Invasion 1944 v2.6 (CO)

[rknharry 10]

Not quite, the new trenches are concrete walls for one, theres both a trench and a wall version (e.g. one and two sides), these are solely for the WN stations I'm not modelling new pieces just making use of things we've had waiting to be used for a while. There is already the Trenchline wooden version and the built in arma fortifications which cover less established trench areas just fine, or the foxholes. Mud ramps really don't work and weren't used as cover by anyone as far as I know, far too easy to drive a tank into them a bury people under the mud which is why you would always support a position like that.

Ah ok. Thought it would just be a matter of changing textures from concrete/sandback to earthen ones on the new objects. :)

---------- Post added at 05:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:08 AM ----------

This unfortunately is impossible, at least on Omaha and all of our current maps. As maps work on a gride size, omaha using 10m for example, each point that you can raise or lower is far bigger than any of these objects, and making them that large for a small feature really sticks out. As we have no way of cutting away the ground geometry this is as good as it gets on a large map in ArmA2. Only smaller higher detailed terrain maps like Bastogne using a much smaller grid (but because of the detail has to be a much smaller map) which allows for placement of foxholes etc in the holes more seamlessly.

I figured Merderet Winter offers quite a lot of opportunities to effectively mould foxholes and trench sections into existing craters and other sunken spots, or rear slope positions. Placement is a bit tricky, but usually I get it working by use of setposATL and setvectorup. :)

Bastogne, while an interesting experiment is a dead end IMHO. Still the "trenches" are more like tank traps and generally too much map mesh works (I guess) and not resource friendly. So the 10m mesh would be the way to go and plug objects then need to be of similar size off course. I see If I´ll find some time for Oxygen to try something out...

[PacUK 1]

Ah ok. Thought it would just be a matter of changing textures from concrete/sandback to earthen ones on the new objects.

No as its a solid mesh of a concrete wall with the earth ramp it would require removing the wall and creating the mesh of that side of the ramp, either that or just texturing the square concrete with mud which would look... odd :D

I figured Merderet Winter offers quite a lot of opportunities to effectively mould foxholes and trench sections into existing craters and other sunken spots, or rear slope positions. Placement is a bit tricky, but usually I get it working by use of setposATL and setvectorup.

Highly recommend RTE for object placement like this, I decorated all the foxholes and trenches on Bastogne using it manually placing is just far to twitchy.

Bastogne, while an interesting experiment is a dead end IMHO. Still the "trenches" are more like tank traps and generally too much map mesh works (I guess) and not resource friendly

As long as the maps are kept small its not so much of an issue, what slows Bastogne down as a map is the foliage as well as the detailed terrain in combination makes it very resource hungry, as we don't have source files for this map as it was a third party map produced by Prowler we aren't able to modify it to make use of much lower resource intensive foliage such as that used on Merderet Winter. Any map is a balance of detailing though as well as making use of the resources we have, we don't have a great number of members to produce new content so its better to focus on using what we have avilable and using the engine to its advantages rather than focusing too much on the weaker aspects of the engine. I still think some of the best use of a high detail small terrain mesh could be as a small ruined town, using the terrain as rubble piles which the AI could still easily navigate unlike the rubble objects which also require pathing etc.

So the 10m mesh would be the way to go and plug objects then need to be of similar size off course. I see If I´ll find some time for Oxygen to try something out...

By all means experiment away, I can however only warn you of the difficulty of blending terrain and models, often it requires the land to be pretty flat or the object to be much taller under the ground level to allow placement on high angled terrain without seeing the bottom of the model floating in the air. Also you lose detail such as clutter so the grass will always be missing from the plugged in objects, on dry terrains its pretty easy to not notice, but on a grassy field a large 10 square still sticks out as much as object stuck on top of the landscape. The main issue at hand is these kind of features are demanding in terms of modelling as well as mapping as the areas need to be pre-designed to contain these objects and it can be hard picking random good spots across the map that ultimately don't get seen or used. Generally its easier just to focus on certain spots such as the new WN stations which are pretty vital positions and allow mission makers to place more specific setups themselves using objects that work on most terrain.

