Beyond the Western Desert

This is the last time I will speak on this subject. I remove "qclocation", "global_layer" and even "mapdata", MAW continues to function normally, so my question is: where are the air bases of MAW?
 
dewoitine said:
This is the last time I will speak on this subject. I remove "qclocation", "global_layer" and even "mapdata", MAW continues to function normally, so my question is: where are the air bases of MAW?
Click to expand...
Maybe we should ask the people who created MAW.
 
I think we are dealing with some language barriers here. This thread hasn't got anything to do with MAW and nothing here will add anything to MAW when it is released.

It seems like you might be making changes to one installation of MAW, but flying another one?
 
This is the last time I will speak on this subject. I remove "qclocation", "global_layer" and even "mapdata", MAW continues to function normally, so my question is: where are the air bases of MAW?
Click to expand...

did you try my above suggestion of creating a copy of MAW and then editing the files you mentioned?
 
Wow!! Can you share the secret please?
Click to expand...

As mentioned above , I am calling an airfield in the global layer and QC file with height set to the carrier's normal deck level. The airfield has a flatten plane size of 256x256m. I call two 0 elevation flatten facilities on to the right and left of the airfield so the hill is 128x256 which is the best I can do.

Your aircraft carrier has to be edited in gmax to have the deck at 0 meters(or close) in z direction. The carrier will be basically underground.

You then have to create a new invisible landclass to add to .lcf file. the new landclass just needs to call a .mos file that does not exist. Paint the new landlass on your lcf .tiff map and add to your lcf texture list and compile with tiff2lcf tool.

As stated, this approach has some problems. The plateau is a bit wider and longer than the carrier. Also the shadows dont cast correctly . Thats not quite as noticeable if you fly at midday. Of course the carrier does not move or have catapult etc.
 
As a matter of interest, why is it that we can't have a carrier as a regular ship and land on it? Did CFS2 have moving carriers?
 
The problem is the deck height above the water surface. The plane wants to land on the surface, and not on the deck. The previous work around was a ship model that was a flat deck at the surface of the sea for landing and take off (only visible at close range), but appeared normally once the LOD resolution dropped when you got farther away. A bit jarring to see, but it worked.

House Hobbit found a way to do air starts down at ship heights for some of his missions to simulate catapult launches.

I've always wondered it we couldn't just use specialty aircraft models where the contact points offsets are such that they match the distance of the deck above the sea surface. The problem with that comes when the plane comes to a stop, and the ship keeps on moving out from under it.
 
"You then have to create a new invisible landclass to add to .lcf file. the new landclass just needs to call a .mos file that does not exist. Paint the new landlass on your lcf .tiff map and add to your lcf texture list and compile with tiff2lcf tool."

Thanks Steve, what does the Land class entry do and I'm presuming the new one has to placed where the carrier will sit?
 
Thanks Steve, I did have a read but then had to lie down for a bit afterwards! I still don't understand why the land-class is needed for the carrier, is it to make the 'hill' transparent?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top