sahrani makes sense?

[jantenner 0]

i read in another thread where someone said sahrani didnt make sense to him, and then i thought, ok that could be my problem with this island too.. i mean it is like 2 totally different islands put together, one arabic desert part and one east european boreal part. this is kind of surreal, and it doesnt convince me to be a real island. in ofp all 3 islands were distinctive but coherent in their own design... i hope we can see everon kolgujev and malden again in a patch.. and even nogova!

[hoot 0]

Currently i have a databaseproblem with the BI-Wiki, but such an 'reloaded' of old CWC content was announced therein, afaik. Can't give you the corresponding link right now due to the error. Maybe it was also posted here.

[Heatseeker 0]

I would happily exchange it for two distinct maps, more natural looking, easier to work with (missions) and less clutered too...

Problem is that we are stuck with it and once people start making custom environments we will so many that people will end up using sahrani for MP anyway..

[SeppSchrot 0]

But Nogova is quite the same, isn't it?

You have desert in the southwest, can snowboard on the mountains in the northeast, and smell the cloverleafs in the other areas.

Do not forget the OFP triple are pretty small compared to Nogova and Saharini.

I think, until decent island maker tools are available, Saharani is a good common denominator for several mission settings.

And for RTS and CTI we have Saharani-Lite.

[4 IN 1 0]

But Nogova is quite the same, isn't it?

You have desert in the southwest, can snowboard on the mountains in the northeast, and smell the cloverleafs in the other areas.

Do not forget the OFP triple are pretty small compared to Nogova and Saharini.

I think, until decent island maker tools are available, Saharani is a good common denominator for several mission settings.

And for RTS and CTI we have Saharani-Lite.

or tonal for god sakes, it got 75% of area pure desert others are sorts of rainforest

[Heatseeker 0]

But Nogova is quite the same, isn't it?

You have desert in the southwest, can snowboard on the mountains in the northeast, and smell the cloverleafs in the other areas.

Do not forget the OFP triple are pretty small compared to Nogova and Saharini.

I think, until decent island maker tools are available, Saharani is a good common denominator for several mission settings.

And for RTS and CTI we have Saharani-Lite.

Not at all, the architecture was not so dramatically diferent and the Nogova desert was just a small area of dry land, the transitions were.. smoother and the island felt much more natural and believable.

Sahrani is like combining some middle eastern dry area with a lush european one. Lots of work was put cluttering the large towns wich are hard to escape from and dont offer the best playability.

I would rather have a huge Rahmadi with more bushland and a couple of larger yet playable towns.

[fitzee 7]

But Nogova is quite the same, isn't it?

You have desert in the southwest, can snowboard on the mountains in the northeast, and smell the cloverleafs in the other areas.

Very good point.

IMO some people here are just looking for things to complain about, so they can stir up crap.

How many missions actually need to use both the north and south...

How many threads need to be started to complain about the same things...

If people dont like ArmA, wouldnt they be better off doing something else, instead of filling the ArmA forum with useless complaints.

[rom_un 0]

I've got two examples :

The Canary island : the two sides are really different, it depend of the dominant winds. One shore is desert (moon style) and the other side is jungle.

Corsica (for me, the best Mediterranean place): One time in October, I've made a morning snowboard session and a surf session the afternoon. And without any 'diving suit' !!!

You can find palm trees and fir trees separate by 25km only.

[dmarkwick 261]

I think Sahrani is just fine - in fact I think it's an incredible piece of work. There is so much detail, so many little nooks & crannies, and every type of environment can be found for whatever mission you want to make (apart from snow). I thinnk as a base default map it has everything for everybody. As has been mentioned before the old OFP maps were desert + woodland, and they were much smaller.

I flew completely around the entire coast the other day and I was amazed at just how little of the map I have even seen yet. There's plenty of scope for thousands of missions for many, many years there.

[Heatseeker 0]

IMO some people here are just looking for things to complain about, so they can stir up crap.

How many missions actually need to use both the north and south...

How many threads need to be started to complain about the same things...

If people dont like ArmA, wouldnt they be better off doing something else, instead of filling the ArmA forum with useless complaints.

Not at all, i really like Arma more than any other game out there, i like the new engine, the gameplay, the graphics, the features...

I just dont like the island and the theme all that much and joined this thread to voice my opinion and discuss with others.

Have a nice day friend .

[Dallas 9]

I really like Sahrani, all of it. There's nothing sureal about the variation between the northern highlands and the dried-up south. Architecture is explained too, deterimned by the northern communist dictatorship and the democratic monarchy in the south.

[-Puma- 2]

North would have been better, if it was a jungle, so it could blend in better, with deserts in south

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

You know, one thing I find curious though - the south, being so dry and resourceless - and I say it's resourceless because its army is crap compared to the North, excluding of course the presence of US Forces - is it just and only powermongering that drives the north to attack the south? 'Cause I see no economical gain for the north to occupy the south, except perhaps to gain more tourism...

[Dallas 9]

It's oil fields around Cayo maybe?

[-Puma- 2]

..or they have some long lasting hatred between each others.

[W0lle 1052]

BUZZARD @ April 11 2007,17:53)]You know, one thing I find curious though - the south, being so dry and resourceless - and I say it's resourceless because its army is crap compared to the North, excluding of course the presence of US Forces - is it just and only powermongering that drives the north to attack the south? 'Cause I see no economical gain for the north to occupy the south, except perhaps to gain more tourism...

