Wolfbane´s tracerfx script addon

[SilverBullet 0]

I guess i'm the only one but the actual tracers look pretty bad to me...

They look like slow moving glowing orbs and not like any tracer i've ever seen. Now, i've never seen tracer fire in person but from all of the war footage i've seen they've always looked like streaks of light. Maybe they look completely different on film then in person but... these just dont feel right.

I do like the fact that you can set the tracers to be fired every X bullets and the ricochets are a very nice touch.

Anyway... if tracers do really look like orbs instead of streaks in person then would you please consider making a more movie like tracer FX version.

[shadow 6]

They look like slow moving glowing orbs and not like any tracer i've ever seen.

Turn off the glow and they look more reallistic.

[wolfbane 0]

I just want to tell you that i´m working on improving the addon. Due to engine limitations i will have to try to find workarounds for some problems and this can take some time.

The main problem i´m working on is the inconsistency of the actual bullet, the tracer and the ricochet over longer distances. This is a very difficult problem to solve. The reason for this problem is that i have to reduce the speed of the tracer (the drop created particle) so it is easy to see ingame.

I will also see if i can do something about the look of the tracers to get them more realistic.

Don´t hold your breath waiting for an update. I will do my best but this may take a few days.

[Cpt. FrostBite 0]

I guess i'm the only one but the actual tracers look pretty bad to me...

They look like slow moving glowing orbs and not like any tracer i've ever seen. Now, i've never seen tracer fire in person but from all of the war footage i've seen they've always looked like streaks of light. Maybe they look completely different on film then in person but... these just dont feel right.

I do like the fact that you can set the tracers to be fired every X bullets and the ricochets are a very nice touch.

Anyway... if tracers do really look like orbs instead of streaks in person then would you please consider making a more movie like tracer FX version.

Well, I must partially agree. Real tracers don't really look like glowing snowballs, but they also don't like those very long streakes as you often see in movies. It's somewhere in between.

@wolfbane

I'm looking forward to it. the elevation-error is the only real problem with the script.I hope you can find a way to fix this.

But let me just say this; the script is already an extremely nice piece of art and it's the best tracer script I've seen so far.

If the elevation-bug can be fixed I'm sure gonna try to convince my LLW-modleader to use this on coming addons. Awesome work!!

[Kin Hil 0]

If you need to take your time to make improvements I'm all for waiting.

Just don't take forever

Please.

I like the way these look at night already, but at day they look kind of silly. I don't know what you can do about this...

I always thought the BIS tracers were crap. I'm so happy to see someone working on what I would if only I had talent.

[MachoMan 0]

Well, I must partially agree. Real tracers don't really look like glowing snowballs, but they also don't like those very long streakes as you often see in movies. It's somewhere in between.

Well that streak effect is just caused by the exposure time of the film, not because they ain't using real tracers.

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

Anyway... if tracers do really look like orbs instead of streaks in person then would you please consider making a more movie like tracer FX version.

There was another tracer project, I think, or maybe I'm just thinking of how tracers looked in DXDLL... That's probably more what you're looking for...

This is definitely what I want, though.  Gives me lots of control, just the way I like it.  Now I'll be able to set it so that my troops have adequate tracers at night, no tracers if they are trying to avoid notice, the works!

Could the tracer speed be set in yet another parameter in the array?  That way you could adjust the placement of the ricochet for each caliber?  I'd like to see what it looks like with the tracers going full speed.

I'm also wondering if you can program the script so that each tracers' velocity after ricochet is 75%, 50%, 25%, or 10% (randomly determined) of the round's muzzle velocity? or velocity at impact? That would increase the realism, even more.

And Maverick, try turning the size down to 0.1 or 0.15... see if you like that.

[wolfbane 0]

I´ve made a small update. You find the new version in the first post.

"Changelog

v 1.02

fix - removed some redundant code and a script that is no longer needed to possibly get some more preformance

fix - new type of glowing tracers that should be a bit more cpu friendly. these new glowing tracers also ricochet of the ground. (they look pretty cool too i think =)). so if you´re looking for a lightshow try switching the glowing tracers on

partial fix - the speed of the tracers are increased so that the inconsistensy between the tracer, the actual bullet fired and the ricochet is less noticeable. the problem is still there however and you might notice it over long distances. i´m still working on this problem. "

[miles teg 1]

Actually I think there's a bug in the script because I tried size: .1 and it still looked huge.  When I left the size variable alone they looked realistic.   So this size adjust part of the script I think is a little buggy.  I would advise leaving out the size paremeter in your script settings.

Also what Macho Man said is true... tracers in real life don't make those big lines.  That's just from the film.  

Personally I think its fine that the tracers move a little slower then the bullets because if you make them faster you won't see the tracers in OFP.

So personally it doesn't bother me that much.  They look pretty darn close to how tracers look in real life.  Not perfect but very close.

