Afghan War Diary - wikileaks

[sick1 13]

I have to agree here. While the reports are very interesting, there is nothing in them that hasn't been done before here. The key is to make missions that are high quality, including voice acting and cut scenes. There are so many missions coming out that lack the polish to set them apart. If you made a campaign including lets say 10 of the most unique reports and added voice work along with intro and outros, then you would have something.

[Jonn 10]

Will check this out :)

[Ryujin 0]

@TV-PressPass: The mortar kicked in since I was running the SLX mod, which adds in some better AI behavior (like using mortars, more suppressive fire, etc). It has some issues, but it's great for making a tad more realistic firefight (not quite perfect). With it running the AI took some initiative, layed down lots of fire on the outpost, and tried to attack from the east flank. It after the mortars hit about 5 mins in (killing two of my guys and knocking out our mortar) it turned into a pretty desperate fight for me and the SAW gunner, we nearly ran out of ammo before the enemy started retreating and we could finish em off. I think this made for a bit different experience (lots of rounds put down by both sides, lower percentage of actual hits).

[CarlGustaffa 4]

So I've downloaded this whole mess and try to read it. But all my browsers (IE, FF, and Opera) seems to be unable to read "offline material" - no links works. I've googled it and it seems to be a security "feature". Now in an environment where there are just a few pages, no problem, I just point directly and it works. But for 90000 or so pages - no way.

Any ideas?

[VariousArtist 19]

I think its very interesting, 98% of the reports go like this as far as I can see."Found IED. Removed it". "Indirect Fire. No casualties". Pretty boring and predictable. As for Wikileaks, they don't give a damm about Journalism. Even the NY times contacts numerous government agencies before posting sensitive material. Wikileaks doesn't care about the operators in the field. They are exposing response times and tactics of ODA teams, local followers on are side, and double agents working for us. I would like to see a mission made were you have to find and capture the creator of Wiki leaks. This would be great!!

Ive loled! You need to think before you post! If you mention NYT think about "lobbyism"! To me its known that WL does not post material that can reveal any material that can bring persons into difficult situations that they dont deserve. You sir are a media-parrot! ;)

[kristofer 10]

I just finished it. Nice mission, but my AI teammates can't use mortar FPDR :)

Thanks

[megagoth1702 252]

i like the idea of converting the real missions in to arma 2 (OA is already pretty realistic but it always can be better)

OA is realistic? Try OA + ACE + ACRE , hehehe...

I have troubles getting my 14 KIA, I look for them thru my scope, find some, put a few mortar rounds on them and do the rest with my gun & sqd.

However, I found at most 10-11 guys.

Boring? Hell, this is a real life mission. In real life the soldiers are kinda happy that they are not "in the shit" all the time, they do all they can to save a life. Insurgens and BLUFOR troops. This is why insurgents retreat and BLUFORs call in CAS.

Arma2 is considered a game but actually, it's not. Especially noth with these kinds of missions.

When I had a choice in some missions I would do NOTHING but staying up on my hill and lazing targets for bombs & hellfires, but since the mission developer wants all teh 1337 action I gotta take this damn town full of insurgents with my 8man sqd, yea...

Love this, keep it going.

Edited July 29, 2010 by megagoth1702

[sick1 13]

Ive loled! You need to think before you post! If you mention NYT think about "lobbyism"! To me its known that WL does not post material that can reveal any material that can bring persons into difficult situations that they dont deserve. You sir are a media-parrot! ;)

I'm not saying I like or dislike NYT, I'm saying that at least they have common sense not to print any classified information which could endanger troops in the field. It's classified for a reason. Please tell me how this information does not hurt troops in the field and are you saying the people in those reports got what they deserved? I'm not trying to flame bate, but why don't you add something mission constructive if you are going to voice just your views on wikileaks. FPDR

Edited July 29, 2010 by Sick1

[TRexian 0]

From what I've been able to read, it reveals methods/processes, like requesting CAS or doing BDA, stuff like that. I'm not sure how really secret that sort of stuff is. All references to people are by callsign, that I can tell. Well, some insurgent bosses are named, but not friendly forces.

[Brainbug 10]

I have troubles getting my 14 KIA, I look for them thru my scope, find some, put a few mortar rounds on them and do the rest with my gun & sqd.

However, I found at most 10-11 guys.

Yes, there must be a problem with the 4-man squad that starts in the north. I've replayed it now several times, different difficulty settings and with and without SLX. The best I could get them to do was to come in sight, but not close enough for an encounter.