Its not to say its impossible to do well, the Pacific team have done a fantastic job of creating fortifications in their maps that really sync with the terrain but again this is mainly due to the smaller grid size detail allowed by the nature of the maps themselves but also in their original design, most of our maps were not intended for such builds and upping the grid size isn't a practical (or probably even possible). The best example of objects that might work would probably be the warfare bases from stock A2. There large prefab areas have a really high detail level and allow for much more familiar FPS type environments but require a hell of a lot of work to produce requiring multiple LOD's, geomtry's to function well and pathing if they are to be considered anything by an obstacle to AI. Without a very active modelling team its not really a feasible option.

[dimitri_harkov 10]

Our community finally had a nice COOP using the most recent version of I44 and it was awesome.

The few minor issues have been reported.

Great job and thanks to the whole team!

Cheers,

D.

[rknharry 10]

Got some graphical problems, that are most pronounced on winter maps. The info and orders tabs, text, gunsight and everything in that light gray tone, is quite hard to read and to work with. Any ways to turn them to a yellow tone maybe?

Second is the oversize tank compass top and left. How do I get it to a fitting size ?

---------- Post added at 01:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:38 PM ----------

No as its a solid mesh of a concrete wall with the earth ramp it would require removing the wall and creating the mesh of that side of the ramp, either that or just texturing the square concrete with mud which would look... odd :D

Highly recommend RTE for object placement like this, I decorated all the foxholes and trenches on Bastogne using it manually placing is just far to twitchy.

As long as the maps are kept small its not so much of an issue, what slows Bastogne down as a map is the foliage as well as the detailed terrain in combination makes it very resource hungry, as we don't have source files for this map as it was a third party map produced by Prowler we aren't able to modify it to make use of much lower resource intensive foliage such as that used on Merderet Winter. Any map is a balance of detailing though as well as making use of the resources we have, we don't have a great number of members to produce new content so its better to focus on using what we have avilable and using the engine to its advantages rather than focusing too much on the weaker aspects of the engine. I still think some of the best use of a high detail small terrain mesh could be as a small ruined town, using the terrain as rubble piles which the AI could still easily navigate unlike the rubble objects which also require pathing etc.

By all means experiment away, I can however only warn you of the difficulty of blending terrain and models, often it requires the land to be pretty flat or the object to be much taller under the ground level to allow placement on high angled terrain without seeing the bottom of the model floating in the air. Also you lose detail such as clutter so the grass will always be missing from the plugged in objects, on dry terrains its pretty easy to not notice, but on a grassy field a large 10 square still sticks out as much as object stuck on top of the landscape. The main issue at hand is these kind of features are demanding in terms of modelling as well as mapping as the areas need to be pre-designed to contain these objects and it can be hard picking random good spots across the map that ultimately don't get seen or used. Generally its easier just to focus on certain spots such as the new WN stations which are pretty vital positions and allow mission makers to place more specific setups themselves using objects that work on most terrain.

Its not to say its impossible to do well, the Pacific team have done a fantastic job of creating fortifications in their maps that really sync with the terrain but again this is mainly due to the smaller grid size detail allowed by the nature of the maps themselves but also in their original design, most of our maps were not intended for such builds and upping the grid size isn't a practical (or probably even possible). The best example of objects that might work would probably be the warfare bases from stock A2. There large prefab areas have a really high detail level and allow for much more familiar FPS type environments but require a hell of a lot of work to produce requiring multiple LOD's, geomtry's to function well and pathing if they are to be considered anything by an obstacle to AI. Without a very active modelling team its not really a feasible option.

