Late rhs x-mas present

[dm 9]

Was mentioned before, its weird the Enigma not even has proxies for cargo on it  

Wtf then how can i get on it in cargo?    

You dont need proxies to allow a vehicle to have cargo. The game engine will simply place your point of view in the center of the vehicle facing forwards, and will simply not display the soldier model "in cargo".

The problem is probably caused by a bad cpp entry, or no cpp entry. We [bAS] had the same problem with the Kiowas when they first came out, in that even tho they were not set up for cargo, some people could get in them...

Just needs<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">transportSoldier = 0; and the problem will go away

[bucket man 2]

Any change to see North Vietnamese or Iranian T-55?

[Johann "onn" Bitsoenn 0]

Any change to see North Vietnamese or Iranian T-55?

As you are able to make and use own logos on tanks (see readme of T-55), you can surely attempt to make some Iranian T-55, at least something near.

[Acecombat 0]

Was mentioned before, its weird the Enigma not even has proxies for cargo on it  

Wtf then how can i get on it in cargo?    

You dont need proxies to allow a vehicle to have cargo. The game engine will simply place your point of view in the center of the vehicle facing forwards, and will simply not display the soldier model "in cargo".

The problem is probably caused by a bad cpp entry, or no cpp entry. We [bAS] had the same problem with the Kiowas when they first came out, in that even tho they were not set up for cargo, some people could get in them...

Just needs<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">transportSoldier = 0;

and the problem will go away

Ah thanks for clearing that up very informative.

[miles teg 1]

Any change to see North Vietnamese or Iranian T-55?

As you are able to make and use own logos on tanks (see readme of T-55), you can surely attempt to make some Iranian T-55, at least something near.

Oooh! Very cool. I'll have to try that. It's about time that someone used a system similar to Footmunch's roundel system but on ground vehicle addons that are widely used by many countries. Very nice!

Oh one bit of advice. Any chance this addon pack could add a smoke script like the one used by BAS tanks in their Tonal pack??? I really love how the T-55 in that pack actually creates an effective smokescreen that the AI can't see through.

This is something I hope more tank addon makers will do with their tanks as smoke screens (via fuel injected into the exhaust or by smoke grenades) are an important part of armored warfare. While its usefulness is nullified by thermal imagers on enemy tanks, it is highly effective against infantry tank killing teams using simple anti-tank rockets (RPG's, LAW, Carl Gustav, ect...) or ATGM's that don't have thermal imagers on them.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[soul_assassin 1750]

Oh one bit of advice. Any chance this addon pack could add a smoke script like the one used by BAS tanks in their Tonal pack??? I really love how the T-55 in that pack actually creates an effective smokescreen that the AI can't see through.

This is something I hope more tank addon makers will do with their tanks as smoke screens (via fuel injected into the exhaust or by smoke grenades) are an important part of armored warfare. While its usefulness is nullified by thermal imagers on enemy tanks, it is highly effective against infantry tank killing teams using simple anti-tank rockets (RPG's, LAW, Carl Gustav, ect...) or ATGM's that don't have thermal imagers on them.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

We'll discuss it internally.

[frk19732001 0]

great job on these i'm loving it it's really great

looking forward for later release from you guys again outstanding job

[@cero 0]

Oh one bit of advice.  Any chance this addon pack could add a smoke script like the one used by BAS tanks in their Tonal pack???    I really love how the T-55 in that pack actually creates an effective smokescreen that the AI can't see through.  

This is something I hope more tank addon makers will do with their tanks as smoke screens (via fuel injected into the exhaust or by smoke grenades) are an important part of armored warfare.   While its usefulness is nullified by thermal imagers on enemy tanks, it is highly effective against infantry tank killing teams using simple anti-tank rockets (RPG's, LAW, Carl Gustav, ect...) or ATGM's that don't have thermal imagers on them.  

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

Is that feature in the BAS ones just a pice of scripting?

If so, it shouldn't be too much to do it, I supose, but I'm allways wrong, so I may be wrong now, again.

That remindme of the 1988 film "The beast", where they use the smoke screen once.

Another thing they use in the film is a fire canon, whatever is call, I can't think in the words in english right now. But this feature would lagg like hell I supose(again) and I never seen a fire thrower that works well in OFP.

@CERO.

[dm 9]

Is that feature in the BAS ones just a pice of scripting?

If so, it shouldn't be too much to do it, I supose, but I'm allways wrong, so I may be wrong now, again.

