CarlWAW

Vehicles sink into snow.

Hi
 
After messing little bit with shaders (http://bit.ly/1j00Yds) thought it would be cool to add normal maps to roads and backgrounds. As far as I read it, Battlefront tried it few years ago and put it on hold for obvious performance reasons. But regarding Moore’s Law maybe its time to do it. All of this normal mapping will give us nice soft shadows and details. Compare shadows of the soldiers on vehicle and shadows of the vehicle on the roads.
 
Problem is I just can’t get normal maps working
 
- in “z” folder
- if file is “window 1.bmp” than normal map is named “window 1_normal map.bmp”
- normal maps generated with CrazyBump Mac beta and NormalMappr OS X (booth exporting png-s that I later saved as bmp - could this be the problem?)
For roads maybe it’s problem because that they are not enabled for using normal maps, but can’t even get it working for objects already with normal maps.
 
Can someone with experience answer or give some good advice
 
Thanks
 
Recreated effects in Unity with CM textures

no normal maps
 

with normal maps (would be great to see jagdpanther on this road)
 

default (this building already have normal maps in CM)
 

just little bit stronger (but not loading in CM)
 
 

This was supposed to bring You glorios FSAA MSAA AAAA with WM mode...
...but insted
BarbaricCo presents:
CoMiCraft mode:
 CoMiCraft Mode Shader.zip

Hobbit village
 

Combat Mission Wolfenstein
 

@Vanir Ausf B tracers have never been better!
 
Even serious wargamer need a rest and kids will love it, so don't be too upset!
point of interest is line: vec2 Tile = vec2(0.0020,0.0045); 

I also tried those new bump mapped shaders in CMFI demo and they have no effects? What they do is bringing down burned lights and too dark shadows on vehicles and units. More comparision on:
http://www.barbaricco.com/upload/CMRTAnalysis/
Few more screenshoots:

CMRT Default
 

FXShine 02 (edited blur + bump mapped shaders + some Aris mods)
more...





 

@CarlWAW Thank You for involvement. If FXShine settings are "commercial ones" Your settings is definitely what "War Movie" mode supposed to be.

Here it is
FXShine blur + bumpmapping shaders 02a download link:
http://www.barbaricco.com/upload/CMRT_FXShine_02a_shader_download/
- this version also affect default mode
- if You have problems just delete those files from "z" folder
Please post Your results (ATI/ Nvidia/ Intel / graphic card memory - shaders ON/OFF and screenshoots).
 
@RockinHarry, @CarlWAW here is little analysis what's going on:
http://www.barbaricco.com/upload/CMRTAnalysis/
antialiasing affects my performance too much but it seems in Opt-M mode that is worse because off contrast. Also performances are much more influenced by screen resolutions and number of vehicles/ infantry/ trees on map than on the shaders settings. My graphic card (ATI 6750m 512Mb) can't handle large resolutions and shaders well (no depth on far terrain with shaders on?). For editing bumpmap settings to make it simple it's just "shadowValue0 /=" in 4 places. (screenshoots are resampled to 1200px and saved as jpg for upload reasons).
 

FXShine blur + bumpmapping shaders ALL BEST AND ON
 

FXShine blur + bumpmapping shaders ALL BEST AND ON
 

CarlWAW blur settings + bumpmapping shaders ALL BEST AND ON
Now to some tactics analysis. Let's rock!
 

I think I found my personal favourite settings.
 

I think the tank's bright side and the parts in the shadows contrast perfectly with the green of the trees and the trees against the hazy sky, while the building's grey roof just has the correct brightness to shine through the trees. The feeling of depth is very good. OVerall the picture is pleasantly warm.


Soldiers in the shadows are black, while the contrast with the white church is not hurting the eyes. Wall in the shadow shows a good amount of darkness.
The different greens are good to feel, whithout the green color dominating the screen.
 

Here I like the differences between being exposed to the sun, partial shadows and being fully in shadow. The green is vibrant enough to shine through the treetrunks, without dominating the screen. The green grass seems bright enough to clearly contrast any (moving) object on it.
 

Objects on the hill seem three-dimensional and nicely contrasting, without aggressive contrast from the sky. I like the blending of the sky with the rapeseed and the contrasting of the trees. Also the shadow of the tree in the foreground looks great.
 
