TacOps Gazette 04.03

MajorH

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
866
Reaction score
0
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Country
llUnited States
TacOps Gazette 04.03

The TacOps Gazette is an irregularly published compilation of user email and my replies.

This issue focuses on the TacOps map making utility.

> How large can a TacOps map be?

I think that the map tool instructions say that you can build a map up to 31 or 32 kilometers across. That is an error. I recently found out that some older PCs and obsolete versions of Windows have trouble loading a very large map at more 256 colors if the map exceeds the following guidelines (Windows 95, Windows 98/98SE, Windows ME, Windows NT earlier than NT4).

If one axis of the map is 31 Km, the other axis should not be more than 26.
If one axis of the map is 30 Km. the other axis should not be more than 27.
If one axis of the map is 29 Km, the other axis should not be more than 28..

Or more technically, if the total size of a map (width in pixels X height in pixels) is greater than 8,355,839 pixels then the map can not be loaded on obsolete versions of Windows if monitor colors are set at greater than 256 colors. The exact Windows call that is failing at higher color settings is CreateCompatibleBitmap(...).

Confusing minutiae: The map tool limits width to 3100 pixels. It should also limit height to 3100 pixels but I recently discovered that it does not due to a typo in the code. The TacOps program limits width to 3250 pixels and limits height to 3100 pixels. I don't recall why the program is different from the map tool. Probably another detail that slipped through the crack due my falling asleep at the keyboard on some late night coding binge. :)

> Just how big a map could TacOps handle under the newer
> operating systems if you removed the hard coded limits? Is
> there any game logic which will fail before reaching the
> new map size limit?

There is another Windows OS related issue not too far beyond 32km x 32km but I don't recall exactly what it is or where it occurs. Advancing the map engine got sidelined two years ago when I started working on the multiplayer network mode. I will get back to it one of these days. However, indiscriminately adding more and more kilometers/pixels to the maps in pursuit of ever bigger maps is not a good idea. At some point it would make more sense to just change the TacOps map scale or to write an operational level game engine.

> Does anybody have any suggestions for topo map software to
> use as a starting point for TO maps? I am looking for maps
> in the NE United States. I have seen packages by DeLorme
> and National Geographic.

I have used "Topo USA" by Delorme as a starting point for a few TacOps maps. It has a clunky user interface and is poorly documented, so you will have to go through an annoying amount of trial and error experimentation before you will be able to extract a useful bmp file from it (for further scaling and skewing with an art program). "Topo USA" provides an option to display UTM grid lines and coordinates. I used "Topo USA" along with military paper maps in the production of recent maps for MCB Quantico, MCB 29 Palms, and MCB Camp Pendleton. The UTM grid in "Topo USA" was a reasonable match for the UTM grid on the paper maps. I have not used the National Geographic bundle.

> The National Geographic bundles advertise that maps can be displayed
> and printed with UTM coordinates. I don't believe that this is the coord
> system used by the military and TO, if not, is there any relationship
> between the the two grid systems?

UTM is UTM. If the UTM numbers seem different than what is in TacOps it may be because more digits of accuracy are being used. For example, military users at the tactical level usually omit leading digits that are related to the "world" part of a UTM sequence.

> What is the scale that I need to shoot for?

One screen pixel per ten meters of ground. If the illusion of a real world location is required, I usually start with a scan of a 1:50,000 scale paper map. Transforming a scan of a paper map to a finished piece of art at the TacOps scale of 72 dpi and 10 meters per pixel is a tedious, error prone process. It is usually a challenge to get the UTM grid lines on the map scan to line up with the UTM grid lines in TacOps since grids are seldom perfectly square nor perfectly aligned vertically and horizontally in the real world. Except for very flat terrain, the final product will never perfectly represent the real world terrain due to the two elevation level abstraction in TacOps. It is a heck of a lot less work to create a fictional map that is based on a simple free hand sketch. Especially if one borrows the patterns and textures that I used to make maps 1 through 16.

> What resolution should I use when saving the map artwork?

It should always be 72 dpi for the final map artwork. No other value is acceptable.

