Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 11/7/2020 at 3:41 PM, 1212PDMCDMPPM said:

Hello,

I don't quite understand how getAttackTarget is working. When is it reseted ? If I make an AI flee the area, it's still giving me the same result. If I use forgetTarget to make sure the attacker is forgetting what unit he was engaging, getAttackTarget is still returning the same result.

 

Thx !

 

getAttackTarget just directly forwards a value that was shown in diagnostic overlay on dev branch. I don't actually know how it works, it was just requested that we expose this value via a script command and thats what was done.

I also have a active report about that value not properly updating, but it currently does exactly what was requested, any further improvements/fixes on that currently have low priority sadly. I will get around to it someday, the ticket is there.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2020 at 2:24 PM, samatra said:

Wrapped this up into a ticket, also added issues with 7.62 suppressors: https://feedback.bistudio.com/T154769

Thanks, most of those issues should be fixed in upcoming dev branch patch.

 

Here is also small sneak peak what was added to both UH-80 & CH-67 😉

https://imgur.com/a/solywo0

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, reyhard said:

Thanks, most of those issues should be fixed in upcoming dev branch patch.

 

Here is also small sneak peak what was added to both UH-80 & CH-67 😉

https://imgur.com/a/solywo0

 

Amazing 😃

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, lexx said:

Nice. UGV wheels are still broken, tho. : >

I looked it up on the tracker and wow, it turns out this bug is old as hell. Weird how I never noticed before.

If I recall correctly it's by design and you can notice that there is no axle to rotate wheels at all.

Here you have example of such design

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, reyhard said:

Thanks, most of those issues should be fixed in upcoming dev branch patch.

 

Here is also small sneak peak what was added to both UH-80 & CH-67 😉

https://imgur.com/a/solywo0

Wow thanks reyhard! Anyway you could add the neat little feature of ducking down on turrets as you did with the RHS turrets? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, reyhard said:

If I recall correctly it's by design and you can notice that there is no axle to rotate wheels at all.

Here you have example of such design


Hm ok, but then the vehicle simulation is still not 100% correct. In the video you can see the vehicle turning on the spot, but that's not possible in arma. Basically, it should behave more like a tank than a car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lexx said:


Hm ok, but then the vehicle simulation is still not 100% correct. In the video you can see the vehicle turning on the spot, but that's not possible in arma. Basically, it should behave more like a tank than a car.

Thing on video is not the same thing as on video as you probably noticed. UGV in Arma has quite good turning angle and I think real life counter part wasn't able to turn on spot too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I concede defeat. Still think it feels a bit odd ingame, because the wheels look so stiff. Though I guess it's just how it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for doing this here, have done it in community wishes & suggestions too, but no chance of answer there and I don't know how to plan my further works, due to a problem with game limitations.
The question is: is there any resonable chance having the animated bones limit in model.cfg rised (doubled maybe)? I'm slightly aware of dangers it poses to the game, but I am talking about Pilot-View in a plane/helo only. Is that possible and easy to implement somehow?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to say thanks to whomever is responsible for Firing Drills documentation. That alone made me happy, but information about making this process even easier in 2.02 simply made my day!

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Fixed: Not being able to use scripts in Eden Editor that do not return Nothing

That's about the init field, isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, R3vo said:

That's about the init field, isn't it?

and triggers i think

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to point out just how shiny the tanks in game are, it doesn't show to well on the Kuma since its partly white and light colours, but any re-texture mod that adds a dark version really shows just how shiny the tanks are, to the point it seems like it may have been an accident. I don't actually recall them being this shiny before either.

 

HqCNALv.jpg

 

Its fixable with custom RVmats, but that breaks the damage materials, which is the main issue that you cannot fix with coding, not even making your own damage materials.

seE6bjK.jpg

People who I have asked have pointed out that they don't remember it being this shiny either. So I thought I would report it just in case. it means making custom RV matts is pretty much a non-option. this example retexture was to have thermal IFF panels, but it breaks the damage as said before. the re-work image with less shine is just an edit to the specular settings specular[]={0.1,0.1,0.1,1}; when its about 0.54 usually, doesn't seem like it would be a hard fix to just lower the shine on the tanks to about the same as the bottom image.

 

edit: Looking into it, the other tanks don't suffer nearly as much as the Kuma, which makes me suspect even more that its not intentional. and that its just not noticed because of the Kuma's light AAF texture. Doesn't make to much sense for a tank to be that shiny.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2021 at 3:43 PM, weaponslinger3 said:

Looking into it, the other tanks don't suffer nearly as much as the Kuma, which makes me suspect even more that its not intentional. and that its just not noticed because of the Kuma's light AAF texture. Doesn't make to much sense for a tank to be that shiny.

Note that VR map Lighting makes everything look extra shiny, way more than what you will see on Altis Lighting for example. Tuning shinyness to look good on VR map isnt a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2021 at 8:01 PM, x3kj said:

Note that VR map Lighting makes everything look extra shiny, way more than what you will see on Altis Lighting for example. Tuning shinyness to look good on VR map isnt a good idea.

The MBT was tested on all default and CUP terrains. It was designed off of VR, to show off how shiny it was VR was used, its about the same on most other maps. Which loses it a lot of detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone, first, excuse my english please, second, I didn't find a perfect place to write this and this thread is the one which more fits in the topic I want to talk about (that I found). To be direct, I was wondering the odds of Arma 4 to have a "gamemode" where you administrate a base, you have to collect resources by doing missions on your on or sending a squad, and buy new equipment for your soliders; new aircraft to support them, new rifles, tanks, thermal vision, etc. For me, who doesnt have much friends that play arma 3, It would be an outstanding addition, going on mission against AI or other player, also buildings and stuff like that should cost money as well. Let me know your thoughts about this and if it is possible/worth to do it; in my opinion it is (and please soliders are really fit they cant be tired after a 20 meters run).

 

Best whishies,    

                           a LatinoAmericanBoy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Fixed: Field Manual 3D objects sometimes rendering as a pure white shape"

Well damn. Never expected this to be fixed some day.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the textures glitch is still there .....:f:
367512E85F9E3AD072E2A13F95AEE0E8D8EA0EE1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The change note about the MBT-52s materials makes me happy, it matching the Nyx materials makes a lot my soul happy. I very much expect this to make a big difference to community retextures specifically in camouflage patterns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

even the CSAT beret in the all Asian heads has a texture glitch
?imw=1024&imh=575&ima=fit&impolicy=Lette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it's not very likely these skinning / clipping issues will get fixed anymore.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kitbag backpack has a Camo selection in its shadow LOD, resulting in shadow artifacts when hiddenSelectionsMaterials is used. Can this be fixed please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

allowmarking doesn't seem to work with datalink sensor. If for example you make a search radar even with this set to 1 it's radar data can still be used to target with. Any chance this could be looked at? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×