And last but not least the previously used test scenes:

Amazing how threedimensional and warm CM can look, like an excellent oil painting.

The rapeseed is yellow enough and contrasting well with the green, the trees are beautifully dark green, throw dark shadows, with just enough to guesstimate details of the vehicle; the green of the grass shows partial dryness, the wheat looks dry and the soil behind the rear StuG looks freshly plowed and fertile and the sky's contrast and clouds look natural.

 
 

This is how it looks in ArmA Edit, a tool that can open and edit *.sqf files and such:

#version 120
#extension GL_EXT_gpu_shader4 : enable

float luma_mod;
vec3 avg_luma_vec;

// these need to stay up at the top apparently, to avoid some
// fun compilation bugs
uniform sampler2D RTScene;
uniform float rt_w;
uniform float rt_h;
//uniform vec2 rcpFrame;
noperspective varying vec2 pos;

// For all settings: 1.0 = 100% 0.5=50% 1.5 = 150%
vec3 BrightnessSaturationContrast(vec3 color, float brt, float sat, float con)
{
// Increase or decrease theese values to adjust r, g and b color channels seperately
/*const*/ float AvgLumR = 0.7; //avg_luma_vec.r; //0.5;
/*const*/ float AvgLumG = 0.7; //avg_luma_vec.g; //0.5;
/*const*/ float AvgLumB = 0.65; //avg_luma_vec.b; //0.5;

const vec3 LumCoeff = vec3(0.2125, 0.7154, 0.0721);

vec3 AvgLumin = vec3(AvgLumR, AvgLumG, AvgLumB);
vec3 brtColor = color * brt;
vec3 intensity = vec3(dot(brtColor, LumCoeff));
vec3 satColor = mix(intensity, brtColor, sat);
//vec3 conColor = mix((intensity - AvgLumin) / AvgLumin, satColor, con);

vec3 conColor = mix(mix(AvgLumin, intensity, 0.5) /*intensity*/, satColor, con);
return conColor;
}

// bleach bypass
vec3 overlay(vec3 previousmix, vec3 amount)
{
const vec3 lumcoeff = vec3(0.2125, 0.7154, 0.0721);
const vec3 one = vec3(1.0);
const vec3 two = vec3(2.0);
vec3 myInput = vec3(dot(previousmix, lumcoeff));

float luminance = dot(previousmix,lumcoeff);
float mixamount = clamp((luminance - 0.45) * 10.0, 0.0, 1.0);

vec3 branch1 = two * previousmix * myInput;
vec3 branch2 = one - (two * (one - previousmix) * (one - myInput));

vec3 result = mix(branch1, branch2, vec3(mixamount));

return mix(previousmix, result, amount);
}

vec4 bypass(vec4 base)
{
vec3 lumCoeff = vec3(0.25,0.65,0.1); //vec3(0.25,0.65,0.1);
float lum = dot(lumCoeff,base.rgb);
vec3 blend = vec3(lum);
float L = min(1,max(0,10.0*(lum- 0.45)));
vec3 result1 = 2.0f * base.rgb * blend;
vec3 result2 = 1.0f - 2.0f*(1.0f-blend)*(1.0f-base.rgb);
vec3 newColor = mix(result1,result2,L); // was lerp
float A2 = /*Opacity*/ 2.0 * base.a;
vec3 mixRGB = A2 * newColor.rgb;
mixRGB += ((1.0f-A2) * base.rgb);
return vec4(mixRGB,base.a);
}

void main()
{
vec2 rcpFrame = vec2(1.0 / rt_w, 1.0 / rt_h); //vec2(1.0 / rt_w, 1.0 / rt_h);

vec3 fxaa_color = texture2D(RTScene, pos).xyz;

//**********
// "overlay" is a bleach bypass, a la Saving Private Ryan or Black Hawk Down
//**********

fxaa_color = overlay(fxaa_color, vec3(0.7)); // 0.33 // 0.75

//**********
// sepia tones, if you like that sort of thing!
//**********

//const vec3 sepia = vec3(94.0, 38.0, 18.0) / 255.0;
//fxaa_color = mix(fxaa_color, sepia, 0.1); // * luma_mod;


