Taiwan Theater v0.4 MODs for FF/RV by derStef

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-23 13:59:56

send me your cam file. i'll test it... later.

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-23 14:21:00

ccc wrote:send me your cam file. i'll test it... later.

Wilco! Email inbound!
anyone else?

chreers

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-24 11:39:00

my noob skins preview.....
Cheers

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-24 11:49:37

i don't know if i already told you that:
i figured out strange things about ships. ALL ships are moving always a bit north, then a bit south. problematic if you set ships on coast, then in some time the will be on land. especialy here in EAST TAIWAN:

ANY IDEAS OR SUGGESTIONS?

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-24 12:52:15

1.nice viper skin.

2. ship movement N-S, yes it's known issue. just move them away the land.

3. i am testing and tweaking your cam. it seems some obj linking is not good. some obj movement cost is too high. and ground units has no brain or no gut to move. a bit stasis ATM.

campaign running on Day 2, blue turns from defensive- consolidation to major offensive. but no offensive move. Red units have no move since Day 1 - my guess is.. Blue has too many ground units = strong defense!!

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-24 13:05:38

ccc wrote: my guess is.. Blue has too many ground units = strong defense!!

yes, i also thought on that. also a bit FPS hit in some areas.
what do you suggest, more RED or less Blue?

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-24 13:23:07

more red units, and turn some blue units as [reinforcement].. just don't let all of them show up form the start.

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-24 13:27:37

ccc wrote:more red units, and turn some blue units as [reinforcement].. just don't let all of them show up form the start.

OK, i also have to add more RED on Chinese territory... what do you think

10 brigarges for the beginning?

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-24 13:30:23

ok..i think you better red units on taiwan. . those on china mainland do nothing to campaigns.

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-24 16:10:16

ccc wrote:ok..i think you better red units on taiwan. . those on china mainland do nothing to campaigns.

Yes, for sure CCC! but you can't tell me that in the case of invasion no Reds are back in china!

i'll add both for sure, first on Taiwan....
cheers

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-26 03:01:25

if possible, you should change half of blue ground units as [reinforcement], let them show up 12 or 24 hours later. then add more Red ground units on beachheads/ports.

im testing and tweaking your save2.cam, to checking why cam not working as we want.

the tri file is ok. my obsevation here..

- too many blue ground units from the start, make red units look too few and weak - so they wont launch any offensive at all! i run the cam to day 3, blue turns from defensive-consoliatoin-offensive, on Day 1 1800, my tri file already initialized a blue major offensive! increase invasion red units, and change some blue units as hidden/reinforcement, may help red get more aggressive.

- i've not completely checked the road network. even so, i noted blue units do move to reserve. the roads at NW area seems ok, units witdrawing from NW coast to NE corner, near keelung port.. i confirm the route is ok..so i broke it, try force them move NW or stay on their postisions.

blue units in Taichung withdrawing to hills, units near I-lan also withdrawing to hills. i broke the obj links. units in taichung now retreating toward south.

road system between Kaohsung and Ping-tung is broken. the red units do not move at all. need further test.

- the force ratio apparently play a major role in initiative calculation. my guess, the initiative value is calcualted with factors like ground vehicle quantities/ratio, morale, supply, physical condition(tired, exhausted), and airsuperiority( ac ratio).. the value is ever-changing..when it over some level, like 60 or 60%, the side has more initiative become offensive, as initiative value over 80 or 80%, it start major offensive.

- the high priority obj value and PAK.. with current PAK setting, one PAK area may have two or more high priority objs.. i may cause some confusion to ground operation. i try to raise the value of red-occupied obj like Bali and Taichung port, which does not draw the blue units to capture them during offensive period. those in taipei still hold or retreat. those in taichung area still retreat.

i've to review what i did in previous posts..

BTW can you get the ground unit quantity figure in default save2.cam? i can't remember if the ground force ratio is close to 1:1 .

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-26 07:55:48

well..as red units don't move in previous test, i use old trick again..

- i added one independent tank battalion at Bali, PRC type 96 tank, to capture taipei.. though red ground posture is defensive, wow it follows my order, move to catprue lin-kou, taipei Radar station, and keep advancing. blue infantry retreating. before i quitting sim, i noted some static red mechanized units trying to follow the armour unit.. it seems red units get alive.

- i added one single independent type96 tank battalion at SW coast to catpure Kaohsung.. yes it works too, the battalion just moving all the way to capture kaohsung intl airport, industry complex, and kaohsung city. meanwhile, i noted blue units moving close to defend, re-capture airport and industrial complex! some blue units also moving from Ping-tung to support the defense in Kaohsugn. i also found static red mechanized units trying following the advancing.

