Map Boarders

[gorvi 189]

One issue some players have with the map is how the North and West boarders are going to work.  I think it would be a good idea to have it filled in with very thick woods instead of some sort of invisible wall.  The deeper the player gets, the more fresh infected or predator animals are spawned which are programmed to automatically target the player(s) until they are away from the boarder.

 

I'm not in favor of an actual wall or fence or anything.  That would feel unnatural unless there was some sort of lore behind it like the Berlin wall or something.  Rather, I would like to see some sort of game mechanic or gameplay which deters players from venturing that far to the maps edge.  Increasing infected or predator spawns coupled with natural or biological barriers would be a great way to achieve this.  Infected with increased spawns and/or their life cycles beginning there will deter players from wanting to hang around the very edge of the map when most gameplay should be focused away from it. 

 

The main idea is stopping players from exploiting the map boarder either by pinning players against an arbitrary game mechanic such as invisible walls or by camping near the boarder.  A never ending stream of infected coming in from the rest of the region coupled with predators, biohazards, and naturally blocking terrain would make a great way to counter this.

[GaryWalnuts 1680]

I always thought that a bio-hazard fog, smog or smoke around the edge of the map would suit both the impenetrable part and the visual part.   Get too close and your health drops quickly or you get sick.    And you could make it tall enough that you can't see debug from the edge of the map hilltops.

Of course, not being a programmer I have no idea how hard this would be to implement or if it would crush server performance.

[gorvi 189]

10 minutes ago, GaryWalnuts said:

I always thought that a bio-hazard fog, smog or smoke around the edge of the map would suit both the impenetrable part and the visual part.   Get too close and your health drops quickly or you get sick.    And you could make it tall enough that you can't see debug from the edge of the map hilltops.

Of course, not being a programmer I have no idea how hard this would be to implement or if it would crush server performance.

I would like to see this as well, but combined with natural barriers, man made ones such as fences, infected migration, and possible additional AI spawns the closer players get to the boarder.

[Baker. 1484]

I support the natural barriers 

 

[gorvi 189]

Natural barriers does seem like the natural solution.

Edited February 7, 2018 by gorvi

[Just Caused 423]

I was always impressed by how well Dying Light took care of map borders. Here's a picture in one of my gameplays. Following the lore, they closed of part of the city with thick, 3 meters tall cement walls and estabilished quarantine zone. In nighttime, you can clearly see lights from buildings that are far away in distance and it gives you this, somekind of depressing emotion. You're stuck, trapped in a city full of zombies and you cannot get out. Civilisation is right there infront of your nose and yet you cannot exit quarantine zone. I'd really like something like that to be used in DayZ. Of course, there will be problems since Chernarus is more village-ish map. No skyscrapers or anything, it'd be wierd to have 3 meters cement walls in middle of forest.

[gorvi 189]

10 minutes ago, Just Caused said:

 Of course, there will be problems since Chernarus is more village-ish map. No skyscrapers or anything, it'd be wierd to have 3 meters cement walls in middle of forest.

This is the issue I see as well.  It could partially work if there was some sort of attempt at quarantining.  Military forces tried to erect a fence starting from the main roads before they were overrun so it only extends so far.  The other spots could be some sort of natural barrier, biohazard zones, etc.

[Baker. 1484]

2 hours ago, gorvi said:

Natural barriers does seem like the natural solution.

Naturally 

[Kirov (DayZ) 585]

First I have a question - can someone with programming experience tell me what the Debug Plains really are, in essence? I mean, why not a force field, which is equally arbitrary? What's the purpose here?

And I know that there's no persistence or loot on the Debug, but what happens when you get caught there on the restart? Are there any special rules for our toons? I noticed recently that it actually rains (when it rains) on the Debug Plains and I wondered why bother.

 

And coming back to the topic:

 

On 07/02/2018 at 12:25 AM, gorvi said:

Infected with increased spawns and/or their life cycles beginning there will deter players from wanting to hang around the very edge of the map when most gameplay should be focused away from it. 

I see three problems with this idea:

1) The 'jungle' with zeds and predators like the one you mention is just going to make the map smaller, and I'm afraid it's a big no-no for me. Besides there's no reason to do that (i.e. it's just a waste of content already in game).

