Razani, N. Waziristan Map

[sparks50 0]

Amazing map, will work without QG too(but you wont get some of the nice ground clutter).

Someone should make Afghanistan era soviet troops to go with the terrain

[miles teg 1]

Agreed! Incredible map! It actually still looks extremely nice even without Queen's Gambit and there is still plenty of ground clutter, so please people don't argue about that.

I also would LOVE to see some good Soviet Afghan War era troops. There was a great pack made in OFP where they had those tan uniforms and "cowboy" hats on some of them. Sadly nothing yet has been made for ArmA.

So my Mujahadin have nobody to fight right now.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Caselius 94]

This is good map and very realistic!

I checked that area with google maps its wery simillar to this one

Edit:Is new versions planned to this great map ?

[TankCommander 3]

Great map so far! My only suggestion would be to add more bushes around the linear looking bush clusters. Just sparse bushes would do to break up any uniform patterns.

Also took a few screenshots as I was wondering around the map... I love it so much Now I just wish my clan was active so we could have some missions on it...

Anywho, thought you might like to see your map through the eyes of someone else =)

I think those river beds would make for some nice off-road racing tracks =p

Second EDIT: Just got to say how amazing it is to just take a rover and drive along the dirt roads. The long grass draw distance and all the bushes with the winding road taking you to scenic areas... breath taking. And damn those roads are dangerous lol. But feels very realistic.

[MehMan 0]

Just the other day I was thinking to myself: sweet, the ukf jackals are here, now all I need is waziristan. And now it's here.

THANK YOU!

[Nicholas Bell 0]

Good to see no complaints about performance (yet) – and I guess the issue of structure color/saturation levels is acceptable.  Still on my list to tweak a bit.

Quote[/b] ]the Arma.rpt file content was then examined. Messages relating to this addon are repeated references to Grid info and various missing config classes in razmisc.pbo. Unique messages for razmisc are:

Must admit I am stumped on the configuration files – I don’t really know what I am doing.  Or why.  Basically modifying Opteryx’s stuff to fit the renamed objects (necessary to prevent problems between the addons).  While his stuff works, mine doesn’t.  If it were across the board wrong with all my objects it would be a lot easier to figure out, but not the case.   Obviously I have more work to do.

Quote[/b] ]Finally a suggestion, in my opinion the high compound walls are rather easy to breach using a vehicle. Perhaps they could be increased in strength so more effort is needed to knock these walls down (e.g. an explosive entry required) or inherit from a different destruction model. That would make a qala a much harder target to attack.

Good point – I only check them based on firing on them.  Unfortunately increasing the armor solves one problem only to make another, which is to make objects more resilient to HE fire.   Fastest way to bring down a structure is firing sabot, which is a** backwards.   Opteryx’s Bigwall1 objects convert to a neat rubble object when destroyed.  As noted in the readme, I am unable to duplicate this – another configuration file issue.   Hopefully once I get this resolved I can consider creating similar type rubble or breached wall models which are much nicer than just tipping the object over.

Quote[/b] ]Few initial comments about the town mainly:

· the metal bus shelters looks totally out of place for the environment. Every other structure is mud or timber.

· I would try to avoid putting the buildings beside/overlapping the walls without at least a 1.5m gap. AI don't behave well otherwise. It can also look better since the textures are different. Plus it reduces the use of escape routes and hiding spots.

· The parallel side roads seem too well pre-planned for such an area

· Walled compounds can also be rhombus or trapezoid shaped, not just perfect oblongs. Again, that relates to avoiding the perfect preplanned community.

There are metal roofed structures in the area, so the “Army Storage Hut†(not a bus stop) is not totally out of order, despite how it looks.  Practically all of the buildings in the qalats are built into the walls, with no gap at all.  I will look at widening the space where I can.  Eventually hope to have models which can be placed adjacent to the wall with no gap without stuff appearing on the outside wall of the qalat.

The parallel roads and the shape of these structures are there because that is how it is.  You will see odd shaped qalats where there are odd shaped qalats.    While I may have to slightly move or modify structures (given what objects I have to work with), I do my best to follow reality and not just make up sh*t.

NB:  The farm field areas are an exception.  The actual fields are tiny walled areas, often terraced.  Terracing is not doable, and having 2 dozen walled fields instead of one makes no sense when the AI can’t handle the walls as they are.

