Map is too big?

[bearcollector 0]

Anyone that thinks the map is too large should take an afternoon to play a few missions off of the single player campaign of Arma 2 or Operation Arrowhead. Nearly every one of those missions involves traveling long distances.

Or you could just play one of the already existing multilayer missions like Coop Domination or Warfare. Both of them take place over the entire map and require players to travel from one end to the other.

The Arma2 engine was not the only engine available to the developers to build this mod. If Rocket wanted this game to be based off of a smaller map don't you think they would have chosen a different game to use? Hell, why didn't they choose one of the smaller maps that comes with Arm2 or operation Arrowhead, such as Utes or Zargrabad.

EDIT: I also think that the maximum of 50 players per server is fine the way it is too. DayZ takes place in a small post soviet state. This is not a sprawling epicenter of civilization with major cities even before a zombie apocalypse. Its a poor rural country.

[griffinz 2816]

oh my god, a complaint about the map size...

...it has begun

[oilman 72]

rocket why havent you made at least thirty new maps yet you call this an alpha this is ridiculous you are a terrible developer

[cat (DayZ) 22]

-----About needles in a haystack and the illusion of threat

The map is too large

Assuming the game map without water is ~200 square kilometers. Then the average density on a 50 player server is 4 square kilometers PER PLAYER. That means if evenly distributed, each player has a box of 2x2 kilometers all by himself.

Taking into account the average density of obstacles, like buildings, trees and terrain the average unobstructed viewdistance is less than one kilometer. Further taking into account that if you do not run the game on full AA and high resolution the visibilty of other players is reduced further.

Taking all of the above into account, the average player who does not constantly scan the area for other humans will only notice other moving players on a maximum distance of 200-300m.

That is basically needles trying to find each other in a haystack.

So to recap all of this:

On a 50 player server:

-4 square kilometers per player

-Unobstructed view distance: less than one kilometer

-Practical spotting distance: 200-300m

Now some may argue, a chance this low to find other players is good, it enhances the sense of loneliness and dread. But that is just an illusion. Statistically you are very safe by simply running around on your own. And that loneliness is not dread, it is perfect safety. I designed quite some missions for all arma and flashpoint games, and while an empty landscape with creepy music seems foreboding and dangerous, it is in reality a peaceful, void space, simply because you can not populate the map densely enough with zombies to uphold a sense of constant danger. Hardware limitations and bandwith are limits to this.

So if you remove the creepy music and look at the statistic reality of it, a game on a map this large degenerates to peaceful hiking with teh occasional food can hunt in a village.

And this perceived illusion of threat will quickly wear of to experienced players and the only real threat will be interaction with other players, which is too rare because the huge playable map waters it down.

So I would like to propose this:

1

Create variants of the game where only half or a quarter of the actual map is accessible. Halving it would still leave each player with 2 square kilometers for himself.

2

Offer the same mission on Takistan. Here is why:

It is much less tough on the CPU and GPU because there is less object density on the map.

The landscape is wide open, with only concentrated dense areas scattered. This has several advantages:

Players can see others from farther away, because the practical spotting distance is far higher.

Also Tak offers far more enterable buildings which allows players to fortify in places.

NOTE: Moderators please do not remove this threat by assuming it is just another "map too large" topic, as I am clearly explaining the reasons in detail why that is.

the issue:

You have to look REALLY hard to find danger. and in a survival game, avoiding danger should be harder than looking for it. And that is not the case on a map this large.

[mir00 2]

In theory - map is huge and its hard to find players.

In practice - ravel routes are known, points of interest are also mapped. That makes meeting another players very easy and map is actually way-way smaller.

[BlackAlpha 12]

-----About needles in a haystack and the illusion of threat

The map is too large

...

You have to look REALLY hard to find danger. and in a survival game' date=' avoiding danger should be harder than looking for it. And that is not the case on a map this large.[/size']

Very detailed post... and yet it can be debunked with a single sentence:

Go to known travel routes or popular towns, in the north or south, and you'll find an abundance of people.

Conclusion:

It's currently easy to find people. So what you said is not true.

As an additional counter argument. If you make the map any smaller, you'll turn the map into what is happening right now at Cherno/Electro. The game will be ruined, as it will become a regular PvP game.

Also, putting this mod on Takistan will turn the game into a sniper nightmare. It will completely ruin the atmosphere of this mod. It's a very bad idea!

[Sabre (DayZ) 4]

Bottom line: The map isn't too big.

The map is too big.

Solution to your problem:

Uninstall Arma 2!

[duffbeeer 2]

The game ist still in Alpha. Why dont you people get it and just relax and wait what rocket has in store for us.