Yeah, that´s beyond any my capabilities (none), so I better keep working with what we have. My example here would´ve been the Iron Front 44 foxholes and trench objects btw. Mission making and learning to script right now is enough of a challenge to me, next coming to map making anytime, but modelling.....not that soon I think. Yet looking forward to new stuff you´re working on right now. 8)

[jiltedjock 10]

The IF foxholes and objects are quite well done, but they are still just objects, I haven't seen anything on the IF maps that looks like the maps were tailored to fit trench objects "better". The IF foxholes and objects don't look massively out of place when used on Omaha and Neaville, although the grass textures are a bit different, but they fit into some of the field corners quite well without looking too obviously like an alien hill. The double MG trench and the lowered MG trench in particular are quite good, having the benefit of buildingpos for reliable AI placement.

[PacUK 1]

Our community finally had a nice COOP using the most recent version of I44 and it was awesome.

The few minor issues have been reported.

Thanks always great to hear people are enjoying the mod! We'll take a look at the Panther and damage but will probably need more information on hit locations, who did the shooting etc before we can reproduce it.

Got some graphical problems, that are most pronounced on winter maps. The info and orders tabs, text, gunsight and everything in that light gray tone, is quite hard to read and to work with. Any ways to turn them to a yellow tone maybe?

That's more of a personal preference, if we changed it to yellow then you'd lose them on maps like Neaville with its yellow wheat fields. Ideally A2 would allow the user to customise the interface and change the colour using a slider but unfortunately as far as I know it has to be preset images, overall we found the white on black to read the best across most maps without sticking out like a sore thumb, making it a much less intrusive interface (we were close to just removing the on screen iron sights completely as well as other hud elements but decided to leave them in for users who prefer having a HUD and sticking with difficulty to deactivate them instead. Plus after 10 years of ArmA-verse games I barely look at the orders panel anymore heh. Might be something we look at again at some stage but its not high on the list.

The tank UI size I believe only shows correctly when using the very small interface size design, the members who developed it however are no longer very active so unless we get a new UI coder in I doubt I'll be able to fix that issue myself, welcome to try persuede Homer or Macolik with booze and women to take a look at it but it has been an issue we are aware of since the interface was implemented. If any community members can suggest anything code-wise feel free to drop me a line!

Yeah, that´s beyond any my capabilities (none), so I better keep working with what we have. My example here would´ve been the Iron Front 44 foxholes and trench objects btw. Mission making and learning to script right now is enough of a challenge to me, next coming to map making anytime, but modelling.....not that soon I think. Yet looking forward to new stuff you´re working on right now.

Again I'd highly recommend you give Real Time Editor a look its a very useful addon for decorating ArmA maps, much easier than hand placing the objects :)

[domokun 515]

The more I play this mod, the more I'm amazed at the level of detail.

Quick question: is there any way to recreate the mayhem on the Invasion C&H 100 mission that you experience in the SP version?

IIRC in the SP version there are mortars and constant MG fire, whereas in the C&H when I host a COOP it seems too quiet.

I rather suspect that this is because most of the enemy AI are celebrating their capture of Crossroads.

[PacUK 1]

Quick question: is there any way to recreate the mayhem on the Invasion C&H 100 mission that you experience in the SP version?

IIRC in the SP version there are mortars and constant MG fire, whereas in the C&H when I host a COOP it seems too quiet.

I rather suspect that this is because most of the enemy AI are celebrating their capture of Crossroads.

Not really as it currently is, the huge load of the static objects really bogs down what's possible for one. The main issue is the AI can't really navigate or use the defences, if you're lucky they might man the statics but compared to the number used in the SP missions it isn't nearly as noisy. I did consider putting AI in as 'extras' but this again puts far too much load for it to then actually be playable with 100 people on a dedicated server + a whole bunch of AI. You could however edit your own version and simply add in more static enemies at the beach which leave the "playable" axis respawning units more time to run between the capture points as their AI tells them to.