Not this time It is indeed a "simple" script, it requires the hit eventhandler to use, so its a little slow to what it would be IRL (in the fact the tank has to be shot at before it will deploy the smokes)

[ran 0]

Another thing they use in the film is a fire canon, whatever is call, I can't think in the words in english right now. But this feature would lagg like hell I supose(again) and I never seen a fire thrower that works well in OFP.

@CERO.

an OT55 wouldn't be a bad addition

i remember of this Pre-Resistance flamthrower scripted addon , it didn't lag much .......

[miles teg 1]

Also since Resistance came out, there was that WWII British "Red Devils" paratrooper addon that came out in which they have a flame thrower soldier that performs exceptionally well against not only infantry but also armor. I LOVE using that addon as its very impressive watching the flame thrower soldier assaulting enemy units. As they are hit, they catch on fire also. I wish someone would add it to the WWII USMC infantry addon that came out awhile back.

So anyways I'm sure it wouildn't be too terribly difficult to add that script to a T-55. (It would also be nice for Sherman tank addons and for Vietnam era US flame thrower tank addons).

So if someone makes a flamethrower tank I think it would be quite an achievement in OFP and I think it would make combat missions very intense especially if you're playing the part of rebels or US forces trying not to get fried.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[ran 0]

OT55

[Johann "onn" Bitsoenn 0]

My entry in OT-55, have not discussed it with rest of the team but I think it covers..:

I agree that OT-55 is a very nice tracked metal can, that could be nice addition to OFP. But, unfortunately, OFP makes it hard to implement. Flamethrowing effect is something that will consume a high amount of CPU power. Damage simulation is another thing not easy to implement, as it will either be unrealistic (dunnow... some invisible MG bullets at high rate), or very very complex (damaging script, transferring itself to other objects and keeping them lit and possibly making them transfer fire to others and so on - that is still a hard and complex thing to do) and moreover it would rather have to use triggers placed by gamer, which are against our scripting interface manner/policy.

Making a working flamethrowing system itself - working and bugless SP/MP - is something that would need probably more than a year to accomplish. Therefore attempting such a big and consuming project for just one tank is a bit senceless.

But I think that there will be no problem making an OT-55 when OFP community will gain a real working and bugless flamethrowing system from other source, if we'd be allowed to implement it. That's how I see it.

[miles teg 1]

Well, if your team absolutely is against using triggered scripts for anything, then oh well...

BUT... using the triggers for the Red Devil flame thrower units is VERY VERY simple to use and the instructions are straightforward. If a mission maker can not follow the simple directions to use the flamethrower then I seriously doubt they are capable of making very good missions because it is dead simple to do. Even someone with no experience using scripts should be able to figure it out.

There is no need to reinvent the wheel because the Red Devil flamethrower system works perfectly. The only thing that would be needed is to give the OT-55's flame thrower greater range then the man-carried flame thrower.

But if you guys think it's a bad idea because of the need for a trigger, then ok forget about it. I'll just hope that perhaps another mod team will pick the idea up.

But if you haven't used the Red Devil addon, I highly recommend you hunt it down and check out the flame thrower.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Johann "onn" Bitsoenn 0]

Well, if your team absolutely is against using triggered scripts for anything, then oh well...

BUT... using the triggers for the Red Devil flame thrower units is VERY VERY simple to use and the instructions are straightforward. If a mission maker can not follow the simple directions to use the flamethrower then I seriously doubt they are capable of making very good missions because it is dead simple to do. Even someone with no experience using scripts should be able to figure it out.

There is no need to reinvent the wheel because the Red Devil flamethrower system works perfectly. The only thing that would be needed is to give the OT-55's flame thrower greater range then the man-carried flame thrower.

But if you guys think it's a bad idea because of the need for a trigger, then ok forget about it. I'll just hope that perhaps another mod team will pick the idea up.

But if you haven't used the Red Devil addon, I highly recommend you hunt it down and check out the flame thrower.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

I've used that script and I remember it was quite nice :]

Anyway, the triggers. I understand when you say "if missionmaker is not enough skilled to use simple trigger he is not a good missionmaker". Actually, I hear such things like "it is very easy to do" from some people - but these are people that are really overaverage.

Most of players (which means, that's not any offensive word, average players) do not like to wait for mission to appear, and then to play it to test the tank that was involved in pack. From what I was able to notice, and I think that is quite commonly noticed, most players tend to install the addon and then to open the editor and - apart from just "place'n'ride" - they play with it by making some very simple missions, that ussually ends with placing few units and maybe some routes, that are leading to a battle, without any story or whatever.