Actually, I waited a while, put all my guys on "hold fire" and observed what happened. The enemies came in sight, but not really close, and none of them opens fire. When I finally fire a few mortar rounds into them, they are a bit upset, run around and fire a few unaimed shots, but eventually calm down and either stay there indefinitely or even retreat, which makes it hard to get the 14 kills to end the mission. I never had the impression of being attacked. The mortar poses a theoretical danger, but I haven't seen it fire a single time at all. So if I do nothing, all 14 enemies will line up and wait to be killed.

I think the distances are just a bit too far for the unscoped rifles that everyone (except for the player) has. Which may be intended by the mission maker, but the AI obviously doesn't engage because of that. I don't know though why the enemy mortar doesn't open fire.

IMHO the taliban had a good chance to win if they tried to sneak up the hill from several sides at once (and thereby getting in effective firing range of their rusty toys) while the mortar fires on the hilltop and distracts the US troops. But if they just stay in sight but out of their own firing range, then they are just clay pigeons waiting to be wasted eventually.

Fighting intensity could be increased if the taliban had a guy with a scoped rifle, e.g. an AK74 PSO1 or something, who can pin the US troops down on the hilltop while the others move in. The US camp should in turn provide a bit better cover, e.g. a few rocks or crates. Also the wikileaks text doesn't say if all taliban had been killed. I'd put in a few more and then count with a retreating AI, i.e. winning condition would be an enemy free zone around the US camp and not necessarily 14 kills (though the mortar should be destroyed to win the mission).

---------- Post added at 06:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:13 PM ----------

From what I've been able to read, it reveals methods/processes, like requesting CAS or doing BDA, stuff like that. I'm not sure how really secret that sort of stuff is. All references to people are by callsign, that I can tell. Well, some insurgent bosses are named, but not friendly forces.

The Taliban are certainly much better informed than we. For example, while the German public knew just barely that their Army is getting a bunch of Eagle IV armoured vehicles and you could assume that they are also moved to Afghanistan, but neither a certain number nor a closer timeframe than "in the near future" was given. However, we had to read in the news a while ago that a convoi was attacked that drove some of those new vehicles from Bagram airbase up to Kunduz, so obviously they knew exactly when and where the new stuff would be moved.

They are certainly getting much more information from just observing the war efforts directly than from reading those dry and short reports. As Napoleon said, "don't fight an enemy too often or you'll teach him all your tricks".

[TV-PressPass 10]

Fighting intensity could be increased if the taliban had a guy with a scoped rifle, e.g. an AK74 PSO1 or something, who can pin the US troops down on the hilltop while the others move in.

Interestingly enough I originally had an SVD with the mortar to increase difficulty, but removed it because the simple fact is if the US forces had received sniper fire they would have noted it in the report.

I'm considering a few options of the next one:

Option A: might be interesting because there is no actual enemy contact, but still lots to be done. For some reason I find that aspect still appealing, that there is action without gunfire. That and the fact that there will be a rusted helicopter wreck up in the mountains probably until the end of time.

Option B: is probably too complex for me, but I like the detail offered in the war diary text.

Option C: might make for an early morning air strike.

This war doesn't have many set piece battles. Thats going to be an obstacle for blockbusters and short lived special reports. Instead, it has hundreds and thousands of tiny firefights, which are better suited to short one off game levels.

I don't want to be the only one doing this. After fifteen minutes looking through the documents I always find something that is interesting enough to be a mission.

[RaZoR1472 10]

Interestingly enough I originally had an SVD with the mortar to increase difficulty, but removed it because the simple fact is if the US forces had received sniper fire they would have noted it in the report.

I'm considering a few options of the next one:

Option A: might be interesting because there is no actual enemy contact, but still lots to be done. For some reason I find that aspect still appealing, that there is action without gunfire. That and the fact that there will be a rusted helicopter wreck up in the mountains probably until the end of time.

Option B: is probably too complex for me, but I like the detail offered in the war diary text.

Option C: might make for an early morning air strike.

This war doesn't have many set piece battles. Thats going to be an obstacle for blockbusters and short lived special reports. Instead, it has hundreds and thousands of tiny firefights, which are better suited to short one off game levels.

I don't want to be the only one doing this. After fifteen minutes looking through the documents I always find something that is interesting enough to be a mission.