There might be one more reason.

If you drive around long enough and watch carefully you'll notice that the north, except at some bases, has no civilian used fuel stations.

The south might be almost resourceless, but fuel stations at almost every corner.

They might invade the south to gather that technology and the ability to refuel their cars without relying on the northern army.

[Heatseeker 0]

Well... i honestly dont believe that comunism vs monarchy would have such a deep influence in topography, architecture, vegetation, etc.

Realism drives games like this one further, more realistic animations, models, special effects, sounds, gameplay... and Sahrani just doesnt feel very realistic or even believable.

I can imagine 2 terrain editors working on 2 diferent islands using Arma's stock material (artwork, textures, etc), one making a large dry/middle eastern style environment and another making an european/lush environment and i can imagine any of these two being much better than Sahrani.

[*]More believable and realistic looking.

[*]More mission editing friendly.

[*]More gameplay friendly.

[*]Less demanding.

I can live with it for now but i cant wait to get away from this strange looking place .

[Scrub 0]

The idea of the north being a jungle is interesting. Columbia anyone? Definately a different battlespace, since druglords probably don't fly too well and the new MI-24 Crack-Hinds would end up being very expensive weedwackers. Also, large tank battles would be difficult too with the MBTs unable to knock over huge trees and sinking in and grounding out.

[wamingo 1]

Also there are sizable cities in the south. Cities equals income.

edit...

But I do agree, the island is not coherent. But BIS did this just like every other developer does it. It is believed having multiple different themes gives more sales because you don't aim for just one taste. Most games have madly varying areas. Often you see yourself going from bolivian jungle to african desert to tokyo to paris to siberia to middleage europe.. It's really rather annoying, and totally breaks any kind of atmosphere previously built up, but it's probably difficult to pursuade dev's or publishers to do it otherwise.

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

I rather figure that the south is an "artificial country" which is almost exclusively dependent on foreign aid, hence the gas stations, airport, etc... Kinda like a monarchy being supported by the "west" during a Cold War as part of a "containment policy" against "dictatorial communist expansionism", or something along those lines...

Edit: @ W0lle: If the north is, as stated, a dictatorship, then it is fully plausible that it is a rationed resource in the north, and as typical in dictatorships, armed forces have priority over civilian access to such a precious resource, therefore it is rather unsurprising not to see many fuel stations for civilian access in the north, whereas, in contrast, the south has fuel due to the external support being given...

[benreeper 0]

The island is supposed to representative of a tiny continent in order to create balanced MP missions, most likely CTIs. Think 2Fort2 for Team Fortress or Face for UT CTF.

--Ben

[ijozic 9]

BUZZARD @ April 11 2007,18:40)]I rather figure that the south is an "artificial country" which is almost exclusively dependent on foreign aid, hence the gas stations, airport, etc... Kinda like a monarchy being supported by the "west" during a Cold War as part of a "containment policy" against "dictatorial communist expansionism", or something along those lines...

Edit: @ W0lle: If the north is, as stated, a dictatorship, then it is fully plausible that it is a rationed resource in the north, and as typical in dictatorships, armed forces have priority over civilian access to such a precious resource, therefore it is rather unsurprising not to see many fuel stations for civilian access in the north, whereas, in contrast, the south has fuel due to the external support being given...  

That's all ok but it doesn't allow many different scenarios. Now if the island was conceived as one country with corrupt monarchy and rebels hiding in the northern part which has more vegetation, it would allow different scenarios. For one, we wouldn't have that no-man's land part.

[Spokesperson 0]

Hasn't anybody here actually played the campaign?

The US supports the dictatorship in the South because of the oil-fields and because of the tourism. If you watch the map closely you'll find dollar signs everywhere in the south.

The north is mainly an agrarian and industrial (a bit) society. Even if it's "communist" it seems to be supported by the people. In the campaign southerners flee to the north because the monarch in the south haves his citizens executed. The north liberates the south. It's a vietnam-like scenario.

Still, in the beginning the US and the South are depicted as the good guys. The story in the last two missions change that completely.

[-ZG-BUZZARD 0]

I thought this thread was about wether Sahrani made sense or not, not about what Sahrani should or not be...

Edit:

Quote[/b] ]The US supports the dictatorship in the South because of the oil-fields and because of the tourism. If you watch the map closely you'll find dollar signs everywhere in the south.

The north is mainly an agrarian and industrial (a bit) society. Even if it's "communist" it seems to be supported by the people. In the campaign southerners flee to the north because the monarch in the south haves his citizens executed. The north liberates the south. It's a vietnam-like scenario.

If there's a monarch in power in the south then it cannot be a dictatorship, me thinks...

[Spokesperson 0]

Absolute monarchy = dictatorship.

The island doesn't make sense when it comes to geography. Politically it makes sense. That's a required compromise for the meaning behind the story.

Last OFP was entirely pro-US. It was very shallow in logics and reasons. Arma on the other side beautifully discovers the mechanisms behind geopolitics, media and propaganda. The US soldiers and everyone else that believes in the propaganda think they fight for the right cause. But the real things are covered up by the kings men. (Wiping a US-troop out as soon as they found out about the _refugee_ camp for instance).