RockinHarry

Thanks for the great responses, guys!  They're really helpful, actually.  I suppose it's a useful topic to discuss not just for me, but for the whole community.
A small force battle is one of the things I was considering.
Forest and urban battles were also on my mental list.  Urban battles might be more problematic.  For me CMBN gameplay starts to get choppy when you go beyond a certain threshold with the number of buildings.  I want to keep the scenarios accessable.  I could see a small, densely packed urban map though.
I specifically don't want to do historical battles.  It seems to me a lot of people are already doing historical or semi-historical battles, and while I applaud them for their efforts, I like to be free to go outside the constraints of history.
I was not considering large battles with recon, but I'll keep it in mind for the future.  The way I've been doing maps is to start with a fairly small one and work on it until I get it to a level of detail I'm happy with.  Then, after playing a scenario on it for some time, I expand it around the edges and make it bigger, step by step.  If I ever get one big enough, I'll think about a larger-scale battle.
I've always liked maps and scenarios that emphasize the vulerability of tanks and other AFVs to infantry.  I don't know how many of you ever played Close Combat 2, but years ago I made a couple of custom maps for that game (Pulling Teeth and The Devils' Triangle, in case you want to try and track them down).  I think those maps embody my general philosophy.
For a long time I've been obsessed with the Commonwealth Forces scenario Linking Up & Breaking Out, so I may make my own interpretation of that scenario.  I like it because it's got interesting goals...if you play as the Germans, you have to defend a crossroads from a multi-directional attack while retreating elements try to scoot across from one side to the other.  You can choose to scoop up some of the retreaters to bolster your defense, but your total score is based on how many make it all the way to the exit point.  It's more than a simple conquest or defense of victory points.
Thanks Again!

Neat! ...not that I´d expect to see any sort of CC anytime in the near future.

With regards to hand and rifle grenades, I´d like to see them added to the supply dumps and vehicles (incl. pillboxes) soon. That would be neat +1

Hi
I recently started another huge PBEM QB on a very large map.  Apart from the challenge of coordinating/battle planning a large force size (it was 7209 points), the main issue I was faced was just being able to get a feel for the maps topography.  Without an understanding of it, you really can't develop a battleplan (well you can but I am sure it will be flawed).  Yes you can navigate around the map with the camera but we a all know this is a time consuming and poor substitute for a simple topographical map. For me topographical maps are the bread and butter of battlefield commanders (at least modern ones) and I doubt much could be accomplished without access to one.  It is such a pleasure to play a game like ArmA and access the awesome in game topographical maps that come packaged with the game.  You can mark them up and draw up all kinds of plans.
The suggestion of the game featuring contour lines to assist in this ends has been thrown around probably since CMx1 days and it is a shame to find that there seems no plans for BFC  to ever consider/implement such a thing. That seems odd because I believe much of the information to generate one is already in the game.  It is also odd that all that information is also available to the player yet I do not believe it has been properly realised (at least a forum search didn't reveal anything).
Having only recently started playing around with the editor in more depth, I realised that it was relatively quite easy to create quite effective topographical maps of any CM map (OK it's not exactly a plain contour map, but it achieves the same thing).  I hope I am not posting something that has already be done before but a search of the forums reveals that the kind of map I created hasn't been done before (well, not mentioned of in these forums) which again was quite surprising.  Surely this has been done before.
The map I converted was WynnterGreen's Three Towns QB map (3800x1800m) which has featured in at least one AAR on these forums. I have posted up a downsized version of the full res map so it fits on the screen. The map is a 100% accurate conversion of the actual CM map.  It's incredible the difference having a map like this has made to being able to generate both strategic and tactical battle plans.  You realise just how much you are missing out on playing the game without it and how much a game like this really could benefit from it. I can see how it could benefit both player and scenario designer alike.