Quote[/b] ]Something good, something bad:is it normal for the AI not to follow you into the Housing complex? I went in, with the Column (close) and they stopped at the entrance and walked around it. The same happens to me in the Afghan village and Avagani.

Opteryx has AI paths built into the wall doors and gates, as he does in his structures.  I am as frustrated as you with how the AI fails to make use of them.  I’ve gone to the extent of placing additional BIS “standard†hidden pathway objects  in the entrances to see if that would help.  The only way I saw noticeable improvement was if I doubled the size of the pathway object – and then AI soldiers would then go through the wall.  Evidently the hidden pathway object kills the effects of the geometry LOD.   I want to experiment with placing additional pathways through the doors and gates.  My thought process here is that a pathway has an entry and exit point, and the problem may be that the AI is not hitting that point when it passes by.  Maybe more points would improve the chances of getting the guys through a gate.

This is why I personally stick mostly to “open field†type engagements and leave the qalats to air attacks.

Quote[/b] ]Is new versions planned to this great map ?

Yes.  First I need to get the config file “right†before proceeding.  Once that is done I will continue to add structures and fix problems.  It takes a great deal of time to convert a “working†map to one presentable to you.  For example, there’s no need to change the sat image and mask when I am just placing objects, but those definitely need to be updated for your use.  Plus I need to add enough content so that one is not downloading a 235 MB + file just to add one or two qalats.

Quote[/b] ]Will you build villages with 3D live editor?

No, building it in Visitor.  I’m not smart or patient enough to get 3DE to work.  Hopefully folks will be kind enough to post some templates of their work.  If I had the time I would create a mission with sandbagged positions all over the map in spots where they would make sense.  Then the user could simply pick the ones he needed for a mission and delete the others.  If I had time.

On a different note, sandbagged positions on top of the tower roofs seems to be a fairly common practice.  I’ve found several images with these.

[TankCommander 3]

Are you planning to optimise the roads? Because at the moment the AI is having a rather hard time sticking to it. I've tested several cars on each road heading to the same destination, and some roads do not behave properly at all where AI is concerned.

[Nicholas Bell 0]

Quote[/b] ]Are you planning to optimise the roads? Because at the moment the AI is having a rather hard time sticking to it. I've tested several cars on each road heading to the same destination, and some roads do not behave properly at all where AI is concerned.

Other than using the road smoothing script which I've done, there is no optimizing.  These are standard, non-modified BIS roads and trails, placed on the map in accordance with standard Visitor protocol.  Nothing fancy here.

I use a lot of waypoints when I plot vehicle movement in a mission which get them where they need to go and keeps them on the road.  When the shooting starts they drive all over creation.   I long ago gave up being attempting to command tanks or tank platoons because of my inability to control units, on or off the road.

Could you give me a location where you are seeing the AI ability to stick to the road repeatedly fail?  I could add some hidden roadways at the those spots to see if they will smooth things over.

[miles teg 1]

Nicholas, what I noticed is that the AI drive off the road in areas where the different levels of roads are close together on the mountains....basically the AI tries to take a shortcut and drives off the cliff to get to the road below it.  The short distance between the roads is what I think is causing this behavior.  I don't think there's any way of solving that problem short of putting barriers along the mountain roads (maybe invisible objects?).  The other solution, is probably, as you said, for the mission maker to just use plenty of waypoints along the route that they want the AI drivers to take.  For single vehicles its not to bad.  However its a nightmare for formations of vehicles because at every waypoint they sometimes decide to do a little circle and get all mixed up.  

Oh... by the way, I also just wanted to note that I just released update of my Taliban pack.  Your map is awesome for missions with them! In your next update of this map I would recommend using that HESCO object pack that was released for the community to finish up and use. That along with some sandbag bunkers, machine gun nests, and other such objects would be very nice to have to make Taliban fighting positions and forward operation bases.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[bravo 6 0]

Does your terrain environment have any similarity with the following videos?

Youtube - video part 1

Youtube - video part 2

Youtube - video part 3

edit: This is if you want to tweak the terrain colors

[miles teg 1]

In that movie the terrain is alot more desert-like which some parts of Southern Afghanistan are. This map however is Waziristan so its not Afghanistan and thus has a bit more vegitation. Still it is excellent for simualting parts of Afghanistan as well.