2) The way you implement barriers is very important. The increased infected spawn will not only be irrelevant (due to the aircraft simply flying over) but actually counterproductive. I mean, introduce that feature and literally the first thing I'm gonna do is try to penetrate that line with grenades and big guns. What you described is a challenge/quest, not an obstacle of any kind. And many other kinds of barriers could be considered 'unrealistic' and actually kill immersion (come on, nobody's that stupid as to actually try and wall off a country or its part oh wait). Yeah, I understand that the Debug Plains are 'unrealistic', but they may be actually easier to swallow than a fence which pretends to be a man-made quarantine, in the same sense that I'd rather talk with C3PO that a 'human-like' robot. At least the devs are honest and blunt here: "The game ends here, go back. Oh yes, you can go farther, but it's pointless and potentially risky, so WTF would you?'.

3) But first and foremost - you're trying to solve a problem which I believe is not there in the first place. Are you really so lonely in Novy Sobor because everyone else hangs out in Stary Yar? For I have a hard time believing that people tend to flock there in any considerable extent. Yeah, people like to set up their camps at the borders, but it's hardly an issue. The Western strip is as welcoming to campers as it is to camp-robbers. As to the North/North-East, your camps may be safer there, but also much harder to reach, and don't forget the spawn points in Berezhki and around. But really, people just don't go there, or maybe they check out the car spawns. For faraway lands, there is always a trade-off between security and accessibility, and few people bother. At best, they drop their mil tents and go back. Obviously there's more traffic around Tisy, Myshkino and Kamensk. But all in all, I believe the edges serve the purpose intended by the designers.

[BeefBacon 1185]

I suspect that there will never be a proper map border, unfortunately, even though it's something that has been suggested over and over again for years. Aircraft also complicates the issue since they could simply fly over any barrier. Some have suggested that there could be off-map SAM sites that shoot down escaping aircraft, others have suggested a sort of soft wall that slows aircraft down to a stop or forces them to turn around. There are lots of ways to create a good map border but, again, I doubt the devs are willing to actually create one for a range of reasons - for example, I don't think they can increase the map size any further, so the only way they could create a map border that extends into the distance would be to make the actual playable area smaller. At least I think that's true.

[Reaper TDO 14]

Ok so Map Boarders well they could have the north as the black mountains and maybe have a mill base set up inside the mountain and to access it you have to go through a secret door of some sort at the kemensk mill base plus they could have a couple of mountain villagers too and maybe a mill base/town  near the top which is where the soldier lived who worked at kamensk and the mountain base too then just have it if you look beyond the mountain all you see is a fog or mist 

To the west you could have more towns villagers maybe a large city with a dam which used to power key places then you could have it go in to fields with large farms a few mill outpost then it leads into a large forest with say hunting cabins and summer camps then you hit the fog or mist as for tisy mill the underground bunker should be open to access a mill med centre or a bioweapon centre of some sort. 

[Kirov (DayZ) 585]

1 hour ago, BeefBacon said:

I don't think they can increase the map size any further

Interesting. Are you sure, vaguely recalling or just guessing? And why do you think that is so?

I know next to nothing about programming, but can't think of a reason preventing such a change by the very game creators.

[Dancing.Russian.Man 1631]

As far as literally "expanding" the map, it's probably not about it being impossible, but not feasible due to however the terrain/maps are created.

As for what the "debug plains/forest" is, is just an infinite/procedurally generated terrain (and water). I'm not entirely sure what the purpose is aside from it being a cheap way to surround the map with something solid, much like how other games have "sky boxes" to create a backdrop/illusion that stuff exists far in the distance, even if you can't ever go there. This is especially important for aerial vehicles like BeefBacon mentioned, which would be able to see far past the map's borders anyway.

Of course, you could force players from leaving the map by implementing some kind of "turn back or u die" mechanic, but I think it's unnecessary effort because most people won't try to go there once they realize there's nothing there. Maybe they'll do it for entertainment, but not for gameplay (at least now that stuff doesn't save in the debug plains like in ARMA 2).