[MR DELICIOUS 297]

The map's not too large for me (perhaps too small). Really though, it's all about map variation and density. I love the change in rhythm from cities to towns to villages, however, I would really like to see some bigger cities in the middle of the map. Perhaps a sister city to Chern, or maybe two Chern sized cities near the north or middle of the map. It would be awesome to have a disease center by in the largest one, and perhaps have four times the amount of zombies one would usually encounter, along with the certain spawn of good gear (the barracks spawn template). It would pull the experienced players away from the coast and force team work PVE due to the sheer amount of bullets and firepower someone has to put downrange to kill that many zombies.

Similarly, areas I would like to fight through or see in the game:

*Abandoned fun fair.

*Old stepped quarry.

*Marsh land.

*Spaghetti Junction.

*I'd love a big highway bisecting the island (a four - six lane kind of thing). It could be strewn with cars and buses - some working, some not, some filled with supplies, some not.

*Big enterable estates.

*Road tunnels.

*Old cinema complexes.

Etc, etc, etc.

Changing the topographical texture of the game over such a large area would give the impression of a more dense map simply because there are so many distinguishing landmarks and features. Also, this isn't a criticism, it's just a wish.

[oilman 72]

I fully agree with Mr Delicious. It's like I always say to prospective mates: It's not about the size, it's about what you're doing with it.

[duffbeeer 2]

Yeah thats why people should prolly keep tight and wait what the other 80 % content are rocket has planned for this mod.

[griffinz 2816]

nothing is planned...its seat-of-your-pants!

[codeine 3]

The map's not too large for me (perhaps too small). Really though' date=' it's all about map variation and density. I love the change in rhythm from cities to towns to villages, however, I would really like to see some bigger cities in the middle of the map. Perhaps a sister city to Chern, or maybe two Chern sized cities near the north or middle of the map. It would be awesome to have a disease center by in the largest one, and perhaps have four times the amount of zombies one would usually encounter, along with the certain spawn of good gear (the barracks spawn template). It would pull the experienced players away from the coast and force team work PVE due to the sheer amount of bullets and firepower someone has to put downrange to kill that many zombies.

Similarly, areas I would like to fight through or see in the game:

*Abandoned fun fair.

*Old stepped quarry.

*Marsh land.

*Spaghetti Junction.

*I'd love a big highway bisecting the island (a four - six lane kind of thing). It could be strewn with cars and buses - some working, some not, some filled with supplies, some not.

*Big enterable estates.

*Road tunnels.

*Old cinema complexes.

Etc, etc, etc.

[/quote']

+1 I agree and have often thought if more things like that which should be added.

Is the arma 2 engine capable of these things? or will arma3's engine be more suited?

[sleepless 22]

IMHO the map is fine. Lets not have one of those ga,es where the devs feel the need to fill every square inch with a mob. The map feels desolate, just right for a post apocalyptic world. If you want action 24/7 youre in the wrong game, there are lots of those type, just thinking of zombie games left4dead springs to mind.

[Malaclypse 3]

If anything I'd like an even larger map.

[JimiEZ (DayZ) 0]

For me the tension comes from the very fact that bumping into other players is fairly rare, when you're out in the wilderness. If it was a constant occurrence, it wouldn't be nearly as exciting as it is now, when you know that running into someone is fairly unlikely, but still it is possible. You can find yourself face to face with another player any time and anywhere, and you might have hostile eyes upon you at any given moment.

You can't just mechanistically calculate that the total area is a and the amount of players is b and thus the density is c and thus the odds of running into are d, because that is assuming that players are somehow evenly distributed along the whole map, which isn't even close to reality. Barring just randomly travelling in the middle of the woods, you probably have a reason of going to some place. Chances are that someone else thought of the exact same thing and is there for that same reason as you, which means that the chances of running into other players is actually a lot higher than simple density calculations would let you believe.

So no, map size definitely isn't too big and there shouldn't be more than 50 players per server, unless you plan on completely ruining the atmosphere of the mod.

[oktyabr 53]

Arma3's default map is four times bigger than the Chernarus map, if you count the water. That means that the engine is optimized too. Chernarus was state of the art when it was first released. Why aren't there custom maps that size or bigger? Because it's HARD to do without ending up with a map only people with quad core liquid cooled sli machines will be able to play.

[JimiEZ (DayZ) 0]

-----About needles in a haystack and the illusion of threat

The map is too large

Assuming the game map without water is ~200 square kilometers. Then the average density on a 50 player server is 4 square kilometers PER PLAYER. That means if evenly distributed' date=' each player has a box of 2x2 kilometers all by himself.

