Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by blackthorne556

  1. Awesome. I've been avoiding this mod since I got into community play because I thought it was a non-option. I used this exclusively when I was a SP kinda guy.


    Any other behavior mods that work with, compliment, or go nuts when used together?


    I have to assume all other AI mods are right out, but some have comments about using them with others, so I figured I'd ask.





    Having investigated the readme, it indicates not to use mods that alter CfgAISkill or danger.fsm


    Would that include using the AI skills module in ALiVE?

  2. So, I'm a little confused. If I understand correctly, the current working version is the mediafire link posted May 5th, not the one on PW6. The mediafire version is the FX version, not the AI only.


    How would I go about using the AI improvements only?


    Follow up - I'm a little hazy on what gets synced to what - If I want to use the AI enhancement in an ALiVE mission, where I place no actual enemy units on the map, how do I go about it? Or is it just the effects that need to be synced...?

  3. So I've done a bit of testing with this mod, and have a little feedback.


    1. Needs - More - Aggression. The idea of "try to stay alive" is good, and that's something that should be maintained, but the AI needs to be more aggressive. Move up on the enemy, flank his position, gain elevation, and if that can't be achieved, perform a fighting withdrawal. The AI is too willing to get pined down in the interest of not taking risks. This is just as fatal as a bad charge. Locate the enemy, fire on him directly, or suppress him while your buddy moves, then change position.


    2. The desire to move to cover is good. Once fired upon, units spread out to nearby cover - IF there is cover to be had. HOWEVER, I've noticed a lot of instances where a unit will move NEAR cover, and not place it between themselves and the enemy - Standing in front, or beside the rock or wall that could save their life.


    3. Abandon hopeless positions. If the enemy is caught in the open, there needs to be an override to get them to disengage, retreat, and regroup. Currently they seem to look for cover, and if it's too far, they just give up and return fire indefinitely.

  4. So I've done some testing on this, and it seems like the vehicle behaviors combined with an ALiVE combined arms style mission don't work very well together. Trucks, cars, and APC type units will roll up, then everyone including the driver and gunner will pile out and abandon the vehicle. I can understand the behavior with a truck, but that's just plain unacceptable for an IFV like a Bradley...


    Tested with latest versions of ALiVE and using RHS factions.

  5. Sorry if this has been answered, I searched through several pages but couldn't find what I was looking for.


    In regard to the modified difficulty variants on the front page - Do these change the "behaviors" of the AI, or is it tweaking the "skills"? For example, is the "insane" difficulty more accurate, or just more aggressive?


    I wouldn't mind seeing the AI more aggressively flank, sprint to cover, and suppress the hell out of us. However, I would want to turn down the "aimbot" a bit.


    I also plan to use this with alive. Could I put down Alive's skills module and make the AI a little less "360 noscope" but maintain all the "duck and cover"?

  6. So, a little update - http://imgur.com/a/v2qVC


    That's the top left panel of 4. Before and after editing. I think I did pretty god for my first go at GIMP. Thanks for the tip about the clone tool. Infinitely useful. So far I've used it in creation of the shoreline, adding trees to the low res sections that I cut from further zooms and stretched, and for "erasing" the clouds.


    Thanks for all the help. I'm sure I'll be back with another hangup sooner or later!

  7. Yeah, I hadn't thought about that. The distance at which the sat image renders, I'm sure I could get creative enough to blend it in. I had hoped to avoid employing my extremely limited photo editing abilities, but if Bing lets me down, I think that may be the answer.


    Still waiting on the Bing Download... 90km x 90km at 100 m (well, 150 yard for Bing) is a great many panels.


    You were right about the Google results coming back patchy. Hopefully Bing's look better across the board and I can JUST use that, if not it will be a case of superimposing them and cutting out the one that looks worse. I suppose I could select the areas and adjust with color controls as well. Hopefully, between the 2, I can get all the non cloneable parts to show up without these damned clouds...

  8. Yeah, I know I bit off a pretty big bite to chew on. The upside is that we have a resident Xcam expert in the unit to teach me how to populate it and provide assistance. I just have to figure out the base layers. Once I get heightmap, satellite overlay, mask, textures, and clutter all hammered out, we can get to fun stuff.