- as i posted in previous posts..such independent units- espeically ARMOR units- works as pre-scripted TE missions, follow my order loyally and do nice job. i'll check if organized armour brigades can lead the rest of units moving..

- the blue units do respond to red attack. once a red unit advances/captures some obj, you can tell the response from blue..units gathering, re-taking obj, etc.

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-27 13:59:02

more test reports.. i use several single independent battalion- type96 tank, to check the roads..

- the road from San-chih to taipei is ok / NW corner.
- the road from Taipei to Hsinchu, NW coast line is ok.
- the road from Taichung to taichung port, from south or north routes, is ok.
- the road from Wulung to Kaohsung is ok.
- the road from Wulung to PingTung is broken - it seems missing a bridge over river! tank battalion just won't move. will try to fix it later.

As previous tests, independent type96 tank battalions can do their job in short time, their move is not affected by red ground posture or operation target. After setting their obj and capture order, they advace to targets, at any cost. i noted some red mechanized and infantry battalions following the advancing of type 96 tank units.. Blue units also do good job to re-capture their lost obj later, which happen in Taipei and Kaohsung area. the Taichung area, all blue retreated to reserve positions and never back. impression - organized blue units/brigades respond to attack. organized red units do not act properly - they are quite static.. probably due to their embrassing ground vehcile quantity..they have no power to launch offensive.

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-28 07:30:31

CCC, your reports are GREAT! thank you! they really help me alot.

OK, i'll set some Blue to Reinf. and add more Red to taiwan.
BIG Thanks for "Road-Checking".

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-28 14:00:15

i got Closter's latest PAK - looks GREAT!

but it's overlapped by korea pak outline? how to fix it?

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-28 14:09:50

ccc wrote:i got Closter's latest PAK - looks GREAT!

but it's overlapped by korea pak outline? how to fix it?

Huh?

Closter? help us!
PLEASE!

Closter · Post by **Closter** » 2008-01-28 21:33:42

Sorry! I missed these last posts...

I am now looking into it. I will tell you in a minute...

Closter · Post by **Closter** » 2008-01-28 21:47:02

Well, there are two rar files that I sent to Derstef:

-First one has Derstef's .cam with some edits and taiwan.pak from that .cam. ->content goes into Taiwan's campaign dir

-Second one has intel.idx and intel.rsc with PAK_OUTLINE_OVERLAY.tga and PAK_REGION_OVERLAY.tga made from .pak --> .idx and .rsc go into art/art/resource.

Check second, error could be there.

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-28 22:02:40

Hello Closter!
Well i have alerady sent your files to CCC!
ccc talks at last about your stuff here!

Thanks!

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-28 22:12:46

Some Skin Screens....

2nd one made by horus

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-29 04:38:44

ough - i think i missed the second zip, will check it later.

btw nice sceenshots!

and, my test to add more bridges.. it seems ground units dislike my new bridges, they just won't move crossing them. the bug probably come from inaccurate placement of bridges.. got to check the precise coordinate in Terrainview later.

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-29 15:52:27

i add the second zip to art folder - YES it is perfect now!! thanx Closter

now back to bridges test.. i read PMC tut again..

it's hard to place bridges right on the place.. and terrainview window looks too small.. make the operation hard.

i place a new bridge between Tun-chiang and Sui-ti-liao, south kaohsung area. there's a river.. i add an independent type96 tank battalion to move north catpuring kaohsung. it passed the bridge!

pass Tun-chiang, it turns to chao-chu.. missing a bridge ther, i add one, ok, now move to wulung.. stuck there, it seems bridge 1532 not on right place...

derStef · Post by **derStef** » 2008-01-30 20:20:44

ccc, you are going heavy inside the whole secret! great!

what do you suggest?

Cheers!

Stef

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-31 12:29:43

tank battalion road test :wulung<->Koahsung and Wulung<->PingTung are ok. the battle should be fluent in this area.

another tweak - adding a bridge at NW corner, between Bali and San-chi. it won't work. the taiwan-feature bmp does not have a road crosing that river, so i use terrainview to create new road in L2.. well, no go - i order tank battalion move to capture or cross the bridge - no move, no obj in their status data.

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-31 14:22:04

the pic shows SW coast hot zone .. kaohsung-pingtung-wulung.

white line shows road network ok. i add a new bridge in yellow circle. without it, red units have to move to NE, then turn west to pingtung.

this pic shows NW coast hot zone - taipie- Bali- San-chih.

white line is designed engagement route.. tank can move along north river bank to taipei. tank also can move along south route - from bali - linko - taipei radar - taipei sam - taipei.

i add a new town - Dan-shuei between San-chih and taipei industry. it works, tank can pass and capture it.

i try to create a bridge crossing the river - in yellow circle, no go.. wierd.

