Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Nicholas Bell

Razani, North Waziristan Map

Recommended Posts

For whoever mentioned the rivers: It's not a river, it's a wash, and it looks perfect. I live in Arizona, this terrain is a dead ringer for the type of high desert here and in Pakistan. I'm really looking forward to this, might jump start my own terrain work a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this is what im talking about. This map looks incredible. I am already imagining making scenarios with Johny's Special Forces and this map. Man o Man great job NB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok we need bin laden model now and a dope mission designer to do the mission with him hiding in it. This time we WILL find the bastard! rofl.gif

Awesome stuff Nicholas! That map looks so damn fine. notworthy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks truly awesome!

I hope it's as good as Schmalfelden, with lots of open ground for realistic lines of fire (What is it with map designers and useless hills everywhere, anyway? confused_o.gif )

Also, the typical thing is lots of villages and towns to confuse your AI. I get so sick of watching them try to figure out what a house is, and how you get around it. Better with small compounds if you ask me, and as far as I know, fairly realistic?

My 5 cents!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote[/b] ]@Eric 3DE --> Silola and mapfact ;-)

Ooops.... notworthy.gif yes indeed : Silola.

Still my point stands : he should use it... it's not for mission making only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote[/b] ]I get so sick of watching them try to figure out what a house is, and how you get around it. Better with small compounds if you ask me, and as far as I know, fairly realistic?

I completely agree, best to make maps around ARMA's AI strengths than weakness. For me ARMA SP or AI use = open ground, and scattered covers / buildings. Anything else and it can get real messy especially controlling an AI Team of more than 4 men.

This map will rock for that, no real issues at all on that front.

As regards 3DE use, in a way its perfect for this open map, but Id rather have an open beta to play out on without any learning curve delays with something new. Not that its that bigger deal but I think an open beat as mentioned, then finer details on 3d editor.

Hell, id say open map with small additions and let the community 3de users populate it and post versions biggrin_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope it's as good as Schmalfelden, with lots of open ground for realistic lines of fire (What is it with map designers and useless hills everywhere, anyway? confused_o.gif )

Guess what? The concept of "realistic" depends very much on where you are.

If you think hills are "useless", all I can say is it's a good thing you are not in a command position in a real army smile_o.gif

Try siting your tank in a hull-down position on top of a ridgeline, with improved visibility over the surrounding area, shooting down at larger target and weaker armour (i.e. the top of a tank rather than the front), and then when you come under heavy fire simply driving backwards a few metres and voila! you are out of sight and safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess what? The concept of "realistic" depends very much on where you are.

If you think hills are "useless", all I can say is it's a good thing you are not in a command position in a real army smile_o.gif

Try siting your tank in a hull-down position on top of a ridgeline, with improved visibility over the surrounding area, shooting down at larger target and weaker armour (i.e. the top of a tank rather than the front), and then when you come under heavy fire simply driving backwards a few metres and voila! you are out of sight and safe.

I made no other presumption, mind you. You don't have to read many books to learn about these things smile_o.gif

Obviously in reality all terrain differs depending on where you are, but reality doesn't matter much in this game, and the thing I was talking about, that causes it to feel more realistic, is when you do have those long, clear lines of fire - in ArmA - and your guys therefore don't have to creep over a stupid hill (that really doesn't even need to be there) one by one, laying down no combined fire of their own to protect themselves, thus predictably being picked off one by one, by whoever is on the other side.

It's the same old ArmA/Flashpoint paradox: ArmA doesn't work properly as something you'd dare call a simulation, so you have to make it seem like it does any way you can; you have to design everything around it's quite existential flaws.

Schmalfelden seemed to work by that concept, almost to an art. To me it's quite simply the benchmark of how an ArmA map should work.

If you make a realistic map for ArmA, the AI will make you pay. Not to say ride your ass for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm...okay, I see where you are coming from. Fair point.

But I still prefer to have hills around. At least *I* can try and use the terrain intelligently even if the AI, as we all know, generally do a very good job of realistically imitating a bunch of untrained conscripts.

I guess the answer is for there to be maps of various types so that everybody can play on the sort of terrain that they like most, or switch around for a bit of variety.

Or big maps like Sahrani containng a variety of different terrain types.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first of all if you just sit "AI" on the map then they will engage each other just how the game was designed to do so... but if you use waypoints and scripts then that is a defferent story... the game can be as realistic as you want it to be... as long as you kno what you are doing... And i use a suppressive and reactive script (I forget who made it) that works really well... and as far as moving on top of hills... if you expect the ai to do all those things on heir own you are dead wrong. thats why BI implemented te fact that you can change the way the game runs... to fit your own personal needs wink_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not much new and interesting to show for this week - more work on the mask and satellite image.  Added about 40,000 bushes and rocks with several hundred thousand more to go.