[gorvi 189]

3 hours ago, Kirov (DayZ) said:

I see three problems with this idea:

You see problems with anything.  Lets discuss solutions which can give the appearance of a natural landscape which deters players rather than just ignoring it and going "oh well".  That sort of logic could have been used with many gameplay features.  Devs are trying really hard to avoid any immersion breaking aspects of the game.

To answer your questions.

1. Extremes which dont apply

2. Easily done from a lore stand point.  Armies, especially European ones, love their checkpoints and fences.  We already know there was an attempt at quarantine which failed.  This would account for partialy completed fences.

3. See above.  For a new player with fresh eyes, coming across the debug plains would rip you right out of the world devs are trying to immerse users into.

[Guy Smiley 534]

Or, or, hear me out....  Wait until the game is done to see what the devs came up with.  You guys with me on this?  

[Guy Smiley 534]

Hmmmm, keeps getting stuck on saving so it made a duplicate post

Edited February 9, 2018 by Guy Smiley
Duplicate post

[cirkular 178]

Well, there were talks about this many times I guess, and we had a discussion about this again, in another thread a couple of months ago, as Baker pointed out. Now, I don't know much about lore, neither developers ideas on this, since I can't recall ever reading anything about it yet in status reports. So again, I had a suggestion for the north map "border" that could seem natural. So what do you think about this:

1. As we see on this big old Arma 2 map, there is a river flow towards east and into the sea. Earlier, I was suggesting to make a sort of a gorge or a canyon out of that river flow to make it a kind of a border towards north. Maybe that's neither a good or a bad idea. It kind of depends on the available vehicles/aircrafts as you should be able to fly over pretty easily.

2. But just north of it we have the Black mountains spreading all across. What if that's where the terrain starts to raise and really becomes impenetrable with dangerous cliffs, thick tall forests and from there you could see mountains with visible snow tops not far into the distance.

3. Additionally and consequently, this terrain should feel COLDER then anything felt throughout Chernarus. Assuming there would be no existing equipment in game to survive up there, thus forcing you away from it.

I mean, that sounds better to me instead of making the border just filled with some poisonous gases (it's still just some virus outbreak that occurred). Or some attempt previously made by the military to quarantine the zone (quite a distance to cover, still not that it can compete with the Trump wall). Or missile sites, which I don't believe anyone could operate in the first place since it's a major outbreak throughout the world.

[gorvi 189]

3 hours ago, cirkular said:

Well, there were talks about this many times I guess, and we had a discussion about this again, in another thread a couple of months ago, as Baker pointed out. Now, I don't know much about lore, neither developers ideas on this, since I can't recall ever reading anything about it yet in status reports. So again, I had a suggestion for the north map "border" that could seem natural

The current maps size isn't going to be expanded but there is no reason why it couldn't be added into a new map after release.

 

Altis is almost 4 times the size of south zagoria.  Thats on the the old engine.  I could see a full sized Chernarus map being possible with Enfusion.

[HarryUp 0]

5 hours ago, gorvi said:

The current maps size isn't going to be expanded but there is no reason why it couldn't be added into a new map after release.

 

Altis is almost 4 times the size of south zagoria.  Thats on the the old engine.  I could see a full sized Chernarus map being possible with Enfusion.

Because map making in Enfusion is complicated on it's own. Player made maps often took years to finish, and still they miss this Armish style of atmosphere. The point I'm trying to make is that they would have to set up another department to do so.

[BeefBacon 1185]

20 hours ago, Kirov (DayZ) said:

Interesting. Are you sure, vaguely recalling or just guessing? And why do you think that is so?

I know next to nothing about programming, but can't think of a reason preventing such a change by the very game creators.

Vague recollection. I think it might have had something to do with object coordinates, or something? So increasing the map size would scatter everything about weirdly. In any case, I'm certain that the devs have said that they won't be increasing the size of Chernarus. Could be because they can't, could be because they won't.

[gorvi 189]

9 hours ago, HarryUp said:

Because map making in Enfusion is complicated on it's own. Player made maps often took years to finish, and still they miss this Armish style of atmosphere. The point I'm trying to make is that they would have to set up another department to do so.