As for making a "The Beast" mission, there was a T-55 addon released but we have no Russian infantry addons that simulate the Afghan War era Russian soldiers.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[bravo 6 0]

ok.. glad you cleared my doubts about the terrain.

Much appreciated.

About "The Beast" i thought it was a T-62 tank instead.

Edit: Yeah , ShadowY, you are completely right

How could i miss that.  

[TankCommander 3]

It looked as tho there were many little spots the AI drivers would turn off on. They would prefer to travel along the river bed than the roads from what I noticed. And as said above, they do seem to try and shortcut roads that run closely parallel.

Found the furthest most north dirt road doesn't like AI drivers the most. I'll have to use waypoints like suggested but they would need to be placed on every road corner.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Stupendous effort! Really looking forward to seeing the building-ised version of it.

[ShadowY 0]

About "The Beast" i thought it was a T-62 tank instead.

Via the radio they call the tank T5447  

You can read on wikipedia that there are several T-55`s used.

The main one with modifications like a 105mm M68 tank gun was a isrealian ti-67.

Armchair knowledge after checking the real ti-67 instead of only the notable details from the film on wikipedia

Nice Island I hope it will get better in time

[pauliesss 2]

Great map, however I still think that the terrain color(or ground color) should be little more "sandish"....but its your map and ist great anyway, thank you Nicholas.

[BadBenson 0]

looks pretty much like the real thing to me. just compare. great job Nick. and for those wanting a more desert-like terrain like seen in those vids just wait for what i'm working on

1

2

[Nicholas Bell 0]

Yeah, I'm not making sh*t up as I go along.  Attempting to recreate reality here, best I can.  Admittedly, the angle of the sun, time of year, quality of photo can have a bearing on the color of the ground.  Heck, the map looks different in-game on my 2 computers.  

That is why I am using the high resolution Google Earth image of the area as a basis for the project.  The color on it I confirmed with other true color satellite imagery (Aqua and Terra via Modis).  If you check Pakistan on Google Earth you will see a wide range of terrain - any colors.  Even the Razani sat-map has a wide range of colors.

These are obviously greatly reduced images, and much is lost in converting to jpg, but you can see that the satellite image I have created is actually lighter than the GE image (apart from removing shadows).  This is because I have to take into the account how the ArmA engine changes the appearance of the satellite image by overlaying an .MCO file over the sat image to add variation.  This darkens the sat image at certain ranges.

Sat Map:

Google Earth Image:

BadBenson posted a few images I referred to - here are a few more which show this is not sandy desert, rather semi-arid mountains:

[Nicholas Bell 0]

These are images from the Afghan side of the border, but it is same range of mountains and terrain type.  Not light tan or pink sandy color.

And this from a tester who said the terrain reminded him a lot of Afghanistan - a personal shot.  Without having this image before, I think I got the dry river beds pretty close.

[opteryx 1562]

Excellent work Nick, you deserve a medal.  

BTW are my PMs not getting through to you again..?  

[Nicholas Bell 0]

Never heard of that movie - "The Beast".  Pretty nasty start.  At first glance those do look like T-62s (the mid-barrel smoke evacuation system), but as noted above they are rebuilt captured T-55s with US 105 mm guns.

The film was also shot in Isreal.

Quote[/b] ]It looked as tho there were many little spots the AI drivers would turn off on. They would prefer to travel along the river bed than the roads from what I noticed. And as said above, they do seem to try and shortcut roads that run closely parallel.

Found the furthest most north dirt road doesn't like AI drivers the most. I'll have to use waypoints like suggested but they would need to be placed on every road corner.

Well, when I said a lot of waypoints, I meant several around every corner.  This has been my experience all the while with ArmA -  whether the BIS maps or my earlier Schmalfelden map.  If you are saying you can give a unit a couple of waypoints on other maps and it will follow curves and take the correct turns, then I am doing something wrong here.

One thing that may play into the trail you mention (I assume you mean the east-west one in river) is that the "roughness" factor of the terrain is barely worse than the trail because it was pointed out during testing that it seemed wrong, ie vehicles could not travel quickly in the river beds.  Maybe the AI is calculating that it takes less time off road than following the trail because of this (?). Anyone have any real world experience driving on a rocky dry stream bed?  I'd be happy to bump up the streambed roughness if this would help the vehicles stay on the road.