Placing an addon and giving it a route is a most common "skill" around players. This is not a speculation, I've spent time with quite a representative amount of players. It really amazes me, but most of modmakers think that at least 75% of players are able to use 100% of mission editor, while in reality it is more like to be 25% or less. The common false view is based on observation of the board community, while in reality, there are lot of people playing this game who do not visit such places like boards, they are quite passive and inactive, they just visit pages and download addons.

So, going back on subject, making a trigger-activated feature means that such feature is inactive when there is no trigger placed. That leads to few inconviniences:

- Players are irritated when they read about feature and they don't see it ingame. And they won't see it by just putting the tank in.

- Player is human, human tends to be a lazy creature :] Having to either remember all the names and properties for triggers - or need to look over them, either on paper or readme, irritates. It needs work.

We don't intend to make players irritated because they skills are not enough. That's the point.

Okay, now I know I will hear something like "Why make addons for them? If they cannot learn, if they are lazy, they don't deserve playing addons!"

It is a very unfair thing to say so. Look at the OFP game itself. BIS intention was to make it as easy as possible to play, so that most people will be able to play it. It is easy in install (but it could easily be hard, imagine that you have to extract several archives and then manually edit some config files to make game just run), to configure (you have easy interface, you don't have to edit config files either), to play (you don't have to use e.g. text console to move around the battlefield :P). Even the editing section is easy - it could be much worse. For addonmakers: imagine there was no oxygen, that you would have to work with hexedit on binary files to make models (ugh).

If Authors of this wonderfull game had said, that "Why should we make game for lazy people? We will make a game, that you have to learn a lot and work a lot to play", that would be really easy to make so. And... nobody here would be happy :>

We want possibly all around to be happy, and to proceed with it, we must work on - and find - a best compromise. That's the compromise we worked out here.

It is but, to add on the end, not the final decision. It may happen one day, that one way or another game will limit us so hard, that we will decide to change our policy. In matter of fact, everything tends to go into better. If "triggered way" will occure to be a better way some time in future, we will proceed with it. And all we ask you about here is not to insist here or in any other place on certain solution.

We have a great scripters, leaded by a great man who you know as Raedor. They work hard on such solutions (and following decisions), and the outcome of they work is not "just because we think so". They know what they are doing, and they are doing it best they can. Best for you :]

That's about triggers (for now) :]

[Shadow NX 1]

The fact Onn thinks its hard today isnt saying we will never do it, i will download the Red Devils and take a look, i want to have a RPO Launcher in the weapon pack as well so maybe it helps giving me ideas but after all the whole team decides...

[Johann "onn" Bitsoenn 0]

The fact Onn thinks its hard today isnt saying we will never do it, i will download the Red Devils and take a look, i want to have a RPO Launcher in the weapon pack as well so maybe it helps giving me ideas but after all the whole team decides...

Exactly what I said :]

It is but, to add on the end, not the final decision.

[Shadow NX 1]

And did i say somewhting different, that was simply a answer to Miles Teq, and according to his answer he though you gave him a no we dont make it...

simple as that

[Acecombat 0]

Awww...

No flame thrower

Onn i think i as a mission maker would agree with Miles a person whos not capable of utilizing the editors simple functions shouldnt bother using addons at all ... and this isnt about click and play , most addons that are made by the community are made so they add up to our gameplay (i.e missions and campaigns) and not 2-3 mins joyrides in the editor.

I feel sorry for this poor addon if its being stopped on the grounds of lack of player trigger using abilities , (still as you said not the end so hopes still there ).

Quote[/b] ] BIS intention was to make it as easy as possible to play, so that most people will be able to play it.

Exactly and thats why they gave us a easiest to use editor in the world (believe i have seen editors or Deltaforce and such games and i bet i could spot the Alpha centauri much easier in the sky then a unit on a trck in those editors) , BIS gave a easy to understand README guide with OFP too which people dont read unfortunately , all my mission making learning or most of it was from there. Besides you guys could easily make a mission for the editor too just zip the mission folder from the editor in with easy to use instructions.

Anyway your decisions are the final one and i will respect it whatever it is.

[Johann "onn" Bitsoenn 0]

How it is said, there should be a solution for every problem, and a way around each obstacle. In fact, OFP history prooved, that there were many barriers that have been broken.

What wants to happen, will happen.

:]

Your posts able us to know that there are people wanting certain features, and we will have that in mind in future. Obviously, we will keep working on many things and one day (don't take that as very far one) we may come with an answer :]

Getting back on bugs and errors, anyone noticed anything new?