Do option A, sounds really interesting. I'm on the same wavelength as you. I bought this game so could play a simulator. Do the day in day out things that soldiers on the front lines do.

btw, like someone else said, can you make it so that perhaps the insurgents have a machine gun or something. Just to spice things up a bit;)

Thanks and carry on the great work!

[TRexian 0]

With option A, use DAC or some other system for randomly spawning an AI patrol or 2. It may be there, it may not.

[Killerwatt 0]

@TV-PressPass: Unfortunately I have no experience in building missions or I would be joining you in this venture. I hope you can gather around you a group of acomplished mission builders who will eventually be able to release many missions based on this material. Perhaps you can call yourselves the AWD Mission Group.

These are exactly the kind of missions that are needed by the majority of OA players who don't have the time to dedicate to joining a squad or don't want to play online. Short, fairly simple and to the point, sometimes boring, sometimes downright scary missions rather than epic story lines for each mission. more an every-day experience of a soldiers war.

Good luck in your endevours and I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

[supergruntsb78 67]

OA is realistic? Try OA + ACE + ACRE , hehehe...

I have troubles getting my 14 KIA, I look for them thru my scope, find some, put a few mortar rounds on them and do the rest with my gun & sqd.

However, I found at most 10-11 guys.

Boring? Hell, this is a real life mission. In real life the soldiers are kinda happy that they are not "in the shit" all the time, they do all they can to save a life. Insurgens and BLUFOR troops. This is why insurgents retreat and BLUFORs call in CAS.

Arma2 is considered a game but actually, it's not. Especially noth with these kinds of missions.

When I had a choice in some missions I would do NOTHING but staying up on my hill and lazing targets for bombs & hellfires, but since the mission developer wants all teh 1337 action I gotta take this damn town full of insurgents with my 8man sqd, yea...

Love this, keep it going.

realistic as in the war zones not the feeling of war :P

[sick1 13]

Its a dirt secret these reports.

Edited July 30, 2010 by Sick1

[nominesine 0]

The Afghan war diaries are obviously a good source of information for non-military mission makers (such as myself) who wants a realistic set up, for a small mission or missionette. I'm a member of the press in RL and have been studying the leaked reports for the past days as part of my job. Hence I have a fairly good knowledge about what's in these (rather vague) reports. As far as ArmA2 goes, they will mostly be useful for:

... Setting up realistic mission parameters (Objectives, tasks, etc)

... Including realistic forces into my missions (unit strength, support available, forces distances from each other, etc)

I find the diaries useful for making missionettes, rather than regular mission making. Why? Bebause most full blown missions (including my own) tend to focus on exciting gaming experiences, rather than realism. By including respawns and support modules into our missions we do indeed create an interesting gaming environment for our virtual soldiers. But in order to balance these games, we are forced to add units to both sides in an (often) unrealistic way. The Takistani air force and armored squads are a good example of this.

I find that these war diaries lets me create interesting missionettes on much a smaller scale than before. That's what I'll use them for (outside of the journalistic field, that is).

As several posts in this thread already shows, some people are offended by the thought of reenacting the events described in the war diaries. Rightfully so, I believe. I know people from Somalia who where (equally rightfully) offended by the motion picture Black Hawk Down a few years back.

Even though these war diaries may seem innocent at a first glance, they do describe events that have happened to real people in the real word. But this is a dilemma we face evry time we make a new mission in the fictional ArmAverse, wether we think about it or not.

My best advice to those who wants to use the diaries in a non-offensive way is: Use the reports as a reference guide only. Don't try to recreate the event exactly as written (in most cases it isn't even possible due to game engine limitations). And if your story turns out to be too close to reality... don't point out the source. A good mission is still a good mission.

EDIT: Will download the mission from the first post as soon as I can find the time to do so.

Edited July 30, 2010 by nominesine

[lNTRUDER 26]

I might have a look at basing a mission on one of these reports. Seems like a good idea if you want to create a realistic scenario. Hell, I could certainly use a less 'arcady' touch in my own missions :D

I will give this one a try to see what it's about. Thx.

[PzS 10]

Nice mission, just tried it but..one question remains: is this mission artillery enabled or not?

[ajsarge 10]

I went and edited TV-PressPass' original mission. The friendly mortar now works, and I gave the player 4 salvos of 4 rounds each. Simply point your cursor where you want the rounds to land, and call radio Alpha (0-0-1). It may or may not require CO. If it's ok with him, I should have the DL up shortly. Once I can find the mission file...

Edited August 25, 2010 by AJsarge