    According to my Xcam guru, there are ways to get large areas done with randomization algorithms. That will do for "painting" large portions of the map, and we can go on to fine tuning from there. I keep getting disappointed by maps that are either really nice but too small, or big enough but ugly. That's not to say that there aren't some out there, but there are a lot more maps than there are good maps.  :lol:


    Some of my unit have worried about performance, but with the DX12 compatibility on the horizon, hopefully those of us who have invested in decent hardware will be alright. Those who have not really shouldn't get to set the standard :P


    So I've got Terra downloading in oziexplorer format. It's a huge download, so hopefully it works out. Either it will work - whether with some stretching/scaling or not - or it wont and I'll just have to bite the bullet and change some sizes and rethink which parts of my slice of the world are most important to me for inclusion.


    Thanks for the help so far. I'll report back on how it goes.

  9. No, I gathered my heightmap from http://www.opentopography.org/

    I am using the coordinate input for both, so I would hope that (once scaled appropriately) they would line up.


    Also in reference to your earlier comment, I had considered using a 1:1 format, but the piece of the world I am trying to work with has so many interesting features, but I needed about 90x90km to take advantage of them. Hopefully this all works out, or after shaking off the disappointment I may be forced into a 1:1

  10. Derp. Yes. 20480.


    I do currently have a heightmap generated from OpenTopo. It's at 4096x4096 already. I'm thinking that I might just use GM to create the sat a map from the pieces I collect from Terra, and tile it into 4 panels of 20480x20480.


    Unless I'm mistaken, I could then copy those, and make a downscaled image from them and line them up with my height map to confirm a good match.


    Once that is done I can move on to my mask. Can I assume that TB will read 4 mask images just like I'm doing for my sat image, and do that in 4 panels of 20480x20480 as well?

  11. Ok, so I've got TerraIncognita up and running. I've made my selection using my coordinates. A bit of searching tells me that to get 1m/pixel resolution I want to set zoom at 100meters. The small guide I'm reading from also mentions Global Mapper, and says that he is saving in ArkView format for compatibility.


    So, before I launch such a large download, let me run some numbers here.


    I want my final map to be about 40x40Km. I've gathered my heightmap from OpenTopo, and the area I seek to emulate is 90x90, so it will be slightly downscaled. So I take my slice of the world, and I scale it to 4096x4096, and would put that into TB at cell size 10. Compatibility pending, I may recapture the data in GM, but we'll see.


    So if I gather the sat images from Terra, then import that to GM, cutting it into 4 panels, can I then scale those to 20580x20580. If so, when I set that to 1m/pixel, everything should in theory match up at the desired size, Correct?


    Or am I missing something that will screw me in the end?

  12. A little context - I am starting a new 40x40 terrain. I'm using a height map of 4096x4096, with a cell size of 10. For the satellite image I intend to use 4 panels of 20580x20580 for a total image size of 40960x40960 with a 1m/pixel resolution.


    My question is this: What is the best way to generate a decent looking satellite image?


    Here is what I have tried so far:


    Google Maps Downloader - This has the option to input my lat/long coordinates, fetch frames at a given zoom level and piece them together. The problem I encountered was that the final product was either horrible resolution, or was missing pieces that Google did not have at closer zoom levels. I also had the problem that at large zoom levels, Google Maps would ban my IP for too many requests per 24 hour period.


    Universal Maps Downloader - This program does the same as above, but I attempted with Bing to see if I could get better results. Not the case.


    Global Mapper - Using the 2 week trial, I attempted to wrap my head around this program, but did not have enough money to justify the Digital Globe account to use the high-res images. To be fair, I didn't explore this option very thoroughly. I found the UI to be fairly intimidating for a new user. After pulling up the world from a free database, I was at a loss as to how to gather and save the data.


    Screenshots - Using Google Earth Pro, I cordoned off the piece of the world I'm working with, then bisected it into my 4 panels. I then created a 20580x20580 canvas in Gimp. I did some maths, and adjusted my zoom levels in GE, went to the SW corner of my cordoned location and encountered a critical error in my thinking. The world, as Columbus had predicted, was round. It does not cut into perfectly square shapes. Now, with a little effort, I could grab more than I needed and trim the edges. Ok, but even if I ignored this problem, with a map the size I am working with, the manpower intensity is a little insane. We're talking tens of thousands of images. Not only to move around and collect, but then to stitch together. Never mind the fact that as I move west to east, the image doesn't simply pan, but the world rotates, witch relates to the first problem of grabbing square data from a spherical source.


    What am I missing here? What is the best method to go with? I feel like I'm going to have to make a compromise, but I need direction as to HOW to make that compromise. Is there a program that should be preferred over the above listed? Was I on the right track with GM? If so, what is the preferred database to use?


    Thanks for taking the time to read through all of that if you're still with me. I'd be grateful for any assistance.