About the important fix mentioned earlier, we have not forgot, it is being prepared but it will just be a bit later (heh, probably because of... new year, and some issues, like small medical issues that a big part of the world's community shared by the morning :P).

[miles teg 1]

Thanks for the comprehensive answer guys! I respect your decisions.

I also know what its like seeing an addon criticized because the player isn't able to get it working right in the map editor. A lot of player's have been criticizing my mod team's Sanai Peninsula map because we released a beta that requires a lot of addons to be downloaded. This was partly because we don't have people with the skills to make the addons part of the map .pbo itself and so we figured at least some kind of Sanai map would be better then no map at all at least until we got our version 2.0 made. So its frustrating, but I think in the end, since the OT-55 would be part of a T-55 pack, if the player couldn't figure out how to get the triggers working then they'd still have all the other cool T-55's to play with so they shouldn't complain too much. The OT-55 would just be like a bonus for more serious mission makers. One thing I do know is that while most players just throw addons into the editor for quick battles, that almost all of them download missions and campaigns to play (and the required addons for the missions).

So that's just something to keep in mind.

Anyhooo.... enough said about that.

Other then the bugs reported I haven't noticed anymore yet.

But I'll keep looking. But so far I'm enjoying these T-55's immensely as they make for great tanks for Suchey's Russian Marines to ride around on and as excellent companion's to the DKM's T12 and to the VITAPC pack.

The only bad combo I've experienced is with that Russian Federation Airborne pack that came out awhile back...with them its lag city but I think it's cuz of Inquisitor's weapons that they use with all those damn jpeg textures.

At the moment I'm making a "Guba Lives" mission where he goes up against Suchey's USMC forces on a surprise attack where they only have their SMAW's and lightly armed AAV-7's and LAV-25's as part of a lightly armed peace keeping force.

The T-55's really rip into them and the sound of Suchey's SMAW rockets exploding everywhere and the deep echo of the 14.5mm HMG (and the big thunder of the main gun) on the T-55's really create for a ferocious sounding battle. Unfortunately I'm also getting CTD's during those big battles but I'm not sure if this is from memory running low or what. I may try replacing the T-55's with the VITAPC pack's BMP3's to see if it's the T-55's causing the CTD.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Gollum1 0]

Could RHS give us a "known bugs" list right now? I'm not sure if some bugs have been reported before.

@Miles Teg: Guba never died, he was arrested.

[raedor 8]

@miles teg: when you don't get a message after ctd, i'm sure it's cos of t-55s. you may have some minor problems with the update. if so, ask here and we can try to help you out.

buglists:

t-55s:

- T-55AM2 LOD: wrong LODs mentioned in T-55AM2. //28dec2003

- Enigma Cargo: cargo reported on Enigma, which should not exist. //28dec2003

- Cargo Script: CTD reported when diembarking soldiers from 2 tanks at once, only when they are close. //28dec2003

- Cargo Script: AI logic remains gunner when player moves from Gunner to Cargo. //28dec2003

- Enigma/Modelling: Enigma's rear should be like that (notice the round thingy on the bottom) pic//28dec2003

- Scripts/MP/CTD: (player testing in CTI) The PC of a player freezes when his T55 explodes and I got a CTD when my T55M2 was hit by a Kiowa Warriors Hellfire. It only happen when the tank is completly destroyed. //29dec2003

- Desert texturing: Pulling wheel (the front one) is still green //30dec2003

- Scripting/RAE_init.sqs: RAE_smokeOff should be RHS_smokeOff //03jan2004

t-64s:

- Texture/Error Msg: sometimes a message occures: "Cannot load texture SIG_T64b\barrelnu.paa" //28dec2003

- Texturing: There should be no numbers on HMG ammo box //03jan2004

weap & crew:

none.

[lee_h._oswald 0]

Another strange thing in combination with CTI.

When players die in a T55/T64, sometimes they die 2 or 3 or 4 times.

"Player X has been killed"

"Player X has been killed"

"Player X has been killed"

"Player X has been killed"

Then sometimes you are not spawning as a "CTI player", so you can´t buy anything, have no cti options and so on.

MfG Lee

[miles teg 1]

Thanks Raedor. Yeah I don't get any error message when I get the CTD. and it usually happens only in heavy combat so it may be because of the tanks getting destroyed that it happens. I'll also try the T-64 tanks and just have the Marines ride in BTR-80's to see if I get the same crashes with the T-64's.

Thanks again,

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>