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-31 14:49:17

i test fly over the taipei NW area where i added a new bridges and edited the road tiles.. hmm.. my tile edit doesn't change.. and the bridge location is off..

BTW while i heading toward taipei basin, i saw lots SAM trails.. cool.

Sherlock · Post by **Sherlock** » 2008-01-31 15:38:35

ccc wrote:tank battalion road test :wulung<->Koahsung and Wulung<->PingTung are ok. the battle should be fluent in this area.

another tweak - adding a bridge at NW corner, between Bali and San-chi. it won't work. the taiwan-feature bmp does not have a road crosing that river, so i use terrainview to create new road in L2.. well, no go - i order tank battalion move to capture or cross the bridge - no move, no obj in their status data.

CCC,
are you aware that just adding a bridge is not enough? The tile, over which the bridge sits, must be updated in Pathmaker to "contain" a bridge (if it doesn't already have one recorded in the texture.bin file for that tile). Just FYI. Adding a bridge in TacEdit only provides for the 3D view, it doesn't allow for the campaign engine to utilize that route unless the texture.bin file also has a complete path reflected in it AND the bridge has all sections of it not destroyed.

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-01-31 16:10:20

Sherlock wrote:CCC,
are you aware that just adding a bridge is not enough? The tile, over which the bridge sits, must be updated in Pathmaker to "contain" a bridge (if it doesn't already have one recorded in the texture.bin file for that tile). Just FYI. Adding a bridge in TacEdit only provides for the 3D view, it doesn't allow for the campaign engine to utilize that route unless the texture.bin file also has a complete path reflected in it AND the bridge has all sections of it not destroyed.

ya.. i am terrain newbie.. i knew i got to do something else to get it right..so - what to do now?

BTW master Baldeagle give me his answer..(about terrain change after tile tweaking)

Generally, you have to rebuild the theater. TV just assigns the Texture.bin tile offset number to the L2 tile data (first 4 bytes). SPTinstall builds the L0 and L1 files from the L2 data. It also builds the L3 thru L5 files using the L2 pcx file info and the smaller pcx versions. It builds the fartiles.raw by combining the small pcx's into "large-area" tile pics. Finally, TexCompress converts the pcx tiles to dds tiles (day and night).

So, completely rebuilding the theater (pain in the butt) is the best way to go when tiles are changed in TV.

Closter · Post by **Closter** » 2008-01-31 23:34:57

i knew i got to do something else to get it right..so - what to do now?

Please make mr .thr and mrs linking know the good news!

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-02-01 05:18:10

ccc wrote:
if i hand-tile some area in taiwan L2, what to make it visible and work in 3d?
htti.exe needs to be run, point it to the Theaters\Taiwan\terrdata\ directory and click create.

i follow Snakeman's instruction, run htti.exe - yes the tile change now looks correct in 3d! i place the bridge precisely on the spot. the river/road tile and bridge placement are perfect.

now - tank battalion still won't move across it, and prefer pick the other way..??

@Sherlock - can you explain more about theater.bin? pathmaker to make the road network recognizable by campaign engine?

more info by Fred..IIRC..pathmaker is for tile road definition?

Hi Fred,

i've some questions about your tool - Pathmaker.

-is it used to define the path on single terrain tile or whole terrain?

It defines "path and "water areas" on tiles. The "paths" are not used except possibly in the GM display. When the Theater.map is made by pathMaker, tiles with water areas designate that tile route like it is a river/lake tile (no crossing without a bridge).

- will it help check some broken/choking point of ground unit movement?

No. The campaign "roads" are straight lines between linked objectives. The "cost" to travel between these Objectives is calculated from the type of cover, including water, and "roads", slope of terrain, etc.. So, providing many of good routes (links) with complete paths (links) to the war objective (major city, AB, etc.) should help keep the ground uints movement.

- when creating a new road in a theater, after i linking two obj, do i have to tile a road to connect two obj to help ground unit moving?

As noted above, the ground units follow the line between linked Objectives. The only thing that will stop them is "water". Without bridges, the units stop moving, thus do not blow up all the bridgges.

- road-cross-river/bridge obj seems create many choking point in campaign.. can this tool help remove them? or changing tiles, remove bridges can cure it?

PathMaker can be used to remove "water areas", which may help movement of units. Make sure that the links include bridges when the link path crosses a river. IMO, I think much of the campaign problems with movement is due to poor linkage.

