Firing from Vehicles feedback

[Wiki 1558]

So, is there no way to have it by default? Instead of making mission maker being forced to use the scripting command again?

[pettka 694]

So, is there no way to have it by default? Instead of making mission maker being forced to use the scripting command again?

There is no need to use any scripting commands, I don't know where this urban myth came from, but giving it a proper try is always a way to go :icon_twisted:

[Mattastic 97]

Great addition! When sitting in the back of offroad, shooting from back left and back right at same time may cause character model clipping. Could change static stance to solve this problem.

[kecske 46]

The new Truck and Offroad models broke the unarmed animations, and switching seats between the Offroads cabin and the bed is back.

[petek 62]

Sorry if this has been covered but can't see any updates on reducing the limitations on the firing arc that the FFV positions give. I've just gone back into the Dev branch to see if any improvements and TBH the limitation on this is really annoying me..... With the exception of the "littlebird" the FFV postions all seem to be configured to cover an arc to the rear of the vehicle. It seems odd that an unarmed truck can only defend itself to the rear without dismounting. EDIT - actually the civi and FIA "truck" class seem much better configured (all flatbed positions FFV.... if only the ftont 2 near the cab could be standing/crouched to fire forward it would be near perfect in my opinion.... hope this layout makes it's way to the other vehicles.....)

It seems so much like a "close but no cigar..." kind of thing - especially after so many years of everyone requesting this.....

Is there a way of modifying these "arcs"?

Cheers..... and thanks to BIS for putting the feature in - it just has so much potential that it would be a shame not to get the most out of it

Edited October 18, 2014 by petek

[Mr. Charles 22]

There are two positions from which you could shoot from the PO-30 Orca, if you could open the doors *hint hint

[petek 62]

.....ahhh "opening doors"....... I do hope we see work in this area again .... and don't get me started on hopes for "turn out" FFVs on MRAPs, APCs and tanks;-)

Implementation seems pretty inconsistant. In the "truck" can move between any available FFV seat (and between "passenger" and the 2 FFV positions in the HMMT and Tempest but not the Zamak) I know it's still WIP but the official DLC date is looming.....

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

There are two positions from which you could shoot from the PO-30 Orca, if you could open the doors *hint hint

They must bring back opening doors in that case.

[chortles 263]

They must bring back opening doors in that case.

Animations-wise it 'should' be simple, but then the problem cited during the removal was that the geo LODs for most vehicles weren't set up to match the animation.

[bad benson 1733]

Animations-wise it 'should' be simple, but then the problem cited during the removal was that the geo LODs for most vehicles weren't set up to match the animation.

which should not be remotely close to impossible. i know priorities, money, time bla bla. makes only sense to cripple a new feature just because it requires additional model work...last time i checked you could animate geo lods (doors in houses).

[chortles 263]

Oh, it wouldn't be close to impossible of course... I'm just wondering if anyone already​ did said geo LOD changes or not.

[pettka 694]

We have done several tests regarding the doors, there are some functional issues, but the main problem is performance - properly prepared model has up to 17 % performance loss in some extreme conditions (tens of such models colliding). So it's not just about us being lazy to address every possible issue that appear with adding open-able doors (we would not test it in the firs place if we had been so lazy :icon_twisted:), we have made some decisions based on proper testing that are in progress, but I cannot promise anything to happen as there are technical difficulties to be expected :icon_twisted:

[Brisse 78]

Interesting. I bet there was not many people here who expected such a performance impact.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Well, i think the best solution, is to get it as functional as possible, for example, it's playable via multiplayer, and attempt to fix more of the performance issues gradually. This way, it can be crash tested, while still functional enough, and the player base and pinpoint the rest of the main issues for cleaning if need be.

[bad benson 1733]

properly prepared model has up to 17 % performance loss in some extreme conditions (tens of such models colliding).

i don't think that ten helos in the same place should be the benchmark. that does simply not happen in normal play at all. never. and if it happens (for example taht a2 shacktac littlebird deathmatch video) the helos are usually the only thing happening.

and the game already runs poorly with many vehicles around (tested with one of each type in alpha on the airstrip). again. it's not a common situation.

maybe the method you applied was too detailed. i really don't see how two additional cubes in the geo lod would be a problem though. does the phys lod need additions too? wouldn't it be possible to just extrude a hole into the hull and have the doors open at all times? or have them just closed visually when shut? not sure about reality here but small arms fire goes through the hull anyways, doesn't it?

of course additional features/geometry bring more performance demand. but they also bring more functionality. duh :p

anyways. thx for the rather detailed response.

