Re: PR Dev Journal.

**Warlab** · 12-17-2010, 04:05 PM

Awesome post about an awesome develpoment Soccer !
Great stuff

**Celestial1** · 12-17-2010, 05:42 PM

Great stuff. A relatively minor change in thought, but such a major change in how it works.

Hey, Soccer, are there any thoughts about giving objectives a priority level? eg, the city is given a priority level of 1, while other flags in the southern region are level 0. If a route is picked through the South, the city objective is given a higher priority of being picked/is always picked. For some maps it wouldn't be all that useful, but for some I could see weird layouts with no true objective being chosen (eg just a bunch of hill objectives on Fools, whereas with a priority on Hilltop and train, you'd be likely to have at least one "major" objective.

Another thought is will mappers be able to sort of associate where territories can be crossed... eg, 4 sectors of the map, base flags always in the NW and SE (NW and SE areas connect in a small area in the middle of the map, NE/SW areas do not touch the center), but sometimes there will be a route that goes through the NE or SW corners, or crosses the center of the map in a straight line.

Just some ideas to further the logic of flag placement in a strategical sense.

**ThirdSin** · 12-17-2010, 08:59 PM

Sounds fun. 1 thing i fear though - When fighting over a :route:, you could argue that you use the rest of the map less. (I'm not saying you wouldn't; Fobs, flanking manuevers. Just less than you would at present). That, and I don't want maps and certain routes to get 'perscriptive' in the way some people play them.

**AFsoccer** · 12-17-2010, 09:10 PM

Originally Posted by Celestial1

Great stuff. A relatively minor change in thought, but such a major change in how it works.

Hey, Soccer, are there any thoughts about giving objectives a priority level? eg, the city is given a priority level of 1, while other flags in the southern region are level 0. If a route is picked through the South, the city objective is given a higher priority of being picked/is always picked. For some maps it wouldn't be all that useful, but for some I could see weird layouts with no true objective being chosen (eg just a bunch of hill objectives on Fools, whereas with a priority on Hilltop and train, you'd be likely to have at least one "major" objective.

Another thought is will mappers be able to sort of associate where territories can be crossed... eg, 4 sectors of the map, base flags always in the NW and SE (NW and SE areas connect in a small area in the middle of the map, NE/SW areas do not touch the center), but sometimes there will be a route that goes through the NE or SW corners, or crosses the center of the map in a straight line.

Just some ideas to further the logic of flag placement in a strategical sense.

Great questions. The short answer is yes to both.

- With the new AASv4, a mapper can place what you call a "priority objective" on several routes, so thus it shows up more often. For example, I have already created two routes that have the city on it, so if either of those routes get picked then the city will be a flag... thus increasing the chance that you'll be fighting there more than the airport, since it's only on one route. Another benefit (and it may be hard to explain here) is that since each route is separate from the others, a mapper can designate several options for one area. For example, in the large city I have set up 3 flags... one large one that covers the whole city and two smaller ones that each cover half of it.

I then designate that 1 of the 3 be picked in the randomization process, which is nice because a city flag will always come up but it won't always be the same flag radius.

- If I understand your second question correctly, this is most definitely possible and one of the biggest reasons why we developed the AASv4 system. On the most simplest of designs, the mapper could create one route up north, one in the middle, and one in the south. Although the entire map remains open for movement, the attack route would focus the action to an area designated by the mapper. And if the mapper created natural choke points, these routes would ensure each is used as the map goes through it's rotation on the map list.

I hope that clarified it a bit more, but if not, let me know.

**AFsoccer** · 12-17-2010, 09:15 PM

Originally Posted by ThirdSin

Sounds fun. 1 thing i fear though - When fighting over a :route:, you could argue that you use the rest of the map less. (I'm not saying you wouldn't; Fobs, flanking manuevers. Just less than you would at present). That, and I don't want maps and certain routes to get 'perscriptive' in the way some people play them.

I think strategies will be developed, sure. That's natural. BUT if the mapper implements all of the new features, there will still be some randomness to each of the routes. For example, take a look at Route 1. You can't see the coding behind the flags, but there is a random feature set up so that if Route 1 is picked, the "Rice Patties" and "Train Bridge" are both in the route and the computer picks just one of them. On the Chinese side of the river, the route will have both "Dajiapo" and "Airport" on the route but it picks just one. Thus, even when Route 1 comes up, it will be slightly different each time. Lastly, as I mentioned in my response to Celestial's questions, the big city can be randomized so that it's flag will be picked from a cluster of 3 possible.

