Global Dominance

Hepps

With work on HOH winding down.... work on GD has recommenced.

It is with great satisfaction that I announce that the map is now completed in its entirety.

Here is a look at it at 3% resolution.

0_1522954905322_Small sample.png

General_Zod

@hepps

Not big enough, hehe

Hepps

@general_zod I'd have gone bigger.... but this is the max size the drawing program will draw on my system.

Hepps

@general_zod Just wait til you try and zoom out on this map.... you are never going to see enough of the map Mr. Zod.

General_Zod

@hepps I know, we will need a new spy satellite view.

General_Zod

@Hepps

Perhaps heat signatures.

Frostion

There sure is a lot of sea territories. How many moves do ships have? More than the land units?

Hepps

@frostion Variety of factors go into naval movement. Needless to say the math has long since been worked out.

Much like land and air units...different naval units have different movement values. On top of which there are shipping lanes that offer faster travel. Fighting for naval supremacy will be a much bigger deal in this game than in any other. And due to the different aspects of how it works.... there will be different strategies available to ensure you are winning how you need to win. The individual battles will be more significant than sheer TUV. Just because you can't dominate an opponent... doesn't mean you can't disrupt their maneuvers.

redrum

@hepps Given the size, do you have a sense of how long each turn would represent? Thinking something like 1 month? Just curious.

Cernel

Not supposed to be the one answering such questions (and I think most TripleA maps just don't make timeline assumptions (maybe it is the case here too)), but my take, assuming no Risk style things (in which you can battle in a territory, then moving on battling in another), at these dimensions, 1 round can be no more than half a month (about 2 weeks).
Talking in term of rounds, not turns. It doesn't really make sense to relate time to turns, like Civil War does, even in the case you have only 2 turns per round.
Otherwise, if you look at the frontier changes, like in the aftermath of Stalingrad until the stabilization because of the mud season, you would be just unable to re-create the timeline, at anything more than 2 weeks per round or so.
I remember I had a conversation with @Hepps on this matter, in lobby, as I was pointing out that 1 Carrier should take 36 turns to build and a battleship more than 48 (like about 60 rounds).

p.s.: A map like this would be just impossible to handle as an image on which to build relief by any personal computers at 32 bit (just over 10 years ago), and even now I can see @Hepps must have a fair bit of RAM, if he is relief-working on it with no lag.
Definitely, general human progress is taking TripleA by hand, as I believe a map like this would be just outright impossible to make (and most likely to play, as well) with the technology we had, for personal use, 15 years ago or more (when TripleA started existing).
If I can make a guess, I assume @Hepps got at least 32GB RAM?

Hepps

@redrum Based on some of the changes in movement and other aspects of game-play it should have a feel close to what TWW already has. Of course that is a fairly broad assumption until we are actually moving pieces around the map. The increased size certainly allows for more movement options... but the pace of play should be roughly the same with the exception that there is a lot more room to move around.

Certain things take more time to build... but those changes are really meant to bring more realism and create parity to the timeline rather than changing it.

While movement has been augmented with things like trains and rail on land and naval movement is pretty dynamic. IE. Under the right conditions the U.S. can still move across the Atlantic to the coast of France in 2 moves. Or can reach just shy of the coast of Australia in 2 moves with certain unit types.

All in all the design is meant to give a more realistic feel to the game rather than extend it out from a timeline perspective. That being said.... til we get boots on the ground it is anyone's guess.

Cernel

@hepps FYI, free GitHub repositories are limited to 1 GB, and this includes all history (when you make changes, the old being kept in memory).
If this map, as I can imagine, is going to have about 0.5 GB for the relief tiles only, that may be an issue.
I'm not saying you have to curb your map because of GitHub limits, as that would be sad, but if it happens to hit the 1 GB in total, you will need to discuss with the developers how to handle it.

Hepps

@cernel Like so many of the obstacles that have been part of this game development... we shall cross that bridge when we come to it.

Frostion

@Cernel A quick question: Is the 1GB limit a limit on the size of the map release master zip file that gets downloaded from GitHub? (or what we call that file .. hehe )

prastle

@frostion the overall size of that particular maps repo including everything in it is my guess.

theredbaron

Based on Github's help documentaion, this does not appear to be a hard limit, but in the area of 1 GB. If this indeed becomes a problem, I'm sure the community as a whole will be itching to see GD come out so much that we can find a workaround.

As was said before, this is a bridge on the Rhine and we are still plotting D-Day

prastle

@theredbaron yup I doubt we will mind throwing some cash for a larger repo

redrum

We can just do another migration and move all maps to Gitlab as they have a 10GB limit! https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/admin_area/settings/account_and_limit_settings.html

prastle

@redrum Woot!

Hepps

@redrum If you let those more capable than yourself deal with the things you have neither experience nor knowledge of... the results are always unfathomable to the uninitiated.

Collaborative efforts and expertise are the things dreams are made of. If we simply took possession out of the equation there are no limits to what human minds could accomplish.