On that note the newer version of Omaha should help if I can nail down the AI pathing a bit more but there will at least be better positions and less server load than the current mission placed defences :)

[rknharry 10]

That's more of a personal preference, if we changed it to yellow then you'd lose them on maps like Neaville with its yellow wheat fields. Ideally A2 would allow the user to customise the interface and change the colour using a slider but unfortunately as far as I know it has to be preset images, overall we found the white on black to read the best across most maps without sticking out like a sore thumb, making it a much less intrusive interface (we were close to just removing the on screen iron sights completely as well as other hud elements but decided to leave them in for users who prefer having a HUD and sticking with difficulty to deactivate them instead. Plus after 10 years of ArmA-verse games I barely look at the orders panel anymore heh. Might be something we look at again at some stage but its not high on the list.

It´s mainly the order menu text, but I surely get that solved by memorizing all the radio keys anytime! :D Iron sights, no problem. I constantly switch between difficulty for testing purposes only (main goal: mission making). The tank sights on winter map is some problem though...

The tank UI size I believe only shows correctly when using the very small interface size design, the members who developed it however are no longer very active so unless we get a new UI coder in I doubt I'll be able to fix that issue myself, welcome to try persuede Homer or Macolik with booze and women to take a look at it but it has been an issue we are aware of since the interface was implemented. If any community members can suggest anything code-wise feel free to drop me a line!

Yep, tested it on very small ISD and finally saw all of the tank UI. Nonetheless, everything else is then way too small for me, as it affects all of the UI, incl. editor. Nogo for the time beeing. For what screen sizes is i44 optimized for? Considering to purchase a 22" screen in the immediate future.

Again I'd highly recommend you give Real Time Editor a look its a very useful addon for decorating ArmA maps, much easier than hand placing the objects :)

Thanks, downloaded and give it a try soon. :)

---------- Post added at 10:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:09 AM ----------

Btw, have great fun playing i44 with latest TPWCAS 4.1 and ASR AI 1.16.1, on latest OA Beta and up to date CBA. I highly reccomend this combo! 8)

[PacUK 1]

The tank sights on winter map is some problem though...

Tank sights are a very different beast from the user interface stuff, we decided on the white to be less intrusive so the interface doesn't litter the view with the old green style hud icons. The tank sight (the bit the gunner aims with) is part of the tank model and based on the actual optics, which were generally in black. However some german sights include a night sight which is very effective in the snowscapes as well.

For what screen sizes is i44 optimized for?

I've only ever used 1680x1050 as thats been my native monitor resolution for a good few years, resolution however is generally redundant as it depends on the interface size selection, anything but very small and the tanks UI does not display correctly. As we're lacking in coders I don't expect to be able to get it fixed anytime soon.

Progress on Omaha is going well, I've reconstructed some of the road systems and added a ton more, the sea-front WN stations are all complete and in place (though might be tweaked if we have time to do a few more pillbox models) so I've moved onto updating the missions. I've made a few templates which I'll include in the release which have placed 'static' weapons at all of the station bunkers and positions which should save mission makers a lot of trouble (I'll probably include a version with and without AI manning them too). I'm adding a few final touches to the map today (some road signs from our old and returned modeller Boomrang, welcome back to the team mate) and then will get back to work on the mission updates. D-Day and D+1 are likely going to change a bit and I'm also hoping to expand the size and scope of Operation Tarbrush to make more use of stations. If possible I'll get this and the mission updates out along with some smaller fixes in a 2.66 patch if at all possible but this mainly depends on Gnat's progress with the 2.7 work he's doing and any work Yac has still to get into the overhaul. Hope to have some more pics of Omaha later today!

[sixt 26]

Is there a way to disable the feature with cargo places on the heavy armor, as shermans??

It makes trouble with HAC, because for some reason all the crew members in a group leaves there assigned shermans to walk over to the leaders sherman and sit on top of his sherman.

Sorry my bad english

[PacUK 1]

You could try using LockCargo on your missions to prevent anyone from boarding the tanks until you want to unlock them again.

[sixt 26]

I will try the lockCargo feature.

Thanks :-)

[PacUK 1]

Few new screenies of the WN stations moving up the coast and around the town of Les Moulins which has now been fully realised on the map.