[devilslayersbane 28]

We have done several tests regarding the doors, there are some functional issues, but the main problem is performance - properly prepared model has up to 17 % performance loss in some extreme conditions (tens of such models colliding). So it's not just about us being lazy to address every possible issue that appear with adding open-able doors (we would not test it in the firs place if we had been so lazy :icon_twisted:), we have made some decisions based on proper testing that are in progress, but I cannot promise anything to happen as there are technical difficulties to be expected :icon_twisted:

Thank you, pettka. While I don't expect this to be implemented upon first release, maybe some further testing post-DLC release would help. In my case, I get about 30 frames, so 17% performance loss means getting only 26-27. However, to me, the loss is entirely worth the advantage this would have. Plus, the likelihood of such extreme conditions are low enough to almost be void, imo. I'm certain that you at BI a.s. are aware of such factors. I'm grateful for the excellent response, however, I do ask that you continue trying to test and optimize such a feature.

[miketim 20]

Then again, consider it through the frame of losing 5 fps in a combined arms mission or something.... Well hopefully they sort out any issues with that stuff.

[Gutsnav 13]

Wait, aren't many of the vehicles already capable of having their doors opened?There isn't that much of a performance hit with these vehicles. You can still open the doors with a script command.

- Hunter

- Ghosthawk

- Strider

- Mohawk

- Ifrit

- Kajman

[Brisse 78]

Gutsnav, the door animations are only visual. Even if they are open, the physical geometry of the vehicle is still the same as when doors are closed. This means there are invisible walls and nothing can collide with the doors sticking out from the vehicle.

If I interpret pettka right, then the problem is not the detail of the geo lod, but the performance hit that comes from making the game engine capable to handle animated geo lods. This could mean that the performance impact applies to any object, not only vehicles where you can open doors. Not entirely sure though.

Edited October 19, 2014 by Brisse

[chortles 263]

Gutsnav, the door animations are only visual. Even if they are open, the physical geometry of the vehicle is still the same as when doors are closed. This means there are invisible walls and nothing can collide with the doors sticking out from the vehicle.

If I interpret pettka right, then the problem is not the detail of the geo lod, but the performance hit comes from making the game engine capable to handle animated geo lods.

I distinctly remember a dev (the project lead?) stating that said that you could throw a grenade at a visually-open passenger cabin (i.e. in a Hunter) only for the grenade to bounce off of an invisible door that in the geo LOD still hadn't moved.

[Brisse 78]

That is correct Chortles. I remember testing it myself at some point. The grenade hit an invisible wall before entering inside of vehicle and just bounced back at me.

[chortles 263]

That is correct Chortles. I remember testing it myself at some point. The grenade hit an invisible wall before entering inside of vehicle and just bounced back at me.

At the time, the dev seemed to plead "wouldn't be able to fix this in time to meet launch date" which I took to mean that only a few select vehicles had been prepared and that the team didn't want to take a PR hit from "some vehicles have moving geo LODs but not others, therefore at launch none of them will move so that people don't get the expectation of a moving geo LOD". It is interesting to me that pettka's statement on the previous page is actually the first time that I've heard from a dev that there was a performance/frame rate issue involved.

[roshnak 41]

It is interesting to me that pettka's statement on the previous page is actually the first time that I've heard from a dev that there was a performance/frame rate issue involved.

And it sounds kind of strange. If it's just a collision mesh, it shouldn't need to be that detailed.

Although we have basically no information, so it could be something more complicated.

[blackpixxel 53]

The performance-impact sounds like a very poor excuse.

I have such a low framerate in multiplayer, but it won't change when I turn the view distance up to 12k. What that means? That my system has enough power, and that the bad multiplayer coding is limiting the performance, nothing else. So I am sure that you won't have any major impact in multiplayer, especcially since it only happens in very rare cases. Wow, there are many different cases that cause heavy performance impacts...

[tyret 11]

17% is not a loss, but necessary 64 bit.