> What Photoshop mode should I work in?

I suggest that you work in Photoshop RGB mode and save in ".psd" format until the map is completely finished. Most if not all Photoshop filters and tools work best in RGB mode and in ".psd" format. However, you should convert a copy to single layer, indexed colors, 16 bit (256 colors), bmp format before passing the map art to the TacOps map tool. Some of your map colors may change slightly in the conversion from RGB to 16 bit indexed but the change is usually not severe. TacOps will display 24 bit maps, but the cost in computer memory and hard disk space is very high - I would prefer that 24 bit maps not be deposited on the Battlefront sponsored web site.

>When scanning the map it must be scanned at a perfect right angle on the
>scanner. Right?

That will almost never happen. Your scan will almost always be slightly off. If you want the grid lines to be perfectly north to south and perfectly east to west you will have to rotate and or skew them with a good quality paint program. You will probably also end up needing to shrink or expand the scan to some extent in order to get the scale perfect at 1 pixel per 10 meters.

> How do I scale a paper map scan so that the UTM grid
> lines up with the TacOps UTM grid?

Here is a very simple and very fast shortcut for scans of real world maps that contain a UTM gird. First, rotate and or skew the artwork so that the north/south lines are as vertical as possible and so that the east/west lines are as horizontal as possible - Photoshop allows one to do separate rotate or skew operations on both the vertical and the horizontal axes. This step will also help "square off" the grid squares on maps that have a significant variance in the width of grid squares as one moves from the bottom of a map to the top. Now trim the map scan so that it contains only complete grid squares - no partial grid squares on any edge. Count the width and height of the trimmed map in grid squares (kilometers). Multiply that by 100 (in TacOps a 1000 meter grid square has a width of 100 pixels). Open the Photoshop "Image Size" window and enter the converted width and the converted height in pixels into the width and height pixels boxes. Click the OK button. Photoshop will then automatically scale your map scan to the precise TacOps scale in one step. The result of all of the above steps is usually the best possible convergence of the UTM lines of the scanned map and the UTM lines that will be drawn by TacOps. The two grids will not always match perfectly when displayed by TacOps but they will usually match within one or two pixels.

> To get the UTM grid numbers to match the map, I am guessing that
> you must start with a trimmed map, one that is trimmed right on
> the grid lines?

Correct. But the leftmost grid line should actually be ten (maybe eleven) pixels east of the left edge of the map and the bottommost grid line should be ten (maybe eleven) pixels north of the bottom of the map to allow for the ten pixel border that people usually choose to put around a TacOps map. Check the documentation that came with the map utility. I think it talks about where the leftmost and bottommost grid lines are supposed to be and how many pixels they should be away from the edge.

> Do you have an idea of how to put an area like the enclosed
> map snipped into a TacOps map?

I don't have an easy to explain, step wise, or even consistent method of translating real world mountainous terrain into a two level TacOps map. The best I can say is that I try to interpret and represent the tactical significance of the most important high ground that is on the real world paper map. It is all about trade offs and compromise. Sometimes I go by the contour line at the bottom of a hill or mountain, sometimes I guide on a middle contour line, or sometimes I go by a contour that is near the top of the hill or mountain.

> Is there any way to code swamps

I used some or all of the following to represent swamps and marshes on the Camp Lejeune map.

1. Water (unit has to be amphibious to enter or cross).
2. Water + woods (unit has to be amphibious to enter or cross).
3. Rough1 through Rough4 (any unit can enter and cross). Rough can not be combined with water.
4. Woods + Rough1 through Rough4 (any unit can enter and cross). Rough can not be combined with water.

Woods + rough4 is the worst terrain possible in TacOps - that is still passable to all units.

> What do the different categories of rough stand for?

The info below is an approximation of the effects of rough1 through rough4 terrain for a given unit type. There are other things going on in the game so this may not always be exact.

