lighter colored for the background) for a blend, should be serviceable.

[beelee]

@black_elk

sorry brother but my mind just disintegrated reading this

I took the large JPN and shrunk it to 20 no halo.

Made separate folder for old one.

I'll try and regroup and reread. Mind going blank recently lol

Edit
Oh yea got the blends dialed

I'll make screenshots in Game Notes. I still dig the neon but I can see why some might not

[Black_Elk]

hehe sorry for the technical gimp digression. It's basically just a display rez issue, because I'll be editing in GIMP with a higher resolution monitor, and then launching the game to confirm the display, trying to do this at the two main resolutions 1080p and 1440p, to see how the units will display on screen at each size. TripleA to run at 1440p and up will want to rescale the font of the display by default to 125% or 150%, but when it does this the UI images enlarge as well by the same scale. Thing is, unlike with the font, or images/icons in say windows, in tripleA UI somehow upscales the images with a really rough interpolation. It's not applying the blur evenly or in a way that creates the right sorta visual but will be a little jagged, a little too blurry, etc when switching between those displays. I think I just need to like make an image set for 1080, rather than trying to make it for both, cause it's effectively like trying to edit and image to look good with glasses, and another image that looks good when a person has no glasses and astigmatism or something lol. Like that's what tripleA is doing at the high res, it's just not keyed up to upscale to the higher display really, so it sorta janks out for me there. But then I was trying to get the jank out to look ok enough, but comparing screens with what you posted, I think I gotta just make sure the 1080 will work lol

[Black_Elk]

Ok just saving these here, cause I have them scattered everywhere. At 96px and 24px

I have been trying to create some upscales that would work with the larger unit sets or the UHD

This has been done a thousand times probably, but I'm a stickler I guess lol. I have included some alternative variants, just for completion and since some of the traditional OOB designs are invented or anachronistic, I took some similar liberties. Examples would be like for Anzac, since I recall that old thread with the clutch quotes https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/24984/was-there-an-anzac-roundel

Since it wasn't like a separate air force or anything in WW2, sorta just went the invention route here. The film Gallipoli came out in 1981 so maybe that sorta hit around the time that A&A did in the States, who knows? I wanted to put the Kiwi see if I could make him ride on the Kangaroos back wearing a crown but that doesn't really show up very well hehe.

Instead I put the Kiwi inside the Kangaroo's heart, where it doesn't show up, but bounces together in spirit I guess lol

Anyway the RAF night roundel or the RAF type C with the thinner yellow border seemed to make sense for Pacific forces, after they ditched red inside to avoid confusion with the Japanese red sun hinomaru. The modern Kangaroo by itself worked alright I thought I just sorta mashed em together. Included both just in case anyone want's to try something different. Did the same for some others like Italy, or to give an Alt for I had laying around.

[RogerCooper]

@black_elk The kangaroo symbol for Australia only goes back to 1956 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Australian_Air_Force_Ensign, but it so cute that it should be used. The kiwi flag for New Zealand is not historical at all but it is a nice symbol.

[Black_Elk]

Yeah I tend to agree, sometimes we have to make little compromises for the vibes hehe.

This is the earliest example I could find from around the era... although it's pretty clearly from after the War, since they know the end date1941-45 haha. Probably a remembrance deal there...

I thought about trying to use that design for the Roo the, but just seemed simpler to go with the more formalized shape from later on. Of course there's bound to be lag between say first appearance and official adoption, so I suppose it's possible it could go back to WW1 or whatever. Also when like google image search/Wikipedia become the primary way to hunt stuff down, and then trying to match expectations from other games. I think people just get used to seeing the anachronisms and then assume they must be accurate, when usually it's some sort of novel design. Also like once we go with one invention, and pandora's box is already opened.

You know like if we're already going there for Germany and Italy, might as well go for broke and try to get the colors to play well with each other haha. Between the OOBs from A&A or the HBG decal sets, I can usually get a sense for what works or what's floating around, and then just try to recreate whatever motif from similar materials. I also enjoy it when stuff leans historical, but only to an extent. I feel like boardgames and computer games are not really in the same category as say an Encyclopedia Britannica or some illustrated history tome to be read by adults and academics. Ages 12+ or 14+ suggests to me that things need to be a bit more Saturday morning cartoon style sometimes. Even if it makes the history buffs grumble, we gotta tow the line there I think. My rubric to follow is basically old Hollywood flicks from the Golden Age of the Silver Screen, plastic army men and GI Joe. I feel like that's generally the way to go for this stuff. Customizers can always customize to their tastes, but long as it works for the basic thrust of the thing with the default package.

