Project Reality Forums

FusionGames wrote: This is intended to be more accurate or more realistic? Cause if for more accurate i think the old system was still good, and for more realistic you can set coordinates in numbers (latitude, etc).

It is more accurate. With the new marker system you can judge distance by grids. in 1k, 2k, 4k maps have each grid as 75m, 150m, 300m respectively. Plus them being smaller you can more accurately mark the location of targets. With the old one weve started to resort to 'sub' keypads to get more accurate locations as simply one keypad was still a very large area.

Only real problem with the new ones is as already said is should hve slightly increased opacity, can barely read the numbers/letters sometimes depending on the colour of the map in those places.

The new grid is probably my only gripe about the new update. Other than that, and the CTDs, .95 is spot-on.

new system is better than before. the distance corrispondance with the keypads makes a lot more sense than before. ill admit its difficult to ead the alphabet and numbers but i had no problem reading the lines and the grid itself. not bad for the first attempt at a complicated new system.

Could just go wit the arma Grid System. 000, 000

'[md wrote:MadMak[rus];1470229']We need topographic map.

Yes, that's what I want

[quote=""'[md"]MadMak[rus];1470229']We need topographic map.[/quote]

[quote="SGT.Ice""]Yes, that's what I want[/quote]

There was a topographic map project in the past, it was ditched because soldiers don't use them. They're more likely to have satellite/surveillance photos these days. Fact is, a topo map takes a fair amount of experience with both maps and terrain to make sense of, while an aerial photo (especially a group including different angles) is much simpler.

Here's the old project:
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f388-p ... imaps.html

This post and the few following it address the realism aspect:
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f388-p ... post925529

we use ariel photographs with a grid overlay irl. so good effort but tbh the current editor minimaps are the most realistic.

So there will be no topo maps, now stop going off-topic in this thread.


I don't know if I said so earlier in this thread, but I personally haven't had much of a problem with the new grids. Only issue I've had is lines in some spots blending into the image, but didn't really slow me down

[R-MOD]BloodBane611 wrote:

I don't know if I said so earlier in this thread, but I personally haven't had much of a problem with the new grids. Only issue I've had is lines in some spots blending into the image, but didn't really slow me down

I'm in full agreement here, I don't have a problem with it, I actually think it looks better then it did before. I could see where the lines might blend together, but after a bit of practice it's really easy to just trace a line down, use your mouse if you must.

It would work on topographical maps,but on this colours it doesnt stand out enough.

Yeah I liked the other grid system better too.. Often I just open the map and need to much time to read the grids and then keypad... And on many maps you can't really see the labeling properly!

Solutions I propose to adjust new grid system:
-Adjust opacity of lines for each minimap.
-For the 7th row and column, reiterate the letters and numbers (probably in a more subtle opacity).
-Do the Golf column and the 7 row's borders in Red to mark that as the middle lines of the map. (Maybe)

Aim is to make determining references slightly more convenient (and thus faster).

eztonia wrote:The fact that N,S,E,W are not there is also bugging me. I know that is obvious the N up,S is down etc. but as English is not my native language and if I need to report something quickly, I still manage to mix up E and W. Its not a huge problem but I reckon its not a huge deal to put them there either.

I agree, I miss the compass on the map. The new letters of the grid system are also harder to read.