Density of the forrests

[dm 9]

I'm not sure we have the same idea what density means.

Number of objects per area. More objects per area = more dense.

To me it means the number of trees in a given area, be they a bunched up object or not, and Chernarus just can't compete with OFP in that regard.

Yes, but my point is, you could recreate a forest in A2 that was as dense (or more dense) than those found in OFP, but because A2 uses individual trees and not blocks of them, you would still be able to drive through it.

The large blocks of trees (as one model) cant be pushed over, individual trees can.

OFP forest block: http://www.ofpec.com/COMREF/cfg_images/OFP/Forest001T2.jpg

CWR² Everon's forests were deliberately made some of the densest in any community-made map just to bring back the OFP feeling.

And assuming those forests are made of individual trees, then you will be able to drive through it (all be it slowly, as you push trees over)

[dmarkwick 261]

Number of objects per area. More objects per area = more dense.

I think I might see where the confusion is: in OFP, sometimes you can weave through a forest. Some forest blocks though are too dense to make this viable.

[metalcraze 290]

I used to serve, and we would regularly set up a base in a forest.

With tanks and APCs by knocking down trees?

Surely seeing a falling chopper knock down some trees once in a while is cool, but forests are infantry hideouts and sending tanks there is not the smartest idea so it really isn't critical to the gameplay. Having a dense forest is much more important.

On Chernarus some trees are way too detailed than really needed so that's why forests are less dense - to save GFX performance. But they don't give that feeling (and a proper hideout for infantry) OFP forests do.

I hope as more powerful GFX cards will become a norm in the community when AA3 will come out and provided BIS allows Chernarus to be ported some enthusiasts will make forests more dense as I believe that shouldn't be too hard to do.

Edited July 20, 2011 by metalcraze

[maddogx 13]

Never mind...

Edited July 20, 2011 by MadDogX

[dmarkwick 261]

With tanks and APCs by knocking down trees?

I didn't realise there were hidden rules to your question :) we drove large vehicles, sometimes towing equally large storage trailers. We did not knock trees down.

But, to answer it anyway, you might wish to set up an attack element that surprisingly and suddenly rushes out of a forest.

[EDcase 87]

Even though the real Lemnos may not have forest areas I hope BIS includes a slightly forested part.

The main thing about making good maps is to include variety.

As for density: I think A2 is a good compromise between realism and playability. I don't think it would be a good idea to have more trees per area as it will be harder to spot enemies and the AI are VERY good at spotting you between the branches ;)

Edited July 20, 2011 by EDcase

[celery 8]

Yes, but my point is, you could recreate a forest in A2 that was as dense (or more dense) than those found in OFP, but because A2 uses individual trees and not blocks of them, you would still be able to drive through it.

The large blocks of trees (as one model) cant be pushed over, individual trees can.

And assuming those forests are made of individual trees, then you will be able to drive through it (all be it slowly, as you push trees over)

I'm talking about driving a car, not a tank. And even that's beside the point: I only used it as an example of OFP's tree density compared to Arma 2.

[KorpeN 0]

I remember back those days trying to drive a ural through the forests of nogova trying to escape from russians. But yes ArmA had less density than ofp and ArmA2 less than ArmA.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I agree fully with EDcase regarding A2 density being good enough. When we (as combat engineers) worked together with armored units, we frequently setup camp in the woods but always very close to the edge. Damned armored units btw - we were freezing our asses off in tents while they setup tent over the cozy warm engine :p

[coder4crack 10]

no forests? omg... eewe! that settles it. i'm definitely not buying arma 3, then.

[Tulx 10]

I think the forest density in AII is just right. There ARE certain places, mostly fir formations, which were really dense (I can remember a lot in the region of Devil's Castle), and provide perfect cover for infantry. What the forests could have used, is more undergrowth, but tree density as such is pretty decent for a temperate European forest. Only pine forests tend to have no undergrowth.

I am indeed a bit sad that AIII moves away from the oh-so familiar Eastern European flora. It really felt like home and appealed to me greatly.

Still, I'm sure BI environmental artists will make a good Mediterranean island. Been to a few, so I hope I can relate to them as well.

PS - there actually are "forests" on Mediterranean islands as well. I remember some, although really small and few, on Kerkyra and I think on Crete as well. Plus, there are olive growths all over the damn place, so we'll have some visual cover. ;)

[NoRailgunner 0]

Trees, forrest and other vegetation should be as close as possible to the real "Lemnos". Would be more than strange if you would suddenly see a Northern European "dark" forrest or Taiga or swamp on such an Mediterranean island. Lets see if BIS are developing a bigger addon/expansion that plays somewhere in the North incl. characteristic (dense) forrest and snow. :)

[solidsnake2384 10]

Forests are nice but i can do without them. Always slows down my computer :( .

[Tonci87 163]

Plus, there are olive growths all over the damn place, so we'll have some visual cover.

So true.....

[maturin 12]

Only pine forests tend to have no undergrowth.

Only mature pine forests. Once a few trees have been taken down by wind storms, you can get new trees from knee-height to ten feet that can choke up the forest floor and make it nigh impassable.

[Slides 10]

4 page thread about plants?