Rough1 - 50% of cross country, clear terrain speed
Rough2 - 25% of cross country, clear terrain speed
Rough3 - 12.5% of cross country, clear terrain speed
Rough4 - 6% of cross country, clear terrain speed

The level of 'roughness' affects both speed of transit and visibility. You can mark an area as 'rough' either because it is (a) actually slow to cross due to poor trafficability or due to a vehicle not being able to drive very far in a straight line [i.e. move around boulders, bogs, vegetation] or (b) you can call an area rough because it has a lot of local minor elevations changes or vegetation clumps that tend to cause vehicles to disappear from LOS as they move around or (c) because the area has a lot of local folds that make it easy for a vehicle to choose to hide itself momentarily. 'Rough' works OK for any of those conceptual abstractions. Rough terrain does not block line of sight (unless combined with woods, town, or a misc LOS block) but it will cause spotted enemy units to randomly disappear from the map display. The rougher the terrain, the more often that happens. This is more of a distraction to the human watching the screen than it is to his units on the map. In June of 2002 I added three levels of "impassible" to the terrain types. Unless a road is present, Level 1 can not be entered by wheeled vehicles. Level 2 can not be entered by wheeled vehicles or tracked vehicles. Level 3 can not be entered by wheeled vehicles, tracked vehicles, or dismounted infantry. The presence of road terrain negates any level of impassable terrain.

> I don't know if you have a Rough0

That would be 'Clear' terrain. In TacOps 'Clear Terrain' is easily trafficable to both tracked and military style wheeled vehicles, is reasonably level, and is mostly free of tall vegetation. The only thing in TacOps that is better/faster than 'Clear Terrain' is 'Road Terrain'.

> Do you tie line-of-sight to the Rough levels?

Line of sight - No. Transient visibility potential - Yes.

> if you have 1000 meters of non wooded terrain that is uniformly labeled
> Rough2, can an observer see across the entire space?

Yes - with regard to having a technically unblocked line of sight to an active or spotted unit. But, if a unit becomes motionless and passes a combat phase without firing then the game engine assumes that the unit has taken some sort of small movement action to reduce its vulnerability to being spotted - the game engine then lowers that unit's transient 'visibility' classification. In other words enemy units will have to get closer to such a unit in order to spot it well enough to justify firing on it. If the unit moves or begins firing then its 'visibility' to the enemy instantly jumps back up to maximum. The 'rougher' the terrain then the lower the unit's potential visibility - until it either moves or fires.

> In woods in TacOps, units seem to be able to see about
> 200-300 meters. Is this limitation because you have it
> labeled as Rough2, or because of some other coding you use
> to indicate that the woods block line-of-sight?

This LOS limitation is linked to the coding of 'woods' and not to 'rough'. There are two main abstractions regarding 'woods' terrain. Units that are 'deep' inside 'woods' terrain can only see into adjacent wooded 100 meter squares - this is linked to the terrain being coded as 'woods' and is not due to whether such wooded terrain is or is not also some level of 'rough'. Units that are located in the outermost 100 meters of a body of woods terrain cells can see out of the woods into non wooded terrain the same as if they were in clear terrain - this is also linked to the terrain being coded as 'woods' and is not due to whether such wooded terrain is or is not also some level of 'rough'. To understand the latter abstraction, picture having your vehicle parked just inside the edge of a wood line. You can see out of the woods just fine but distant enemy units have a hard time spotting you because your motionless silhouette is broken up by vegetation beside and behind you. But if you move or start shooting then they can often pick you out instantly. The most basic principle of fieldcraft is that activity draws fire.

> Any tips for Using Photoshop to make TacOps Maps?

A TacOps map must have an image resolution of 72 pixels/dots per inch. Use the 'Image/Image Size' menu item to set this.

Photoshop works best and fastest when the artwork is saved in PSD file format. If your source art is in any other format then the first step is to immediately save the art in PSD format, close the current file, and then reopen the PSD version.

Do all editing and filtering work in RGB color mode. The only time that Indexed mode should be used is just prior to saving a copy of your work in BMP format for subsequent use by the TacOps program. If your artwork is not initially in RGB color mode then use the 'Mode' menu item to change it to RGB.