Sherlock · Post by **Sherlock** » 2008-02-01 07:27:08

ccc wrote:@Sherlock - can you explain more about theater.bin? pathmaker to make the road network recognizable by campaign engine?

Well, this was what I was talking about:

The RED lines are the road/paths defined in the texture.bin file. The YELLOW line is the location for the bridge placement. The BLUE line defines the river path (uncrossable without the YELLOW bridge line over it).

But I have to say that Fred Balding probably knows more about this then I do. I just know that I've seen lots of tiles that didn't have any pathmaker paths put into them OR they had the wrong paths (or rivers, etc.) and it makes for very poor movement of troops I thought.

And as a side note here what Pathmaker looks like when water areas are reflected in the texture.bin:

Note the BLUE circles let you define an AREA where water exists.

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-02-01 08:04:44

thanx - Obviously Pathmaker tool is used for defining road/river/water data in one single tile. but taiwan theater uses default korea tiles and *.bin. we've no new tiles.

so.. the tool can't solve my problem. the bridge placement and tiles are perfectly done now.. the terrain is flat, and the move cost values are zeroed. i've no idea why tank units can't move across it.

Closter · Post by **Closter** » 2008-02-01 12:21:03

Is the bridge already linked? What are the movement costs to/from bridge?

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-02-01 12:33:17

Is the bridge already linked? What are the movement costs to/from bridge?

yeah.. all related obj linked. move cost values checked and all zero - from and to the bridge.

Closter · Post by **Closter** » 2008-02-02 23:07:25

ccc wrote:so.. the tool can't solve my problem. the bridge placement and tiles are perfectly done now.. the terrain is flat, and the move cost values are zeroed. i've no idea why tank units can't move across it.

I am not sure, but my reading the Pathmaker's manual tell me this:

Pathmaker's manual wrote: Building the <theater>.thr File
The <theater>.thr map along with the PAK, SAM and Radar maps (built before stating a campaign) are the prime sources of information for the campaign. If the <theater>.thr is accurately represent the terrain, the campaigns will not run correctly.
Setup
The .thr builder uses the Theater.L2 and the Texture.bin files to build the <theater>.thr map. Anytime either file is changed, the <theater>.thr file needs to be rebuilt. The <theater>.thr file contains a byte for each tile in the theater (1024 x 1024 for most theaters). Each byte contains 4 bits for Cover Type (8 types), 2 bits for Relief (4 categories) and a bit for Road tile and a bit for Rail tile. PathMaker get the Cover Type and Road/Rail info from Texture.bin and Relief from the Theater.L2 records. It is important that you let Terrainview Compute Normals (in the Operations menu) for the Theater.L2 file you are using in PathMaker. It is also important that your Tile Set’s Terrain Type be representative of the Cover Type of the tiles it contains.

Building the File
- Load either the Theater.L2 file or the L2 matrix you previously saved.
Load the Texture.bin file.
Select Generate .thr file from the File menu.
Select the file to save it to. Be sure to back up your old <theater>.thr file.

I guess campaign engine read this .thr for making the troops moving, so if there is no road bits over that position, then there is no movement.
What I can see If I load relief map in Tacedit and switch off all objectives but bridges, is that wherever there is a bridge, a road tile is. Obviously just a guess, but it is easy redoing .thr with Pathmaker after your L2 change and see what happens.

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-02-03 13:21:47

i redo the taiwan thr file with pathmaker - no go, those movable tank battalions now become static! - their info page show capture <empty>. Normally when info page show it, that unit will never move thru the war.

Closter · Post by **Closter** » 2008-02-03 13:28:18

ccc, can you capture and show us how's looking the Show relief option in tacedit over the pertinent area, please? You can leave Show links on, also.

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-02-03 14:29:14

the pic is show relief map. taipei area, NW corner.

the broken road from Bali to new bridge is hand-tiled and processed with HTTI.exe.

yellow lines - tank battalion won't follow my order. yellow circle - new bridge i added. also two new obj nearby - Bali town and Dan-shuei.

Closter · Post by **Closter** » 2008-02-03 16:07:49

My point, as already said, is that there is no road tile over the "river", under or near the bridge, so no units are crossing. Please read carefully my last posts and see for yourself.

ccc · Post by **ccc** » 2008-02-04 01:21:38

Closter wrote:My point, as already said, is that there is no road tile over the "river", under or near the bridge, so no units are crossing. Please read carefully my last posts and see for yourself.

naa.. as i said days ago - i've tiled the road along the south bank of river and placed the bridge precisely on the crossing point.