Edited February 17, 2013 by PacUK

[Gunter Severloh 4056]

Originally Posted by PacUK

Again I'd highly recommend you give Real Time Editor a look its a very useful addon for decorating ArmA maps, much easier than hand placing the objects

Hey Pak are you referring to this?

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=3068

Does that work in Arma2CO? I mean its listed for Arma1.

[PacUK 1]

No you want this version for A2 - http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?85766-Alpha-RTE-for-ArmA-II

[Gunter Severloh 4056]

Thanks Pac, Never knew about the conversion, will check it out.

[ShiftyzZ-98 803]

Will be in 2.7 more Armors ? like:M7 priest,Wolverine,Grille...etc. ?

[PacUK 1]

Will be in 2.7 more Armors ?

2.7 has been primarily focused on the Aircraft so there are no large plans to include any new tanks, vehicles or units other than the new planes and gliders Yac and Gnat have been working on alongside all the new plane features it will bring to the mod. That being said we do have a Wespe that I'll be slipping into a patch soon though can't say whether it will be a small in-between patch, or 2.7 itself. There are some other units we hope to get in for 2.7 but due to us having a very limited team size right now its liable some of our planned additions such as the M10 Wolverine may be delayed until 2.71 or so in favour of getting 2.7 and the planes out etc.

[bonko the sane 2]

brilliant mod, thank you to all the team involved :D

FYI, and you are most likely aware from other players, i am getting lots of ctd's with latest betas and this mod (only in multiplayer).

[dunedain 48]

This looks great. Can't wait... :)

[PacUK 1]

The latest beta's have raised a number of issues which is to be expected, be sure you are using the correct CBA and the correct A2 beta patch for that version. If you experience any actual errors in your RPT please report then on our Dev-Heaven page, if the issue lies with A2 there's not much we can do until we know whether its a change in the way something works or a bug with the new version of A2 so any extra information you can provide would be a lot of help (e.g. dedicated server, specific builds, experience with other builds etc).

[desmondb 10]

2.7 has been primarily focused on the Aircraft so there are no large plans to include any new tanks, vehicles or units other than the new planes and gliders Yac and Gnat have been working on alongside all the new plane features it will bring to the mod. That being said we do have a Wespe that I'll be slipping into a patch soon though can't say whether it will be a small in-between patch, or 2.7 itself. There are some other units we hope to get in for 2.7 but due to us having a very limited team size right now its liable some of our planned additions such as the M10 Wolverine may be delayed until 2.71 or so in favour of getting 2.7 and the planes out etc.

New planes you say? ...hmmm makes this aviator very excited :cool:

[animosity242 1]

At last some working tank damage system, thank you so much !

I mean, its not perfect, and still need tweaking but tank battles is totally other experience now :D

(pzIVd main gun is really too powerfull)

The PzIVD's 75L24 is far from powerful. It is difficult to penetrate any of the Sherman series on a front hull hit. What other "tweaks" are you referring to?

[bonko the sane 2]

The latest beta's have raised a number of issues which is to be expected, be sure you are using the correct CBA and the correct A2 beta patch for that version. If you experience any actual errors in your RPT please report then on our Dev-Heaven page, if the issue lies with A2 there's not much we can do until we know whether its a change in the way something works or a bug with the new version of A2 so any extra information you can provide would be a lot of help (e.g. dedicated server, specific builds, experience with other builds etc).

Im not sure, but the server (ZEUS) has latest available beta and i have latest steam beta, I was running @cba;@cba_a2;@cba_oa;@i44;@zcommon;@acre;@jayarma2lib" "-name=Bonko" -nosplash -world=empty -showScriptErrors -cpuCount=2 Mainly, i crashed as soon as i fired a weapon (it happened to be a BAR and a BREN) and also crashed just standing there, totaly random but it was fast, not more than 5 minutes.

link to arma2.rpt http://dl.dropbox.com/u/18153997/arma2oa.RPT

Edited February 23, 2013 by Bonko the Sane