A perfect TacOps grid square measures 100 pixels by 100 pixels. If you are starting from a scan of a paper map you will almost certainly have to rescale the map image. The easiest accurate way to do this is to 'Edit/Crop' the map so that the canvas consists only of complete grid squares and then count the width and height of the map in complete grid squares. Multiply each dimension by 100 to arrive at the desired map height and width in pixels. Then use the 'Image/Image Size' menu item to set the artwork's width and height to those pixel dimensions. In the window that is summoned by the 'Image Size' menu item, there is a check box labeled something like 'Constrain Proportions' - make sure that box is not checked. Note that if you check the dimensions of individual grid squares after doing this resizing, you will find many that do not turn out to be perfect 100x100 pixel squares. Just ignore this - there is no reasonable way to make every grid square on a map scan end up as a perfect 100x100 square. However, it is critical that the overall map border dimensions in pixels be correct. Sometimes, resizing blurs the map a bit. To correct this, first select the entire map then select the 'Filter/Sharpen' menu item.

Important - save and or backup your PSD formatted work in progress before doing any of this paragraph. When you are eventually ready to output your PSD formatted work in progress to BMP format, first change the color mode from RGB to Indexed. You will likely be asked to select a new color resolution - choose 'Other/256' colors. Then do your save in BMP format being sure to use a different file name from your PSD master file. While saving to BMP format you will likely be asked for file format - choose 'Windows' - and you will be asked for a Depth - choose 8 bit.

> The hi/low and misc Los block buttons in the map utility have
> me confused.

If the hi/low button is check marked then the cursor will create high ground when you click on the map at a point that is currently low ground. If you click on a point that is currently high ground then that point will be converted to low ground.

> The question was asked can we use the USGS 1:24,000 or the
> 1:24,500 older version with the map tool and still get the
> UTM reading to come up on the information bar when running
> the game.

Yes - more or less. To build a TacOps map you must start with an art file in BMP format that is scaled so that one pixel equals 10 meters. When you later run the TacOps map utility and try to begin coding a new map using that artwork, you will be asked to enter the UTM grid coordinates of the lower right corner of the map art. Those numbers and the scale of the artwork will determine if the UTM info is correct when you later use the map in TacOps play.

> As to Hi/Lo terrain I look at the contour lines and the
> triangulation points and make a decision as to which
> contour line is the cutoff point between Hi and Lo. Then I
> make a new layer in Photoshop and draw freehand around
> these contour lines and fill it with a darker shade. Then I
> select all the woods bit by bit and COPY the shape of the
> woods. I PASTE this onto a new layer and make it darker
> green and put that on top of the Hi-Lo layer.

This is how I handle that. I prefer that the edges of details in the terrain art such as (woods, elevation changes, etc) match the edges of the 100 meter terrain cells as much as possible. This makes the map art a bit "blocky" but makes it much easier for the user to position his units with minimal map study and experimentation. I accept the blockiness that this adds to the presentation as a reasonable tradeoff for user convenience. So, instead of drawing the edges/boundaries freehand I use the map tool to actually code them. I then do screen captures of the result and I put that into a Photoshop layer to use as a guide. This probably does not make any sense to you if you are not familiar with Photoshop editing layers and its cross layer selection options. When I do need to do something freehand, I have Photoshop display a ten pixel by ten pixel grid layer and I use that as a guide.

> I have gotten the go ahead to get some maps scanned into the 256 bitmap
> format and to see about building the FT DIX terrain as a map for
> TacOpsCav. Any suggestions before I start?

I think everything was pretty much covered in the messages that I sent you previously. The only other thing that I can think of is that I strongly recommend that you try to get your command to purchase the professional version of Adobe Photoshop for you It costs around $600 but it will make the work of reducing and or converting paper map scans to TacOps scale a lot easier and you will end up with much cleaner looking artwork. MS Paint just does not have the horsepower to manipulate large map scans. If you can't talk them into the full version then the next option would be Adobe Photoshop Essentials at around $100. The cheaper version will leave you with a few unsolvable problems but it is better than MS paint.

> I am missing something with the map tool. It generates dat
> files, but I can't see a way to load dat fills into TacOps.