Not entirely.  VSB3 has shown its possible to have automatically generated terrain.  I know they are different branches of the engine, especially now with Enfusion, but it does show that its something which is possible to reduce workload.

Besides.  I said this could be planned after release as DLC or something.  As it stands, Chernarus+ is the main focus for the release candidate.

[emuthreat 2837]

6 hours ago, BeefBacon said:

Vague recollection. I think it might have had something to do with object coordinates, or something? So increasing the map size would scatter everything about weirdly. In any case, I'm certain that the devs have said that they won't be increasing the size of Chernarus. Could be because they can't, could be because they won't.

When the experimental servers had the positional data in the debug box, the axes were a bit odd.  In the order they were displayed, I would label them (X,Y,Z)  For purposes of finding one's location, the middle number was irrelevant. 
Moderate X value and low Z value would indicate a Cherno spawn, high X value and low Z value would indicate Skalisty/Tulga spawn,  high X and high Z would indicate Svetlojarsk spawn.

IIRC, the X axis started at the west edge of the map, determined East/West position, and increased to the right.  The Y axis started at sea level and corresponded to elevation, increasing vertically.  The Z axis began at the south edge of the map, and determined North/South position, and increased to the north.

This might be irrelevant to why they cannot expand the map, but if it were relevant, this would likely limit any map expansions to the north and east without having to redefine everything.

[Dancing.Russian.Man 1631]

38 minutes ago, emuthreat said:

When the experimental servers had the positional data in the debug box, the axes were a bit odd.  In the order they were displayed, I would label them (X,Y,Z)  For purposes of finding one's location, the middle number was irrelevant. 
Moderate X value and low Z value would indicate a Cherno spawn, high X value and low Z value would indicate Skalisty/Tulga spawn,  high X and high Z would indicate Svetlojarsk spawn.

IIRC, the X axis started at the west edge of the map, determined East/West position, and increased to the right.  The Y axis started at sea level and corresponded to elevation, increasing vertically.  The Z axis began at the south edge of the map, and determined North/South position, and increased to the north.

This might be irrelevant to why they cannot expand the map, but if it were relevant, this would likely limit any map expansions to the north and east without having to redefine everything.

That is indeed irrelevant. It does not make any difference which direction the XYZ axes point toward, and it is common for the Y axis to point "up." (And as an equally irrelevant side-note, it's a sin for Y to point up.) Adjusting the positions of all world objects could be done programmatically as well, so that's not an obstacle for expanding the map. The dev team has created much more complex things.

Why are we speculating on whether or not it's possible, though? We don't have the necessary technical details for a productive discussion about it.

We've already been told the map is not going to be expanded, only populated with more details and I think that's a much better thing. Going back to the "how could you blend the border naturally" would be a much better area for debate.

Edited February 9, 2018 by Dancing.Russian.Man

[-Gews- 7443]

8 hours ago, BeefBacon said:

Vague recollection. I think it might have had something to do with object coordinates, or something? So increasing the map size would scatter everything about weirdly. In any case, I'm certain that the devs have said that they won't be increasing the size of Chernarus. Could be because they can't, could be because they won't.

Q: Will the actual size of the map ever increase?

A: Unfortunately we are limited by the physical size of map that was set at the Chernarus for Arma 2 (15.360km x 15.360 km) long time ago, perhaps in the future we will find a way to extend the border, but right now talking about it too early.

[cirkular 178]

19 hours ago, gorvi said:

The current maps size isn't going to be expanded but there is no reason why it couldn't be added into a new map after release.

Altis is almost 4 times the size of south zagoria.  Thats on the the old engine.  I could see a full sized Chernarus map being possible with Enfusion.

Regarding this I'd say 'wow', since I didn't know about Altis map size. But I won't :D since I checked now and the size of Altis is 270 km2. South Zagoria is 225 km2 (15x15km).

Anyway, I'd go and use harsh weather that we already have, which has been a real headache, combined with rough terrain to make the north 'border' believable. Black mountains are there anyway.

As far as the west border solution, it's pretty unfortunate with the current terrain and also a road and a logical free pass by the sea to the south-west out of South Zagoria. We already found out long time ago what's the whole Chernarus like with that old map...