Basically, AASv4 gives a LOT more power to the mapper instead of leaving the randomness completely up to the computer (which can result in flags all over the place that don't follow any rhyme or reason).

**Celestial1** · 12-17-2010, 09:46 PM

Thanks for the answers Soccer. First one was spot on.
Second one, we're not on the same page... but I'm not exactly sure how I can rephrase it, and I know it's difficult to understand what I'm trying to portray, though I'll try again below.

Originally Posted by AFsoccer

For example, in the large city I have set up 3 flags... one large one that covers the whole city and two smaller ones that each cover half of it.

Out of curiosity, how is it that it will not pick 2 of the city flags at the same time?
Do you define what flags can be used in part of the sequence... eg: South Zone - Flag 1-Majiapo, Flag 2-City1/City2/City3... etc, or what other method is being used to designate that sort of thing?

- If I understand your second question correctly, this is most definitely possible and one of the biggest reasons why we developed the AASv4 system. On the most simplest of designs, the mapper could create one route up north, one in the middle, and one in the south. Although the entire map remains open for movement, the attack route would focus the action to an area designated by the mapper. And if the mapper created natural choke points, these routes would ensure each is used as the map goes through it's rotation on the map list.

I guess one way I can rephrase it would be... Can a route cross over to another area, under certain conditions?
As an example pertaining to your map itself... could it choose Rice Patties (Southern Zone), then Liujia farms (Northern Zone)? Or maybe Mountain Lake (N), to Majiapo (S)?
Since these flags are pretty close, it would be acceptable if a route crossed zones in these areas, and would increase possible variety. Now, these aren't exactly the best examples, so here's another one:
With two flags near the center, that a route could zig-zag, rather than having a tendency to stay on either the southern or northern zone, ultimately resulting in a curve. As an example, the route (UK to PLA) could be GB Supply Depot, Liujia Farms, Shijia South, (The objective with the Bridge, west over the river of Shijia South), Majiapo, Uranium Mine.

A "route" is still achieved, since it will only cross those gaps which you denote in some way or another (no huge jumps in distance), but allow for even more variety in layouts in game.

Hopefully this makes a little more sense. I'm still not at my most coherent at the moment.

**Silly_Savage** · 12-17-2010, 09:50 PM

Easily my most anticipated 4km map. Ever!

Shijia Valley combined with AASv4 is going to bring infantry combat on 4km maps to a whole new level. Fellow mappers, take notice!

*drools*

**ThirdSin** · 12-17-2010, 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by AFsoccer

For example, take a look at Route 1. You can't see the coding behind the flags, but there is a random feature set up so that if Route 1 is picked, the "Rice Patties" and "Train Bridge" are both in the route and the computer picks just one of them. On the Chinese side of the river, the route will have both "Dajiapo" and "Airport" on the route but it picks just one. Thus, even when Route 1 comes up, it will be slightly different each time.

Epic win. Very cool.

**AFsoccer** · 12-17-2010, 10:47 PM

Originally Posted by Celestial1

Out of curiosity, how is it that it will not pick 2 of the city flags at the same time?
Do you define what flags can be used in part of the sequence... eg: South Zone - Flag 1-Majiapo, Flag 2-City1/City2/City3... etc, or what other method is being used to designate that sort of thing?

Without going into full details, each flag can be assigned a number up to 3 digits: XYZ.

X = The order it falls in the attack sequence. Example: Kashan's flags only use one digit each (1-8) since there's only one flag layout

Y = Only used when you have random flags. Tells computer how many of those flags to pick. Example: For the British on Fools Road, there may be 4 or 5 flags that could show up second in the attack sequence. The Y number tells it to pick just one. If you make Y=2, then the team must defend both flags while attacking a third. This is how Kashan used to be when you had to hold both bunker flags while attacking North Village or South Village.

Z = New to AASv4. Divides flags into routes (or groupings). With this digit, the mapper may create specific routes (i.e. Route 1) or create random flags in a specific area of the map.