// these were the original (and less than popular) settings
//fxaa_color = overlay(fxaa_color, vec3(0.70)); // was 0.75, but Bil suggested a BIT more color
//fxaa_color = BrightnessSaturationContrast(fxaa_color, 1.5, 0.8, 1.1);

//vec3 fxaa2_color = BlendSoftLight(fxaa_color, vec3(0.545, 0.27, 0.07));

// Red Thunder default
//fxaa_color = overlay(fxaa_color, vec3(0.75));
//fxaa_color = BrightnessSaturationContrast(fxaa_color, 1.1, 0.75, 0.75); //1.1);


fxaa_color = BrightnessSaturationContrast(fxaa_color, 1.0, 1.15, 1.1); //1.1);

///vec3 fxaa_color2 = overlay(fxaa_color, vec3(0.75));
///fxaa_color2 = BrightnessSaturationContrast(fxaa_color2, 1.1, 0.4, 0.5); //1.1);
///fxaa_color = BlendSoftLight(fxaa_color2, fxaa_color);

//fxaa_color = BrightnessSaturationContrast(fxaa_color, 1.1, 0.75, 0.75);

// holy crap, the parameters are actually brightness, saturation, contrast
//fxaa_color = BrightnessSaturationContrast(fxaa_color, 1.0, 0.8, 0.8); //0.8, 1.1, 1.1); //0.75, 0.5, 1.0); //1.05, 0.8, 1.0); //1.7, 0.6); //1.5, 0.8, 1.1);
gl_FragColor = vec4(fxaa_color, 1.0);

// a bypass filter (sort of Black Hawk Down-ish) that gives a nice effect
//gl_FragColor = bypass(gl_FragColor);
//gl_FragColor.xyz = BrightnessSaturationContrast(gl_FragColor.xyz, 1.0, 0.8, 0.8);

//gl_FragColor = mix(gl_FragColor, vec4(0.0, 0.0, 0.5, 1.0), 0.1);
//gl_FragColor = mix(gl_FragColor, vec4(139.0, 69.0, 19.0, 255.0) / 255.0, 0.07);



// and a final brightness modifier
gl_FragColor *= 1.35; //1.05;

// if you want this shader to have no effect, uncomment the following line
//gl_FragColor.xyz = texture2D(RTScene, pos).xyz;

Hi CMFI fans
 
This tweak was originaly for CMRT but could not resisted to try it in CMFI. Still don't own CMFI but it works in demo!
 
- this is modified Battlefront “War Movie” shader CMFI tweaked version
- this will replace the opt-M (alt-M) mode
- put the unzipped folder in "z" folder
- works also with CMRT, CMBN and CMBS
- little or no performance hit
- OS X and Windows
- screenshots are from demo version unedited.
- experimental stuff
- please don't edit shader if You don't know what You are doing!
 
Combat Mission FXShine mod CMFI tweak link:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/yqic9aamxuqfbzi/AADTj7R-HbHXHgWWS8wuCdSYa?dl=0
 
Please check original Thread at Red Thunder section:
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/120795-fxshine-shader/
 
Please enjoy and post Your best sunshine Italy screenshoots!

Hi All
 
To make a long story short, father in his middle 40-ties decided it's time to check are there any modern time "Close Combat" game for him and here we are. Finally:)
But on the road to Combat Mission it was obvious that some games are more "eye candy".
First decision was to make textures mod. But omg there are "billion" already top notch textures and community already provided great stuff here.
Then I discovered "War Movie" mode.  Why devs didn't made it default? But than again colors in movie mode are somehow too washed and not for everybody eyes. But Battlefront made right direction (they just weren't enough radical with movie shader settings) Textures are great we just need some fancy shader FX stuff. Being developed few iOS games myself I totally understand enormous amount of work small team like Battlefront can have with its own engine and all the assets.
As there is no SweetFX or Reshade for Mac OS X only solution was to try dig in into shaders and here we go:
 
- this is modified Battlefront “War Movie” shader
- this will replace the opt-M (alt-M) mode
- put the unzipped folder in "z" folder
- should work also with CMFI and CMBS
- don't know is this is allowed. Would be great if someone from Battlefront check it. Even greater if this is somehow putted in future official releases 
- tested on iMac OS X Yosemite with ATI 6750m
- little or no performance hit
- OS X only (someone can check it on Windows too -  not sure will it work)
- screenshots are unedited. Only used some community mods (aris mostly)
- experimental stuff
- please don't edit shader if You don't know what You are doing!
 