I think you might have highlighted something I have seen and brushed off a couple of times. So I went and did some close observation of an unmolested US infantry M1919 MMG team in BN (v3) and here are a few things, some of which are just observations about how things work that I hadn't realised before, some of which are just background for completeness.
Machine guns no longer fire while packing up. If you have a deployed team and give them a long movement order without interfering with the Deploy Weapon button, they will automatically spend the normal Pack Up time dismantling their weapon and will not redeploy it when they arrive at their destination. If you have a deployed team, and give them a short movement order (4AS or less on flat open ground; I didn't test to see whether heavier terrain reduces the allowed displacement) without untoggling "Deploy Weapon", the weapon becomes "instantly" undeployed, and only takes 2-3 seconds to redeploy once they've settled down. This is, I believe, simulating the crew shifting their piece without dismounting it from the tripod and all the other formalities. If this short displacement is interrupted short of the objective, the same 2-3s Deploying phase occurs. A Pause order without a movement order does not inhibit firing at all. Doesn't achieve very much either though Machine guns given a Pause and a movement order might fire one short burst at the very beginning of their Pause, but will otherwise not fire during their Pause. If the movement order is long (over 4AS) they will not commence Packing Up until the Pause has completed. If the movement order is short (4AS or less), they will "instantly" undeploy. Redeployment on arrival at the terminal waypoint is not affected by the Pause. So yeah, you can't usefully give complicated combination fire and movement orders to crew-served weapons in WeGo mode. While that may, on one level, be appropriate, it's a bit inconsistent and could probably do with some tweaking at some stage. Especially if it's actually not the way it's supposed to work; it has shades of the "tanks with Pause orders counting as firing on the move when they're stopped for the Pause" oversight that got fixed a while back.

GR - I think you are missing how mods work.
First the mod itself must have a tagged name, and I'm not sure Vein will have done that. In this instance the tag could be [2R].
You will therefore need to unpack the brz. file and add the tag if it is not there, and then add the files to your Z folder.
You then need to create a simple text file and import it into the game with this quoting the tag name. In simple terms a tagged file, whether it be a texture, sound etc is a file that is only called when the mod tag is loaded into a scenario.
If you have BS play around with the tagged textures that came in game.
 Stock Mod Tags
[lawn] - Turns Ground Dirt Red into a mowed lawn.
[trash] - Turns Ground Hard into a pile of trash.
[softtrash] - Turns Ground Sand into a pile of trash.
[rubble] - Turns Ground Heavy Rocks into urban rubble.
[night] - Adds camouflage face paint to soldier faces.
[brown] - Used for US soldiers. Replaces camo pattern on gear with solid coyote brown.
[digital] - Used for Ukrainian soldiers. Replaces older uniform with new digital uniform.
[ukraine] - Used for Ukrainian vehicles. Vehicle models in both Russian and Ukrainian service use
this mod tag to differentiate between Ukrainian and Russian vehicle textures
HTH
 
P

I have used them successfully to close with the enemy as to a approach when no other option is available.
First, you need something else to give the cover fire or aided concealment like additional smoke.
Second break up your infantry into fire teams, spread them out and rush them in quick burst then drop and hide., Then crawl side ways from any expected area fire from the enemy you might receive, maybe one or two action squares.
The trick I find that works best is rush all units at the same time, the enemy will likely only fire on one or two units, then make sure to shift when hidden to prevent any area fire that the opponent might try to place on you.
Concealment is a powerful tool if used correctly in the game, area fire is hard to place on you in wheat fields, so learn to use that. Don't give the enemy a target.
So do not bother trying to fire from a wheat field, you are just exposing yourself, Keep hidden, and remember short bust when moving.
Only after crossing the field and closing in on the enemy will I pop them up and use them in the attack. And that means I am pretty sure that I will have such a fire power advantage that I can expose them to such a move.
So in other word, it is a way of approach, not a terrain to use to fight from.  Using my method, you can cross and use wheat fields without exhausting your troops. As for fighting from them, think of them as clear ground with no cover. Because showing your troops from them is placing them in that exact situation.
Hopes this helps

They do? I don't see them very often (mostly in BN) even in woods that look like they maybe ought to be impenetrable to vehicles...
I agree that the representation, good as it is, is not as good as having a Mark 1 eyeball on the same ground IRL, and that's why there are things like the Target tool. But the benefits from the interactions of terrain types are so complex that the limitated degree of wooliness in their representation doesn't make much difference, IMO.

Two problems:
(1)  Some of us have no actually training and don't really know what's best in the real world.
(2)  Some who have real world experience still cannot fully recognize its abstraction in software.
This is why there are things like a LOS tool.  In the real world, a shooter should be able to estimate distances by various factors.  This is a simulated world.  Providing aids to be used for quick judgements is not the same thing as trying to turn your game play into an exercise in statistics and probabilities.  BTW, your intuitive knowledge is, in fact, your brain's compilation of empirical knowledge into high speed stereotypical choices.
Lastly, this type of experimentation besides aiding player and designers is good for the devs too.  Many bug and anomalies have been found by players trying to understand the mechanics of the game (former beta tester of 20 years speaking here).

Y'know, when you're in the real world nobody is going to hand you a sheet of paper with hard numbes listing relative levels of concealment for the surrounding terrain. Reality doesn't work like that. The whole point of providing a detailed 3-D environment is the 'willing suspension of disbelief'. You're not juggling numbers and algorithms, you're lying in a muddy field in the middle of the night not 500m from people who want to kill you. As to not being able to tell orchards from tall pines in the game. The presence of tall pines ought to be a giveaway on that score.