Taking into account the average density of obstacles, like buildings, trees and terrain the average unobstructed viewdistance is less than one kilometer. Further taking into account that if you do not run the game on full AA and high resolution the visibilty of other players is reduced further.

Taking all of the above into account, the average player who does not constantly scan the area for other humans will only notice other moving players on a maximum distance of 200-300m.

That is basically needles trying to find each other in a haystack.

So to recap all of this:

On a 50 player server:

-4 square kilometers per player

-Unobstructed view distance: less than one kilometer

-Practical spotting distance: 200-300m

Now some may argue, a chance this low to find other players is good, it enhances the sense of loneliness and dread. But that is just an illusion. Statistically you are very safe by simply running around on your own. And that loneliness is not dread, it is perfect safety. I designed quite some missions for all arma and flashpoint games, and while an empty landscape with creepy music seems foreboding and dangerous, it is in reality a peaceful, void space, simply because you can not populate the map densely enough with zombies to uphold a sense of constant danger. Hardware limitations and bandwith are limits to this.

So if you remove the creepy music and look at the statistic reality of it, a game on a map this large degenerates to peaceful hiking with teh occasional food can hunt in a village.

And this perceived illusion of threat will quickly wear of to experienced players and the only real threat will be interaction with other players, which is too rare because the huge playable map waters it down.

So I would like to propose this:

1

Create variants of the game where only half or a quarter of the actual map is accessible. Halving it would still leave each player with 2 square kilometers for himself.

2

Offer the same mission on Takistan. Here is why:

It is much less tough on the CPU and GPU because there is less object density on the map.

The landscape is wide open, with only concentrated dense areas scattered. This has several advantages:

Players can see others from farther away, because the practical spotting distance is far higher.

Also Tak offers far more enterable buildings which allows players to fortify in places.

NOTE: Moderators please do not remove this threat by assuming it is just another "map too large" topic, as I am clearly explaining the reasons in detail why that is.

the issue:

You have to look REALLY hard to find danger. and in a survival game, avoiding danger should be harder than looking for it. And that is not the case on a map this large.

For me the tension comes from the very fact that bumping into other players is fairly rare, when you're out in the wilderness. If it was a constant occurrence, it wouldn't be nearly as exciting as it is now, when you know that running into someone is fairly unlikely, but still it is possible. You can find yourself face to face with another player any time and anywhere, and you might have hostile eyes upon you at any given moment.

Also, you can't just mechanistically calculate that the total area is a and the amount of players is b and thus the density is c and thus the odds of running into are d, because that is assuming that players are somehow evenly distributed along the whole map, which isn't even close to reality. Barring just randomly travelling in the middle of the woods, you probably have a reason of going to some place. Chances are someone else thought of the exact same thing and is there for that same reason, which means that the chances of running into other players is actually a lot higher than simple density calculations will let you believe.

So no, map size definitely isn't too big and there shouldn't be more than 50 players per server, unless you plan on completely ruining the atmosphere of the mod.

[oktyabr 53]

By his calculations a server with 1000 zombies on it means 5 per square km and if there are 4 square km per player then that means 20 zed per player.

Don't worry about the map being so big it's boring. Worry about what you are going to do with 1000+ zombies on the map (again!) and some of them in the woods...

[Lady Kyrah 1110]

If we could have a heatmap of player movements around the map you would see very high density in places like novy sobor, the airflields, the coasts, roads and paths, some density in the "beeline paths" in the forest that connect a hot spot to another, and also some sectors that receive nearly no players because there is nothing there and it's on no direct paths.

So yeah uniform density isn't the best calculation to use for this, even if it gives you an interesting view of how wildly different the theory is from what's actually going on.

[SnR 16]

Don't worry about the map being so big it's boring. Worry about what you are going to do with 1000+ zombies on the map (again!) and some of them in the woods...

Also worry about the negative effect on server and stabliity

[oktyabr 53]

Don't worry about the map being so big it's boring. Worry about what you are going to do with 1000+ zombies on the map (again!) and some of them in the woods...

Also worry about the negative effect on server and stabliity

You are a server host... is this the reason zombie counts have been so low lately? I know we had 1200+ zed at times early on in this mod. I also know that this mod was the first to actually pull it off with any sort of stability. Inquiring minds want to know?

[walou 3]

You dont see a lot of people, but it feels great to think there may be people watching you.

[orbital 10]

10 pages of fairly pointless discussions...

Chernarus is where it's at people. ARMA is all about large maps.

While crossing the contryside, spend some time thinking about how much work it would require to move this mod to another map.