    - Blackthorne



  13. Alright. That does help a bit. I'll keep working at it for now. Hopefully by the time I've masked off my 5 terrain types and drop it into the tools I don't wind up with something unusable.


    My first attempt has been using a 90x90 section and hoping to go to a 3:1 ratio of 30x30 in game, but because of what I perceived to be a problem I cut my selection to the 80x80 @ 2:1 for 40x40 described above.


    Am I over thinking this? Is a 3:1 scaling of "Real Life - Arma" a reasonable idea, or should I move forward with 2:1 as the goal?

  14. So I'm fairly new to this. I have watched CAPTNCAPS tutorials (both updated and new) but I'm a little lost in how to process all the variable I need to know.

    So, I've selected a piece of the world of 80Kmx80Km using googles measurement tool, I then used OpenTOPO using the long-lat coordinates for my height map. Then I used Google Satelite Maps Downloader for my satellite image, zoomed to 15. It's a little fuzzy zoomed in, so I might bite the bullet and go for a closer zoom, but I don't know if I should/have to.


    I began working on my mask image, but an idea came into my head that I can't seem to find the answer to. About scaling.


    The piece of the world I am working with is 80x80, but I want to scale it down to a 2:1 ratio and have a final product of 40x40Km in-game size.


    I found a link in searching this forum to http://tactical.nekromantix.com/wiki/doku.php?id=arma:terrain:grid_cell_sizebut that only gives me the numbers I need to make it happen, but I still wonder if by doing that, I will wind up with tiny mountains and rivers of unrealistically small heights/widths. My concern is that I will go through all the effort and after scaling, end up with terrain that doesn't have realistically sized environments.


    Am I on the right track? What resolution sizes should I scale which images, and at which steps? CAPTNCAPS tutorial is great, if you plan to build something EXACTLY like he is, but there are a few variables he doesn't seem to go into.


    Hopefully someone can help me out with this. Looking forward to any input. Thanks guys!

  15. Looking for a milsim/realism group, preferably using Massi's USSOCOM, or USMC. Rangers are my top pick.

    I've been playing ARMA single player for years, but never got into the MP scene until now. But I am tired of building my own missions from scratch, and ordering around AI. I want a medium-large outfit with rank structure. Radio discipline during missions is important to me. Nothing kills the excitement like out-of-context chatter. I do not require a "Yes Sir!" level of "role-play" but I expect to have persons in command, and persons responding to those commands.

    Having played single player, I have had to get experience in most roles, including rotary wing pilot. I have no base upon which to compare myself, but I have been told by teammates while playing DayZ mod "Shit man, you can fly". I also enjoy the roles of rifleman, and auto-rifleman. I would hope to be able to play as multiple roles. While I do enjoy flying, I don't want to miss all the action on foot.

    30 years old

    Mountain time zone

    English first/only language

    I will be honest about my availability - I work long hours (12 hour days), frequently for 14 days in a row, but then have 7 days off. During my off time, you can expect daily availability through most afternoons and nearly all evenings. Please be a large enough unit that my absence does not effect the units capabilities too much. Also be sure that this availability structure is alright with you before you take me on, as it is not likely to change for the foreseeable future.

    Mods I require:

    Massi's USSOCOM, USMC, and associated weapon pack.

    VTS Weapon resting

    US Helicopters (HAFM)

    CSAT replacement (@TEC_CSAT)

    Mods I would like to see, but are negotiable:

    ALiVE and/or MCC for mission creation


    Sudden's Russians


    A3MP Maps

    RPA Refined Vehicles

    **ANY OTHER MODS that replace the futuristic vanilla with real life assets.**

    I also use bCombat and TPW_MODS in SP, though I'm not sure if these work in MP. And of course I am running JSRS and Blastcore.

    Willing to expand on these if I'm missing something you play with.

    Hopefully I haven't scared you off. I don't want to sound demanding, but I know what I want. Feel free to contact for more info, or to tell me a little bit about your outfit.

    Thanks, see you in the field.


    Not looking any longer. Playing with 1st Ranger Battalion, http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?179169-1st-Ranger-Battalion-ArmA-Realism-Unit&highlight=ranger

  16. I can't see their time or speed mentioned? ;)

    I think I smell a troll.

    ---------- Post added at 20:56 ---------- Previous post was at 20:55 ----------

    'Fast enough' is a pretty broad answer methinks.

    Sprinting for 1/4 mile then pushing a van for same distance, then connecting with a human sized target with 2 rounds while still in motion is enough to prove my point methinks.

    But you know.. You can prove anything with facts, so what do I know.