Well, don't take me wrong in that I do not personally understand that it is a numbers game. No matter what it always will be.
I also will say that I do plenty of calculations as to what might happen within the game and with my units. I do think there is a place for it. But in the game now, I see that place with each weapon and how that weapon works. And to me, that is very much how I see what someone does that is leading real troops and is wanting to use the weapons at his disposal to their best effect.
Example, when black sea first came out, The first thing I did was make a bunch of little fire fight scenarios and made determinations as to what effective ranges different rifles were being effective at.
But did I chart it, I guess I could have, and yes many real soldiers have a similar understanding of that with their weapons.So it makes somewhat sense to me that someone would do that.
But It only took only one time sending troops into a barn and seeing them mowed down to understand it is nothing more than concealment and I don't need no chart to tell me that, just like any other terrain on the map. its pretty easy to understand the likely results of the terrain without any numbers to verify it. That is all I am saying. Of course that comes with playing the game and seeing the results of such terrain.
Where as , in cmX1 I will say, terrain was very much more like a mathematical formula. The results were pretty consistent also. Now, I would not say that anymore with the terrain, it can give you surprises.

Yeah, I'll leave that to the Gamey SOB's, you know Doug and his ilk.  
Seriously, the intent of my Blog is to address the application of real world tactics in the CM games... it is my firm belief that if you learn the real world tactics, and know how to apply them in CM you will be successful more times than not.

Yup, Aris made some files included in his CMFI terrain mods and maybe elsewhere. Could be, that the shader file "water_simple.frag" is responsible for water reflection color changes.

I know it may sound gruesome but as an option I'd like to see hit decals on Infantry similar to how it works on vehicles however this time leave a dark red decal. I'm fairly sure it could be done as I said along the same lines as hit decals for vehicles.
 
Sometimes I think CM is a touch to sanitised and I'm one of those who feel Warfare should be shown\portrayed in it's bloody entirety.

+1. For buildings, and general environment destruction similar to Battlefield 4 for a bar to perhaps strive for. We do have them now for vehicles and terrain, but the ground fire and scorched earth from cmx1 would certainly add to cmx2's atmosphere.
As for the soldiers, if done in a tasteful, non-grisly way it would not bother me. I could see just a red circle, or something that looks like a red paint ball hit. As for this being high on a wish list it is not.
 

I like that idea @RockinHarry. 

Here's a modification of the movie mode shader that gives it a night vision effect for those night scenarios. It's designed to be used in conjunction with the artificial brightness mode (Alt+B), so to use it all you have to do is hit Alt+B and Alt+M. Here's a link to download it right now, and I'll also upload it to the repository.
DOWNLOAD
A couple screenshots:


Thanks to SLIM for the idea and BarbaricCo for making it known it was possible to mod the shader.

You could write a campaign that just reused the same map sequentially. Some campaigns do in fact have successive scenarios on the same map on some of their branches. But the "front lines" at each step of the campaign would only be able to be set at the points the scenario designer estimates they'd be at given the result that led to the map being chosen. So if "Game 1" had each side starting 2/5 of the way onto the map, the campaign would branch into 2a (where Red won) and 2b (where Blue won). In 2a Red would start at 1/2 way and Blue only 1/5 of the way on (because that's where the scenario designer thought a "victory" for Red would leave the lines) and in 2b the front lines would be mirrored (for converse reasons). And Campaigns can only be fought vs the AI (with the possible exception of hotseat... did we find that format works?).
There are, however a few Operational scenarios going on that are umpired and mapped using an adaptation of Panzer Command,which also is used to help deal with the Operational constraints of the situation. This is the Allied HQ for one being run for Red Thunder.
 
Edit: That said, scenarios can be quite long and maps and forces very large indeed if your rig can handle them. Considering the "time compression" we see in CM games (for many factors, but the General's God's Eye View and his ability to perfectly coordinate at a moment's notice are probably the largest), a 4 hour game on a really big map with reinforcements could feel very operational.