Not all areas are going to get vegetation, but here is where I am now:

vegetation.jpg

A better indicator of completion is how far I am in placing rocks:

rocks.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one will mistake these images as photos of real places for sure, but I post these less picturesque images to help you understand how rugged this terrain is.  Yet it still has plateaus which are several square kilometers.  The river beds (washes) are sometimes 4-500 meters across - real kill zones for infantry.

A comment on the discussion above - I don't make the map to "be" anything but as close to reality as I can within the constraints of the game engine.  That is, I am not designing the map for any specific type or mode of play.  There are areas which are wide open and deadly for infantry.  I've had long range engagements between forces on opposing ridgelines at ranges exceeding 500 meters.  I've played missions where I held the hilltop and the AI attacked.  With all the undulations, ravines, ridges etc, you would be surprised at how the enemy can disappear even when you hold the high ground.  Finding the military crest as opposed to the topographical crest is important!  Anyway, I try and take down as many of the attackers at long range before they "disappear", because once they do they will sneak up on me and give me a good surprise if I just sit in the outpost.  Important to patrol around to see where they are.  I have seen the AI infantry move around and not necessarily climb the hill directly when using seek and destroy waypoints.

I see this map being best for small scale actions - raids, ambushes with insertion via air or by foot (which can take a while given the size of the map).  This is not good tank country, and vehicles should only be found around the main highway - targets for ambushes.

Note the images below have the time set for either 7 AM or 5 PM and the shadows are all ArmA generated - they are not shadows from a Google Earth image used as a sat_loc file. (which look great in still shots when used but not so good when the time or sun direction is different)  You can also see how the "edge of the map" looks - the visible range in the images is 10 KM.

arma2008-10-0922-19-29-05.jpg

arma2008-10-0922-20-50-15.jpg

arma2008-10-0922-24-08-29.jpg

arma2008-10-0922-24-17-15.jpg

arma2008-10-0922-25-58-43.jpg

arma2008-10-0922-26-31-40.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

notworthy.gif  yay.gif

it s looking very beautifull. What is the dimension of your sat? and your project?

Very interesting for afghan battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote[/b] ]A comment on the discussion above - I don't make the map to "be" anything but as close to reality as I can within the constraints of the game engine.

Just how it should be, they are doing the same in Arma 2.  

Quote[/b] ]I see this map being best for small scale actions - raids, ambushes with insertion via air or by foot (which can take a while given the size of the map).  This is not good tank country, and vehicles should only be found around the main highway - targets for ambushes.

Well this all sounds pretty much like what is happening in that are in real life anyway, they are not playing games either  biggrin_o.gif

I would also add this would be great for mando bomb strike's as well for targeting drops on enemy area. I can imagine UAV & Targeting with Mando Bombs using Patrol Script to be a real good combination  smile_o.gif With mando you spawn air attacks so no runways etc aren't an issue as you can still call airstrikes with jets too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicholas,

In your MASK_LCO are you using a specific colour for vegitation and rocks or are you maually placing all of the objects in Visitor 3

Please help me as this could save alot of time!

Cheers smile_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, back from vacation - a week hiking in southern Utah, which happens to be very similar to the map in many respects.  Nearly the same latitude.  Same elevation, topography and climate.  Even the vegetation species are related.  I've been hiking in the desert and mountains as an annual event for many years, and as a collector of topo maps and a map-maker for other games, I've always payed close attention to the terrain (apart from avoiding getting lost <g>).  But this is the first time I have had an opportunity to study similar terrain while working on a specific map. Took over 1000 photos to help, along with some measurements. I definitely have rethink the rock/boulder placement.  Sure wish the program could support a smaller elevation grid on a large map - 10 meters will simply not allow a proper representation of how rough the terrain is.  Even "flat" desert isn't flat - unless it is a salt pan.

Quote[/b] ]What is the dimension of your sat? and your project?
It is a 10240 x 10240 meter map with a similar size satellite image.  Using a 1 pixel  = 1 meter satellite image is important.
Quote[/b] ]In your MASK_LCO are you using a specific colour for vegitation and rocks or are you maually placing all of the objects in Visitor 3
There are 5 basic masks - dark sand/rock, light sand/rock, lighter sand/gravel, riverbed gravel and "farmfield".  The sand/rock masks have 6 different clutter models assigned.  For the farmfields I am currently just using  a high thick grass.  The lightest sand/gravel mask has no clutter so I can have areas around buildings and roads without the weeds and rocks growing out of the roads and buildings which sometimes happens.  The riverbed mask is a custom gravel texture with several clutter models of small rocks to keep it looking totally flat. In other areas away from the farmfields and sand/gravel I have additional masks for the mountain rock. Apart from the riverbed texture, all the texture masks are standard BIS textures with the colors modified.  I have also taken the standard BIS rocks and changed their colors to better match the mask textures.  The large plants and rocks are all individual objects placed mostly with the random placement script.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you get to placing buildings, you should check out the 3DE editor, it's perfect for people like you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×