Run TacOps. Load one of the following custom scenario templates, Custom Scenario US Army.sce or Custom Scenario USMC.sce or Custom Scenario CA CMBG.sce. As the scenario template file loads, a window will appear that asks you to select a map to use with that scenario template. At this time you can select any map dat file.

> I'm a bit befuddled by the version number feature in your Map Tool. It
> allows me to set a number 100-999, but traditionally versions of files
> are single-digits with one or two decimal points (1.0, e.g.).

Visualize a dot between each digit. Thus 100 translates into 1.0.0.

> I'm using Paint to design a new TacOps map and am coming up with
> some tedious workarounds to place the various artwork terrain
> features in good alignment with the editing utility's coded
> terrain.

A better art program would best solve your problem but here is a cheap, low tech, and surprisingly effective work around. Use an art program (or PowerPoint?) to create a letter sized document with a 10 pixel by 10 pixel grid drawn on a plain white transparent background. A shortcut would be start with a piece of a screen capture from the map utility showing its dot or line grid on a blank/white map. Print the grid document onto clear transparency film of the type that folks often use to prepare PowerPoint slides and then tape the film onto your monitor with scotch tape.

> An experiment for someone with time on their hands to try.

For use as background art or as an idea generator for a TacOps map. Run Microsoft Flight Simulator. Fly over an area of interest and pause the game. Switch Microsoft Flight Simulator to "windowed mode". Select "Top Down View". Do a screen capture using Alt + Prnt Scr key sequence. Switch to a paint program and paste in the screen capture. Stretch or shrink to TacOps scale.

Note that terrain features in Microsoft Flight Simulator such as airports, mountains, rivers, and major roads are correct only at a gross level. Details such as wooded terrain and towns are almost entirely notional with only the outline of a given area being somewhat correct. In other words, the outline of a town will be fairly accurate but the minor streets, minor roads, and 99% of the building portrayed within that outline are not real at all - you won't actually find the street you live on. There are some exceptions where Microsoft or a third party has created "add on" scenery for a particular small area which is much more accurate. Such as the main strip at Las Vegas, Paris, Washington D.C., and well known large buildings in other major cities.

> Can the misc LOS block be used to ...

A "misc LOS block" completely blocks LOS through it (actually past it) for two units that are at the same level. You can see into and out of a misc LOS block but you can not see past it. It can be used in conjunction with any terrain type, though it is pointless to combine it with woods or town terrain. I think that a unit that is on high ground can see over a misc LOS block that is on low ground but I didn't take the time to confirm it with an experiment. I don't have any real guidance for you as to when to use the "misc LOS block" terrain type. I have only used it a few times myself - in Task Force Davis to represent rubble under several bridges and in Task Force Hurley to represent a sand berm. Some military map makers have used a line of them across high ground to represent a crest or ridge. I never really intended for TacOps to be used to model real world terrain. I have been grudgingly dragged into that a little more each year by military users and over enthusiastic hobbyists. I wanted to leave the maps as simple and abstract as possible so that players could concentrate on weapons and tactics instead of map interpretation.

> I'm currently looking at ways to reduce the file size of a
> few TacOps maps a bit. I understand that TacOps maps must
> be in .bmp format, but is there a specific color setting
> that they must adhere to?

All of the maps that I produce are saved at 8 bits or 256 colors. End users have occasionally contributed maps that were saved with a greater color setting (16 bit or higher) but I have always converted them to 256 colors before adding them to the TacOps CD. Even at 256 colors a 29km by 30 km map file will weigh in at 7 or 8 megabytes. The size of map files can be reduced significantly for storage by zipping them. Of course they will have to be unzipped before being usable for TacOps play. TacOps does not take over the OS when it is launched. It will not insist that a player change his OS setting based on how maps were saved. The game engine will display the maps at whatever color setting the player is currently using on his OS. If the user has his OS set at thousands or millions of colors then TacOps will load the maps at the higher setting. The user won't see any more colors than what were already in the maps and much more memory will be required but TacOps won't object.
 
Top