Few updates
 
What brings to life terrain and flora is overlay setting in "War Movie" shader but it affects vehicles and uniforms to become too dark, or garish. So regarding all of the suggestions and obvious shortcomings of this edited "War Movie" shader I tried to take it further.
  This involves editing of bump mapped shaders, but also in consequence means that normal CM look will also be affected and out of balance. With editing only "War Movie" shader You affect only the "alt-M" special mode so you can easily switch back to defaults. Now it's impossible — unless You move shaders from "z" folder.   - Dark shadow/garish areas in vehicles and uniforms are more pleasing. - edited haze/sky gradients and clouds textures so they are not "burned". - messing with shadows has performance impact. - still didn't managed to tweak the fog.   Important is that Combat Mission still manage to retain a distinctive look. All of this was already "under the hood". I just tweaked the settings. - It would be great if community up vote this, to came on priority list for next update (if it's possible; engine v4.0?) so players can enable/disable, something like "advanced shaders" option. - to leave Battlefront to finalize this job. They know best what's more in the pipeline and how to make this official without breaking anything (at least for PC/Mac's with decent graphic card). - Of course we can continue to play with the settings (please upload those screenshoots!) so they can make better decisions and see what works, what doesn't in different conditions.  - and finally I must resume social and work life back to normal   What I also achieved while messing with shaders is to hard crash iMac. Need to check everything carefully before uploading this mode so it not became Combat Mission - A Shader Too Far   Cheers!   It's not bloody war, it's postcard (Who can now say that Combat Mission has outdated graphic!)   Garish is gone, sky is back - Let's smash! (daily scenarios can take even more "shine" — after all its metal on the shiny day)   Don't look at me, I'm ugly in the morning (@CarlWAW will be pleased I hope so)   peaceful trenches of Eastern Front (night and early morning scenarios probably needs "lighter" settings for playability reasons)   smoke is in the air, action is coming (fog still not there)   To the glory or… (grass is not affected by shadows — probably too much even for the fastest computers)    

All pics taken in-game on a Windows 7 based system with a Nividia GTX970 graphics card; all settings best.
 
Taken at around 0600Hrs - overcast and misty. Current in-game view (note game heavily modded)

 
Same view, same time, with shaders installed and in 'war movie' mode
 

 
Taken around 1400Hrs, clear weather. Current in-game view (again heavily modded).
 

 
Same view, time etc. In 'war movie' mode using new shaders.
 

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;

If you have artillery asset with both smoke and HE - if you use up all HE the smoke shells are lost. Which can be really annoying (but AFAIK realistic) if you first want to pummel a location, then put smoke on it and then advance.
 
It would be a great help if the UI could show how many shells the mission you're about to call will use, so that you don't overextend your resources.
Would it be difficult to program/implement?

I'd love to have them smoke separate. That way, you could fire HE till the tubes glow, then toss the smoke.

Ok. I'll play Iron instead of Elite from now on.

Shane,
Any ETA on when The Proving Grounds (your place to test w.i.p. scenario's) will be available?
What's the thinking on the Proving Grounds process to manage uploads, testing, feedback, and finishing (for posting to TSDIII)? 
Thank you and the rest of The Few Good Men for making Scenario Depot III happen.
 
 

Hello Gentlemen
 
I bring you exciting news of the new Scenario Depot III which has been funded by The Few Good Men.  As we all know The Scenario Depot II was the go to place for Scenario downloads with its most successful period being from the mid-90's to the early 00's for the CMX1 series of games.  Unfortunately it was never updated to encompass the CMX2 series of games but all that is about to change.  I introduce to you The Scenario Depot III.
 

 
The new site is a community wide project and despite being hosted on The Few Good Men servers membership of The FGM is not required.  We have reached a stage where the site is pretty much finished and all that remains to be tested now is its load bearing capabilities.  
 
The Scenario Depot III is the place to upload your completed play tested scenarios for the enjoyment of the CMx2 community and I'm asking if you scenario designers out there would do me the honour of starting to upload your scenarios to the database as a stress test exercise.  If all goes well The Scenario Depot III will be up and running henceforth.
 
The site is available HERE
 
Please read 'The About The Scenario Depot III' section and then go to 'Upload A File' to go through the simple process of getting your scenario into our database awaiting front page post upload. 
 
I would like to thank Gary Krockover the original designer of The Scenario Depot II and The Proving Grounds for his permission to launch the next era of the sites catering for the new games released by Battlefront in the CMX2 series.
 
The site covers all CMX2 games [Afghanistan, Shock Force, Battles for Normandy, Fortress Italy, Red Thunder , Black Sea] and has areas waiting to be opened for the Bulge games forthcoming release.
 
As well as scenarios and campaigns the site also offers the capability of uploading user designed maps for players to download.
 
At present we have just the one map uploaded so please pop over and start adding your content and if you wish to donate towards the endeavour there is a link at the bottom of the right hand column for you generous folk out there.  Donations will go towards the programmes required to get The Proving Grounds up and running which is phase 2 of the project.  I look forward to seeing your work being submitted.
 
Thanks for reading.
 
Bootie