The problem is that everyone here wants different things.

Aside from not having a brighter red color, I'm pretty happy with them.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Kin Hil 0]

This is awesome... the best! Thanks Wolfbane.

I'll be checking up on your updates, but don't kill yourself!

Rome wasn't built in a day, neither are addons... good ones at least.

[wolfbane 0]

Miles Teg: I think the size parameter is working allright when i use it but i might have got something wrong somewhere. I will take a look at the problem and see if there´s a bug.

Kin Hil: Thank you for your kind words. I´ll try not to kill myself..

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

Thanks for the update, Wolfbane!  You rock, man! Glowing tracers are my new best friends! Do those two parameters still not affect the glowing tracers, or was that cleared up in v1.02?

And I want everyone to know that a LOT of the firing OVER a target, at least with LMG's, is caused by the recoil modelling that has been in place in OFP for a long time (i.e., a LOT longer than I wish).

You can clearly see the default B.I. tracers flying high over the vehicle, which should be the equivalent of hitting the broad side of a barn, to a 7.62mm machinegun at 100-200 meters.

This 10 Meg video will demonstrate how much LMG's have been nerfed since they added more recoil to the LMG's (which took place in one of the earlier post-v1.00 patches).  I guarantee that I could go prone with an M60 and shred the shi'ite out of that URAL and its occupants, just by firing parallel to the ground, and I am by no means experienced on "the pig".  You'll notice that the more slowly this 100% skill level mgunner fires, the more accurate he gets, but the problem is that to make an mgunner really open up you have to set the skill level high.  The higher the mgunner's firing rate, the more inaccurate he gets.  Sometimes he seems to keep it relatively under control, consistently nailing the top of the vehicle (which is not ideal), but other times he is firing whole belts almost an additional vehicle's height over the target.  If it were me, I'd be chewing up the tires, too.

You can also clearly see that Wolfbane's tracers are not deviating so wildly from the path of the B.I. tracers (although towards the longer ranges they seem to almost take to wing when the B.I. tracers start dipping).  A large majority of the problem is the recoil modelling of mgunners.

And Miles Teg, I noticed a considerable difference between size 0.2 and 0.1 .  I think it is working fine.

[Romolus 0]

@Uziyahu:

...And I want everyone to know that a LOT of the firing OVER a target, at least with LMG's, is caused by the recoil modelling that has been in place in OFP for a long time (i.e., a LOT longer than I wish)...

Just look at the script and you'll see that no matter how much you claim those tracers to be accurate, they aren't.

The script creates a particle that is given a certain velocity and has a certain weight. So as long as the velocity and the weight of the particle doesn't match the velocity and the weight of the original bullet, the tracer particle is off. Period.

Wolfbane allready mentioned that the script makes the tracer particles slower than the bullet so that it can be seen better.

It's simple physics that in this case the way the tracers are traveling doesn't match the flightpath of the bullet and therefor aren't much of use for aiming.

@Wolfbane:

The only solution I see, is to make the tracer particle act like the real bullet by giving it the same velocity and weight. That way both the bullet and the tracer get treated the same by OFP and therefor take the same flightpath.

Another method is to track the actual bullet with a fast loop like glowing lights are done in the script. But that fast loop hogs the CPU quite a bit, especially when the script is used with a fast shooting gun.

I didn't have a look at your modified version of the script yet, but in the initial one you are calling the nearestobject command for every bullet while the tracer script only fires every x round.

The nearestobject command is quite a CPU hogging one, so this might cause problems especially when the tracer script is used on many units.

I know that it's time-critical to catch the bullet before it gets out of reach of the nearestobject command and that the walk through your array can be too long to put the nearestobject command in there.

What you can do to speed this up quite a bit is to put the tracer settings right into the fired EH with the wbe_tracerfx.sqs

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">_unit addEventHandler ["fired",format [{[_this,%1] call WBE_TRACERFX_FIRE_EH},[_unitID,_tracers,_ricochet,_numrounds,_tracersize,_tracercolor,_tracerglow]]

The first argument _unitID is the position of the unit in the WBE_TRACERFX_UNIT_ARRAY. You can get this id in the wbe_tracerfx.sqs by checking the size of the array before you add the unit, or if you want to get sure, then search the unit inside the array after you added it to get it's position (id).

The id then gets also put into the fired EH and you can directly access the unit your want without having to walk through the array to find your unit.

This makes the fired EH script much faster and allows you to call the nearestobject command only when the tracer really needs to be fired.

Fell free to contact me if you have questions concerning the above.

[Kin Hil 0]

"The only solution I see, is to make the tracer particle act like the real bullet by giving it the same velocity and weight. That way both the bullet and the tracer get treated the same by OFP and therefor take the same flightpath."

I agree. I actually prefer it that way.