Combat Mission FXShine mod link:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/49hc7e5cn0lve4d/AADjTuXSsx6l35wtx_4g3mnda?dl=0
 
Oops - long story!
 
Please enjoy and post Your best screenshoots!

I have done a test about vehicle speeds (Kubel, Opel Blitz, 251/1) on different types of terrain. Here are the results:
 

 
 
At normal speed, no matter what kind of ground, the speed for all vehicles is 16 km/h. 16 km/h on rocky terrain and 16 km/h on a paved road? This does not seem right to me.
 
The speed on very bad ground (like rocky) seems way to high to me. Driving with 16 km/h on rocky terrain with a truck? Good luck! The normal speed for that terrain IMO should be 10 km/h at maximum. Probably walking speed to avoid severe damage after a few meters would be more suited from realism point of view.
 
Transferring this into more realistic game factors this maybe could result in 5 km/h for normal speed (inflicting no damage) and maybe 16 km/h at fastest speed - but with a dramatically increased chance to damage the vehicle.
 
This leads me to the third problem I see: because bad terrain does not have a devastating impact on speed (or on damage, if the terrain is ignored by the player and he orders a fast movement) the variation in speed between the different types of terrain seems not big enough. For example: "normal" speed: on paved road for a Jeep could be around 50 km/h, but 5 km/h on rocky.
 
Fast: IMO shows a nice variation between terrain types (12 - 70 km/h) - but sadly damage is missing completely.
 
What do you think about the numbers?

I am wondering if you guys even have any schedule at all...

I am wondering if you guys even have any schedule at all...

I just finished Blunting the Spear (ep. III) and I was able to QUICKLY rush with all trucks and kubels cross country over kilometers without noticing the slightest damage. I did not even care where the field paths were or if the ground was cereal or green or a ploughed field.
 
As a rural guy and grown up on a farm I have quite some experience the huge difference cfield paths, roads, cross country makes. I think no truck or jeep/kubel would survive more than a few hundred meters how I can dash them at CM's QUICK speed forward cross country.
IMO vehicles being constructed for road use and with light offroad capabilities should be more susceptible to damage because of inadequate speed.

@poesel
I don't think the argument from JasonC is valid because it focuses on what was happening more often and what not in his opinion. But the raised question was not how often situations in CM appeared in reality. Or how realistic the gaming styles of players are.
The raised question is the incredible effectivity and accuracy of Soviet SMG units compared to all others - even compared to modern infantry...
 
How do you remove insurgents or infantry from a house or from woods withpout the use of heavy weapons? According to the CMRT SMG model, just get machine pistol units (not US or German, but Soviet PPSHs are best) and every infantry in MOUT without support is toast. Perfect.
Maybe someone should email the Pentagon, that their instructors in Ukraine should demand the production of a million PPSHs to deal with the MOUT rebel problem, where the use of heavy weapons is a big problem...

Glad someone raised this topic. I have been wondering if I am the only one finding the accuracy of machine pistol units way off in CM.
 
Three main arguments come to my mind:
 
1. If I take the performance of Soviet SMG-units in CM, they obviously should have become the ULTIMATE infantry weapon for urban fighting or fighting in woods after 1945.
Now I am wondering why the US Army or the USSR in Vietnam never heard about this secret weapon? Why did they go the German StG44 (called MP44 wrongly in game) assault rifle route with the AK47 and the M16? Where are today's infantry units equipped with machine pistols like PPSHs?
 
2. The numbers of German losses against Soviet infantry do not indicate they were as effective as they are portrayed in the game, too. To my knowledge even until the end of the war, the Germans never had higher losses than the Soviets despite the inferiority in headcount numbers and equipment and scracity of everything.
 
3. 1st hand experience. Ever shot with a machine pistol in reality? It's a generalization, but to say that it's impossible to hit anything beyond 50 m comes quite close.
 