Originally Posted by Celestial1

I guess one way I can rephrase it would be... Can a route cross over to another area, under certain conditions?
As an example pertaining to your map itself... could it choose Rice Patties (Southern Zone), then Liujia farms (Northern Zone)? Or maybe Mountain Lake (N), to Majiapo (S)?
Since these flags are pretty close, it would be acceptable if a route crossed zones in these areas, and would increase possible variety. Now, these aren't exactly the best examples, so here's another one:
With two flags near the center, that a route could zig-zag, rather than having a tendency to stay on either the southern or northern zone, ultimately resulting in a curve. As an example, the route (UK to PLA) could be GB Supply Depot, Liujia Farms, Shijia South, (The objective with the Bridge, west over the river of Shijia South), Majiapo, Uranium Mine.

A "route" is still achieved, since it will only cross those gaps which you denote in some way or another (no huge jumps in distance), but allow for even more variety in layouts in game.

Hopefully this makes a little more sense. I'm still not at my most coherent at the moment.

Absolutely. Now I understand your question.

The two zones I notated on my map are just examples. The mapper could make an east zone, west zone, central zone, etc. Also, it would make sense to have a few flags that are in more than one zone... so if the north flags are in play, the mapper may include flags that border that zone. The zone line is just imaginary to help minimize how far the random flags are from each other.

**Celestial1** · 12-18-2010, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by AFsoccer

The two zones I notated on my map are just examples. The mapper could make an east zone, west zone, central zone, etc. Also, it would make sense to have a few flags that are in more than one zone... so if the north flags are in play, the mapper may include flags that border that zone. The zone line is just imaginary to help minimize how far the random flags are from each other.

Right, I get that, but what I'm trying to say is...

If a mapper has two groupings, that are segmented into two sections of the map (one route on each 'half'; consider them parallel until they link at a permanent flag), like you showed as an example, is it possible for specific flags in a grouping to be "linked" to a flag in the opposite grouping. Say, route 1 & 2 consist of 2 permanent flags, and 3 flags randomized for their area. Is it possible to have 3 flags from Route 1, then it switches to the 3rd/4th flag in Route 2, and continues the rest of Route 2's flags to the final permanent obj.

My previous example was along the lines of "If that line was the true dividing line of your map, will there ever be a way to get the following flag layout..." where I listed the 4 flags, half of them being on either sector.

I may have to like, catch you on teamspeak to explain what I am getting at, it's very hard to properly convey this so abstractly.

**brettwad** · 12-18-2010, 12:21 AM

This is great, soccer. Looking forward to it!!

**AFsoccer** · 12-18-2010, 12:55 AM

Originally Posted by Celestial1

Right, I get that, but what I'm trying to say is...

If a mapper has two groupings, that are segmented into two sections of the map (one route on each 'half'; consider them parallel until they link at a permanent flag), like you showed as an example, is it possible for specific flags in a grouping to be "linked" to a flag in the opposite grouping. Say, route 1 & 2 consist of 2 permanent flags, and 3 flags randomized for their area. Is it possible to have 3 flags from Route 1, then it switches to the 3rd/4th flag in Route 2, and continues the rest of Route 2's flags to the final permanent obj.

My previous example was along the lines of "If that line was the true dividing line of your map, will there ever be a way to get the following flag layout..." where I listed the 4 flags, half of them being on either sector.

I may have to like, catch you on teamspeak to explain what I am getting at, it's very hard to properly convey this so abstractly.

Yes and no.

Yes, you can set up the route that way but no, the last set of flags would not technically be in another route. I.e. they all have to have the same third digit or not have a third digit at all. If it doesn't have a third digit then it's a permanent flag and thus could be your cross-over point that you mentioned. The part that gets a little confusing (but is going to offer a lot of options) is this: In AASv3 and prior, a specific area could only have one flag so that flag had to either be permanent or random. With AASv4, I can assign a flag area as many flags as I want as long as I give it a different third digit (Z). So in your scenario, if I wanted to include some flag areas that were previously in another route, all I would do is create a new flag and assign it a new third digit. So to the player, it would seem like the first part of the route used "route 1" flags and the second part of the route used "route 2" flags, but in the coding they would be different flags, but placed on the same spot.

If that doesn't answer your question, we'll definitely need to chat on TS. LOL

**Celestial1** · 12-18-2010, 01:46 PM

I think I get it now.
Helps now that you've explained the numbering system behind it.

Sorry for so much confusion.

**Jeepo** · 01-11-2011, 04:33 AM

Its PR so it is relevant!

New update for you folks.............