[Romolus 0]

To help with the visibility at those speeds, the tracer particles could be made to slightly grow over time.

But I don't know if that wouldn't affect it's flightpath.

[wolfbane 0]

Romolus: Thank you for the suggestions. I will defenitely try to implement them. The idea of the unit id was very good (can´t believe i didn´t think of a lookup table for the array myself... ) That will speed things up alot i think. I will also try to move the nearestobject function so that is only used when a tracer is actually created.

I will see what i do about the speed and mass of the tracer particles. The biggest problem besides visibility of the tracers with to high speed (actual bullet speed) is that the particles show up to far away from the weapon/gunner and when fireing at close targets the tracer particle might not be seen at all, just the ricochet.

[Kin Hil 0]

Maybe if you take the thing and put it in the do-hicky, copy and paste it to the directory and then run it with a whatchucallit in the init feild it will look more realistic.

Where do you learn all this stuff!?!

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

Maybe if you take the thing and put it in the do-hicky, copy and paste it to the directory and then run it with a whatchucallit in the init feild it will look more realistic.

   

Where do you learn all this stuff!?!

LOL!

Okay, Wolfbane, if you want to become an OFP god in my eyes, right up there with Kegetys ("who has no partner", as good Muslims might say), then you'll incorporate a toggleable jamming/malfunction/stoppage script into this.

During the magazine loading animation, you can have the CPU calculate whether any of the rounds in that magazine meet the probability for jamming.  Whether any given round will jam or not will be unknown to the firer, so it won't matter if the user keeps reloading his weapon after firing just a few rounds.

A jam=true round will not fire and will be lost during the reloading or clearing of the stoppage/jam/malfunction.  (Say, the brass cartridge was badly bent when it stove-piped, for example.)  

Either the jam can be cleared by simply reloading a new magazine (this might sit well with those who find the very realistic idea of weapon jams to be "unfun", but I reiterate that this feature could be toggled off) or attempting again and again to fire the weapon will only produce an empty "click".  The stoppage can then be cleared by consulting the action menu selection "Clear Stoppage".  (I have heard it said that running out of ammo is technically a stoppage, so that may not be the right term in the minds of all users.)  This can either reinsert the same magazine without the stove-piped (or double-fed) round, or a new magazine can be inserted into the weapon.

I would prefer the latter, as having your weapon jam when you need it is a more jarring experience than simply running your magazine dry.

In the jamming array, the user could specify the number of rounds on average that would need to be fired before a jam would be experienced (up to, say, 999,999).  That way, mission editors could differentiate between dirty and clean weapons, reliable and jam-prone weapons.

If you could give me that (again, as a toggleable feature), you would be right up there with Kegetys in my mind, Wolfbane!

PLEASE?  You seem to have the skills to make it happen...

To produce the stoppage, the character's ammo count might be adjusted to ZERO, with the real ammo count stored elsewhere temporarily, until the stoppage is cleared.

[Homefry 0]

The problem with that is that you cannot add back partial parts of a magazine, only full magazines, which players could use to have unlimited ammo...

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

But only if the weapon jammed, right?

[Kin Hil 0]

There will never be another Kegety... ever.

But I'm fine with that, as long as;

1. ECP 1.075

2. Unforseen Circumstances

3. Wolfbane's tracerfx (without bugs)

are all released some time soon.

Happy Days Indead!

[Romolus 0]

Maybe if you take the thing and put it in the do-hicky, copy and paste it to the directory and then run it with a whatchucallit in the init feild it will look more realistic.

Where do you learn all this stuff!?!

Fighting the engine for allmost 4 years makes you either give up or go creative

[Cpt. FrostBite 0]

Maybe if you take the thing and put it in the do-hicky, copy and paste it to the directory and then run it with a whatchucallit in the init feild it will look more realistic.

   

Where do you learn all this stuff!?!

Fighting the engine for allmost 4 years makes you either give up or go creative  

glad people like you are still around.

[wolfbane 0]

Uziyahu--IDF: Sounds like an interesting idea. I will sure give it a try when i have the time.

About the comparison of me with other addon makers; First of all i must say that Kegety is so amazingly talanted. The work i do is not even close to the very advanced stuff he can do. There are also so many, many other very talented addon makers out there that do so much incredible work. They are the gods, not me. The little i do is nothing really, nothing compared to them. I´m just happy i can give something back to the community and hopefully make someone happy.

About the status of the tracerfx addon; I´m still working on the problem with the inconcisteny between the actual bullet, the tracer and the ricochet over longer ranges. But until i find a fix for that i will release another update with a major overhaul of the code that hopefully should give some better performance. I´ve implemented Romolus ideas in the code now (thanks for the suggestions again man). Version 1.03 will be released soon.

Regards, Wolfbane

[Kin Hil 0]

In your next update, will the tracers be limited to machine guns and assualt rifles only?