In my experience more bullets from automatic rifles do NOT automatically translate into a higher chance to hit. Quite the contrary IMO. In CM the kind of automatic fire seems not to be modelled.
In general I think that the hit probability of (machine) pistols in CM, be it PPSHs or (the sharpshooting crews with normal!) pistols, already beyond 25 m is too high and beyond 50 m is quite out of proportion.
I think the rifle based weapons (M1, K98, StG44/MP44) dramatically are undermodelled in comparison to (machine) pistols.

Playing the German campaign Blunting The Spear with so many vehicles in mission 3 makes me almost cry about plotting vehicle paths.
 
Please, could we have the opportunity when plotting moves for vehicles, that an already existing path for a vehicle could be used for another vehicle?
 
Illustration of what I mean:
 

 

 

 

uh Carl MP44 isa correct name for the weapon. Later once in production and use it received its later name. It was originally named the MP44 because Hitler forbade the project and so they used the name to make him believe it was a smg. You really should know more about subjects before making abject 100% statements about the validity of x or y by the game designers who spemt years reaearching this stuff.

@poesel
I don't think the argument from JasonC is valid because it focuses on what was happening more often and what not in his opinion. But the raised question was not how often situations in CM appeared in reality. Or how realistic the gaming styles of players are.
The raised question is the incredible effectivity and accuracy of Soviet SMG units compared to all others - even compared to modern infantry...
 
How do you remove insurgents or infantry from a house or from woods withpout the use of heavy weapons? According to the CMRT SMG model, just get machine pistol units (not US or German, but Soviet PPSHs are best) and every infantry in MOUT without support is toast. Perfect.
Maybe someone should email the Pentagon, that their instructors in Ukraine should demand the production of a million PPSHs to deal with the MOUT rebel problem, where the use of heavy weapons is a big problem...

Glad someone raised this topic. I have been wondering if I am the only one finding the accuracy of machine pistol units way off in CM.
 
Three main arguments come to my mind:
 
1. If I take the performance of Soviet SMG-units in CM, they obviously should have become the ULTIMATE infantry weapon for urban fighting or fighting in woods after 1945.
Now I am wondering why the US Army or the USSR in Vietnam never heard about this secret weapon? Why did they go the German StG44 (called MP44 wrongly in game) assault rifle route with the AK47 and the M16? Where are today's infantry units equipped with machine pistols like PPSHs?
 
2. The numbers of German losses against Soviet infantry do not indicate they were as effective as they are portrayed in the game, too. To my knowledge even until the end of the war, the Germans never had higher losses than the Soviets despite the inferiority in headcount numbers and equipment and scracity of everything.
 
3. 1st hand experience. Ever shot with a machine pistol in reality? It's a generalization, but to say that it's impossible to hit anything beyond 50 m comes quite close.
 
In my experience more bullets from automatic rifles do NOT automatically translate into a higher chance to hit. Quite the contrary IMO. In CM the kind of automatic fire seems not to be modelled.
In general I think that the hit probability of (machine) pistols in CM, be it PPSHs or (the sharpshooting crews with normal!) pistols, already beyond 25 m is too high and beyond 50 m is quite out of proportion.
I think the rifle based weapons (M1, K98, StG44/MP44) dramatically are undermodelled in comparison to (machine) pistols.

What still puzzles me is why BF did away with the easy click 180 degree arc of CM1.  If you play with armor, one needs to constantly have the turret facing one direction while the vehicle moves in another direction.  Currently, it's a major PITA to have to do 180 degree arcs in order to achieve this.

Glad to hear ( that it's not a bug    ).
 
Do not be too embarrassed, the number of "Spotting is bugged" threads that turned out to be due to Trees or Smoke turned off are legion.
It's all too easy to do - and the fact that the actual tank owned by a particular crew is not easily identifiable doesn't help.
 
Back to the fun then

@Baneman
Thanks for looking into it.
I have identified the problem. The problem is not in the game, but the idiot who sat in front of the computer. I obviously was so clever, that I ordered the two crews, once I had noticed they didn't recrew the tanks, not on the other tank, but in the next minute onto the wrong tank again.   Embarassing.

Going into the editor is taboo for double blind players.

Me too.I am wondering how many of these posters receive a free game as beta testers?