[Black_Elk]

Ran another quickie Hard AI vs itself. Felt pretty solid

I think Axis stabilize pretty well in the midgame. Computer USA foot drags it a bit into N. Africa, but I think juicing them any more at the outset would probably just make it too easy for computer Allies to get a leg up right away, while also making things rather less interesting when playing as Allies vs computer Axis. Overall not too shabby for a split by teams from rounds 5-8 or thereabouts when things start to either swing towards one side or settle into more of a stalemate. In this one France did pretty well by hanging on Syria and then using it as a resistance wedge to stall Axis convergence. Seemed like Computer Japan was poised to secure East Africa for them, but then India cracked back and ejected them from Bombay. Pretty fun to watch from the peanut gallery.

I think instead of tweaking the opener much more, I'd just go with income modifier for the computer, something like 10%-15% to the enemy team for a challenge, maybe up to like 125% if controlling the whole side Axis or Allies. I think that prob takes care of the lower income powers getting bombed off the board, since the income cushion sorta takes care of that, and pad the transports buys a bit.

I'm sure I'll be playing BG3 for the foreseeable future, so probably could just roll this for now and see how it pans out.

I think probably at this point we could noodle the place again for the visual on launch. I couldn't decide on which roundels I preferred, I ended up using the 1943 roundel for USA, and switched a few others just to see which ones felt cool. I think most of them held up pretty well, so more down to flavor preference I guess, or whatever seems easier to distinguish at a glance.

Save and a couple screens from that last bout into round 10 spectating hehe

2025-4-19-UHD-WIP-1940-45.tsvg

For me the UI displays like so at the 1600p default Font 150%. Still has some jank with the interpolation applied there, but not too bad. I think should be serviceable

[beelee]

@black_elk

I'll get back to this soon. Or hopefully I will. So, just need the new flags then ? Don't worry about the units ? Or should I use the new ones as default and put the others in a separate folder for folks to swap if they want ?

[Black_Elk]

@beelee Yeah I say do what you feel, whichever ones look best to you

I tried my hand at the Ironman, USA vs computer Axis with 125% income boost to the machine. Didn't quite get there lol

2025-4-21-UHD-WIP-1940-45_USA_vs_Axis_125_Round_11.tsvg

Mostly KJF plan with what felt like a moderate press vs the Med. G went pretty monster with the extra money! I didn't think we'd quite have the juice to liberate France with our computer pals pursuing their own agenda, but we did make a little blast vs the Balkans over there which had us feeling like we made a contribution. Although perhaps not enough to keep the Soviets in it to win it lol.

Japan has been fighting tooth and nail for the home island. It was pretty entertaining on the water hehe

[Black_Elk]

Just in case we ever get a UI wizard on the dev team, I think it would be interesting to try for something like this in a display...

I mean like the Harrison/Harris approach,==there's just a whole vibe there going from something like this in the 1940s... to A&A in the 80s or something like War Room more recently heheh

The tripleA default has Mercator/Equidistant etc familiar North is up maps, because that's what works well on a flat table, but a digital table top we have more options. When I look at the war room layout from kickstarter it has a whole sweep to it like that's what a UI should look like, some digital version of that.

Prob with the current tripleA presentation for that is the map zoom, since that is all keyed up for rectangular maps, moreso than the circles/squares or riffs on the Azimuthal projection. But then I was thinking maybe if it had a double view, like two hemispheres, so say that the map on the left or the mini might look like world projection we see here, and the one on the right might be more like a rectangular crop within a circular/oval which is more like a theater view?

Idea would be to have two maps that display simultaneously with redundant information but displayed differently for vibes or impact, or something like a playable mini map at say 50% and the 100% on the same board, Iron Blitz view meets G40 panned out say? So maybe one side has that pulled out global view, the other the zoomed in battle view on the curve, and the player can switch between them with a hotkey, or zoom out and see them both at once.

Like imagining the Azimuth/War Room style view would be the left square, and the square on the right would be some theater zoom view of the same with larger unit displays and such, but all on that 2:1 overall map dimension for the survey view where both show together.

I'm certain this can't really be achieved right now in tripleA, since it'd need at least 2 maps working together, but I mean like for the moonshot, would be cool if the Harrison atlas from 44 had like a grab and drag wheel for the global survey view, but then we end up with something more like a regular A&A map from the table top for the campaign/battle/tactical view. That would be fun!