Quote[/b] ]what I noticed is that the AI drive off the road in areas where the different levels of roads are close together on the mountains....basically the AI tries to take a shortcut and drives off the cliff to get to the road below it.  The short distance between the roads is what I think is causing this behavior.  I don't think there's any way of solving that problem short of putting barriers along the mountain roads (maybe invisible objects?).

Yeah, the damn things will try and climb a cliff to avoid following the road unless you explicately waypoint each and every hairpin.  I've seen then go up slopes and tip over backwards.  The invisible object idea is intriguing, but is there any real evidence that the vehicle AI pathmaking routines actually make vehicle go around walls (which is what this invisible object would be)?   Seems most of the time they just bash into objects and get stuck - or knock them down and keep going straight if they are able.    Maybe I'm wrong about this, I pretty much gave up using vehicles a long time ago in my little missions because of their unrealistic behavior.  Heck the infantry AI doesn't even slide along a wall until it finds an opening.

[miles teg 1]

Well I had a similar problem on the Afghan Village map on that highway to the East. The AI drivers kept wanting to go onto the wrong lane and this really screwed up the cutscene movie I was making. So I made a wall for the first 100 meters made up of the BIS barbwire fence object. This seemed to actually do the job and the AI (two vehicles) went straight without switching lanes. They just needed to get going for awhile.

The downside to the invisible wall idea is that you can't accidentally drive off the cliff while you're driving as a player. So that would make it less exciting when you're driving at high speed along those twisting roads (which is very challenging).

However I should say that on the BIS maps I rarely have to put more then 3 waypoints for vehicles. They normally travel just fine on the roads and never take shortcuts through open fields if they are wheeled vehicles or if they are tracked vehicles on "safe" or "careless" behavior. So it might be possible that you could be doing something wrong.

I would talk to some of the other map making gurus to see what they suggest.

At any rate, as you suggested... tons of waypoints should fix things most of the time at least on single vehicles.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[MehMan 0]

I was just trying to think of the name of that movie! The beast! So nasty how they squish him.

[TankCommander 3]

My experience on Sahrani is that adding only a few waypoints was enough for the AI to stick to the roads.

I've also considered the point you made about terrain roughness and how the AI may calculate it quicker to travel off-road. Maybe worth a try configuring those values? After all, wheeled vehicles would find it tougher on rocky unstable ground regardless. Also is there a way to make the roads maybe smoother and more appealing to the AI?

In regards to the map colour, I think the river beds could be more grey to match the colour when up close. From a distance it looks more like flowing water with the blue pigments. It should reflect it's surroundings more as it's made up of the same sand and rock but lighter in tone.

http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~klimek....pg

http://www.thisfabtrek.com/journey....h-4.jpg

http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/d30-10/dry-riverbed.jpg

http://dogbait.smugmug.com/photos/423476918_yF8gd-X2.jpg

[Nicholas Bell 0]

Quote[/b] ]However I should say that on the BIS maps I rarely have to put more then 3 waypoints for vehicles.  They normally travel just fine on the roads and never take shortcuts through open fields if they are wheeled vehicles or if they are tracked vehicles on "safe" or "careless" behavior.   So it might be possible that you could be doing something wrong.

I would talk to some of the other map making gurus to see what they suggest.  

Not sure to ask about this one   Thinking about it, it likely is not the road object itself, nor a config issue as both simply refer to BIS files.  That "only" leaves the texture the road sits on, which is merely a copy of an existing BIS texture, with the rvmat changed.  The problem of wandering AI has been experienced and questioned by others building islands too.  I wonder if appears on any other non-BIS islands other than mine and Opteryx's - something to compare to.

Quote[/b] ]n regards to the map colour, I think the river beds could be more grey to match the colour when up close. From a distance it looks more like flowing water with the blue pigments. It should reflect it's surroundings more as it's made up of the same sand and rock but lighter in tone.

I'm not seeing blue, TankCommander.  Could you post an in-game image so I can better understand?  Is it just the sat image or is it the transition area between the texture and the sat map.  I agree with what the river bed is composed of, and I created it using the GE image so the colors would be right.  I also made it transparent (70%) so the underlying color would tint it.

I'll test making the streambed texture more "sticky" and see it that changes the AI behavoir on the trail.