Zveroboy1

So I thought I understood what was going on, but actually I don't. When I work with the Adobe 1998 profile, I get the wrong colours when saving my work as a bmp. It only happens with the bmp format, I tried saving as a png, a jpeg etc and the colours are fine. The ICC profile checkbox is greyed out when saving as a bmp. Is this normal? The only way I can get the proper colours with a bmp file is by using sRGB.

Neat. Thanks for updating this.

Thanks for the tips Ben.

Never mind. I figured it out with the help of google. I had the wrong embedded colour profile. It is all good now.

Okay let me just preface this by saying that this thread is really aimed at other modders and people who have a knowledge of Photoshop So I am working on some mods and I having some weird issues with colours. It is a problem because one it makes it pretty hard to work properly because I constantly have to go back and forth between PS and the game to tweak the colours and two I am not even sure people are going to see my mods correctly. It is probably easier if I provide an example. So below is the facade of the building in Photoshop : When I save it as a bmp 24 bits I get this : Here is the in game view I get : The in game view looks slightly different than the bmp but I think maybe that's due to the daylight settings in the editor. I think the biggest issue is when I save as a bmp, because when I save as a png or a jpeg instead, I don't see this colour difference. The png looks exactly like the first picture in this thread. The PS colour profile I have been working with so far is Adobe RGB 1998. I tried switching to the one designed for my monitor or sRGB but it doesn't seem to make a difference. How do I fix this?

It doesn't sound boring at all to me. I'd play it for sure. Actually I have been working on something vaguely similar : a patrol in Afghanistan but in the green zone of the Helmand province, so not the same type of terrain at all. And it is just a single mission.

Well still. I have downloaded this rar file that someone on this forum compiled with all the scenarios released for SF1. (I forgot who it was but thanks). And it has 600 or 700 scenarios in it. Combatintman says a grand total of 9 scenarios released in what? two years for FB. Let's say RT and BS have 3 times this number for argument sake, maybe it is more i don't know, this isn't even close. Anyway this is what it is. I have probably made half a dozen scenarios over the years for RT, BS and SF1 and twice as many maps for my own use that I never published because they're only 80% done or I don't think they're good enough. I am probably not the only one.

True but even if you add up all the user made scenarios for RT, FB and BS, it probably won't come anywhere close to the Shock Force 1 numbers. Granted it was the first and only game in the series but still I am not sure why there is such a disparity. Yeah I understood what you meant, but my take on it is that if they start with Barbarossa or North Africa, in a way the old content would still remain relevant. Late war for CM2 and early period for CM3. You could play both and what we have now wouldn't be (completely) obsolete.

I am hoping with the release of the v4 patch that fixes the infantry being shelled behaviour for the other games, we might see more content and scenarios being created. At the moment it feels a bit pointless. I mean the problem with the lack of fan made scenario probably goes deeper than that but this is maybe a factor too.

Well maybe Barbarossa will be the first game they release with the new engine when it is ready instead of starting all over again with Normandy. I know Normandy is the most popular theatre sales wise but it would make sense to cover theatres that have been left untouched so far. North Africa perhaps. Anything with Rommel or Fox in the title is bound to be fairly popular I imagine.

Yes I am interested. Sending you a PM.

I am going to go out on a limb here and I'd be happy to be proven wrong but my guess is that we'll never see Barbarossa in the current iteration of CM.

It doesn't really wrap around seamlessly in the back

Okay thanks. I more or less understood how it worked before but the way you put it, comparing it to leave after order, makes perfect sense. Yeah that's what I did actually in my test. This way they only counter attack if the attack is on the opposite corner of the map.

Okay let's say I want to have the AI defender launch a counter attack when the human player moves to a certain spot. I know how to do this but what happens if I insert another order after the trigger and the counter attack? Will this order be ignored and the defending units stay put if the trigger is not activated? In other words, can I use more than one order to develop a counter attack?

Nice. The map looks almost finished. I take it it is a real location, if so what province?

Talibans work in progress.

I tried a quick test scenario with combatants. I gave the blue side a quick attack plan and was playing the uncons myself, trying to see how easy it was to set up an ambush. I gave blue air support for **** and giggles and the apache seemed to have zero problem spotting them. It slaughtered them actually. It was a veteran apache and the civilian density was only sparse but it didn't seem to be affected at all.

Yes I thought about adding sandals but wasn't too keen on doing the feet entirely from scratch. If you don't mind sharing what you have done for the Goums, I could try adding them. But now I am thinking that it can get pretty cold in afghanistan during winter; I wonder what shoes they wear. Thanks for the explanation Offshoot. I see a bit more what normal maps do now. From what I have seen the effect isn't very dramatic, quite subtle really. Maybe because the model and the texture are quite low res. I'll try adding a stronger effect with the tool mjkerner linked to, to see if it makes a difference. Thanks.

Ouch

Okay that's perfect, thanks a lot. Here is what I got so far. They only vaguely look like Talibans :x

I have been trying to reskin some of the syrian uncons to look a bit more like afghans or talibans with mixed results so far. I am still not entirely sure which one to pick for the job, either fighters or combatants. But in any case I realise that it will never look super convincing because the model is wrong : no pakol hat or scarf and no tunic. It will require a bit of imagination for sure. But I am a bit stubborn so I want to try anyway. Okay here is my question : what are the normal maps bmps for and what are they called? I'd also ask how to make one, but I bet I can figure it out on my own if I know what they're called.

Bump because that's a problem. It would be nice if it was fixed in the first patch. I hope it is not too late. I have tried to stay away from uncons and MOUT in SF2 because of the population density setting not working properly so I didn't notice. Hopefully Battlefront knows about this issue.

Uncon fighters can have both of these already. Uncom combatants can have technicals but no VBIEDs. And Afaik Syrian army can't use VBIEDs. edit : oh you mean for quick battles?

Yeah I have several settings that I use. I think this one was lumasharpen, a tad of vibrance and a multilut. Lumasharpen seems to make it look way more crisp but doesn't seem to affect fps much compared to other sharpening options in reshade, vibrance to make the colours pop and multilut because the default game is just too greenish for me. But I can't get reshade to look super good to be honest so I cheated a bit with photoshop on this one, the depth of field blur in particular, I have just added it. My game doesn't look like that at all. If it looks too dark for you though, this should be easy to fix. Try playing with either curves or levels and toy with the sliders. That will probably help. edit : The last one looks really good Lethaface.