The last few months within PR:ArmA2 have been a little slow going in terms of having something physical to show the community. For one, we have stumbled upon a few problems, and have also started shifting the team's efforts towards the intricate coding and gameplay work. The updates may have slowed down, but you can be assured the work has not!

- British Mastiff 2

The PR Mastiff has had some work done over the last month and is now very close to importing into Project Reality. It's still to be decided what the initial load out will be, but either way it will be a great sight on the battlefield, and a realistic addition for the British Faction.

- British Jackal MWMIK

The SupaCat Jackal 2 is now finished, and like the Panther, is at the import stage. The Jackal will be a regular on the PR battlefield and will no doubt prove its worth for the British. We even have a woodland version should we require it in the future.

- British Army Base Soldier

One of our main problems recently, but we are now starting to get there. The initial model we had was causing the test server to lag badly, and had some serious LOD and Topology issues. We therefore took the decision to work on the Sample ArmA MLOD, and start from scratch.

A new helmet, daysacks, body armour and webbing have been modeled, and we are also working on different uniform variants to add realistic differences to the soldiers. This decision has set us back a bit, but it is something we have to get right. We still have variants of this model to create, however the end result will be worthwhile. We'll be providing some media in due course.

- Main Menu

The main goal of Project Reality is to deliver the best gaming experience possible. We realise your experience is not just about the gameplay itself; it starts before that. That's why you can look forward to a brand new main menu, designed to fit the Project Reality theme and to look modern, and of course to be as easy and pleasant to use. With that in mind, here's what we have so far.

- PR Sounds

The next vehicle to get the PR Team's sound overhaul is the mighty Challenger 2. The video speaks 'volumes', and shows how this beast sounds ingame:

- Other Ongoing work

Of course there are a lot of other things going on, including:

Wardak Map - Work continues on our Wardak map as always, and we now have an environmental designer on the team who has produced some great work already. In total, we now have 3 developers working on the map. This will also assist in the PR Objects Pack we are putting together.

UK C130 Hercules - We're currently working on a retexture, ready to resupply the British Forces.

Bandages - Will be applied to soldiers when they are healed, giving a visual representation that they are injured and have been attended to.

Remote Video Camera's / CCTV - Something we are looking into a little further now will be the ability to place remote cameras and have live video feeds. These will come in 3 versions and at present this is a proof of concept. We are also looking at a version being available for the Taliban, to counter the sheer power of the British Faction. More to follow on this in future updates as we develop this further.

Bridgelayer - This is probably around 50% complete, and will become a fully player controlled deployable and working bridgelayer. Again very WIP at present, and still a proof of concept at this stage.

Caves and Tunnel Systems - These will be used by the Taliban on some of our maps in the future, especially for the Counter Insurgencey mode. Tunnels and caves will not make the first release, but they are being worked on and will prove invaluable in the future.

British Panther - We have now imported our Panther into the ArmA2 engine, and need to code a few more areas so its ready to go. So far so good and we expect it to be released for testing soon.

- Project Reality - Social Networking

Project Reality takes great pride in keeping in touch with our large community, so whether you are on the move, have limited PC access or just want to find out that little bit more then feel free to join us on our Facebook page or follow us on Twitter.

- Become a PR Developer or Contributor

The Project Reality Team are still recruiting talent, even more so than ever ! If you would like to be a part of an established development team, with some experienced developers and many more contributors, or you have a skillset within ArmA2 and would like to help out, please don't hesitate to contact any of the team, or email [R-DEV]UK_Force. Whatever your skill, let us know. We are always recruiting. Our main area at present is for Importers to assist in the backlog of PR Models we need to bring into the game.

So thats it for now. We still have a lot of work to do, and a lot of this is coding. In our next update we hope to be able to provide a detailed changelog of what you can expect in PR:ArmA2 V0.1, as a lot of things in the updates will clearly not make the initial release. Thanks once again for showing interest in our Highlights Reel and supporting Project Reality as a community. Until the next time.....

- The Project Reality Team

**NorthPlum** · 01-11-2011, 08:56 AM

Oh man I'd love to see the Mastiff 2 on PR: BF2. Going through artillery ied, normal ieds, taking rpg fire.... oh wait.

Thread Tools

Display

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Re: PR Dev Journal.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

Recent Blog Entries

FaceDeath

P2P Game Piracy: New Research

More on Digital Ethnography

And Another, Well Not a "New" One...

Still Waiting