A.C.E. Advanced Combat Environment Mod 2

[Lester 0]

I know that you don't like ACE that much (at least in german forums you expressed that very often) so i won't reply to the "lean-out-of-window-stuff", or get into other stuff, etc.

I've never said that i not like the ACE stuff, i've only told that is not so real as some people said and also that some things aren't bugfree or haven't a reproducible functionality like the stamina system.(You start this topic :p)

Also i miss a configuration menu for features like ECS did it.

I like the idea of the Stamina system and of cause i like some other things out of ACE very much like fit the weapon on a wall etc.

To the instant change from primary to secondary weapon an certain stances, the reason was AFAIK that simply a appropriate animation and/or animation-config was missing. Never forget that ACE was/is still beta! ;)

A neverending Beta is also a neverending excuse, i know. :D

And now please don't start your usual examples how bad the stamina system is, etc. You can't ever convince me that ACE = bad!:rolleyes:

I've never tried it, but you can't stop to convince people that 'ACE is almost real' and that that is an prevarication. :rolleyes:

[Daniel 0]

As Pathy's already said, really looking forward to the idea of ACE being modular, for the exact reasons he's stated. Essential core features such as wounding, weapon jams etc, but a vast majority not used unless you play US.

What sort of help are you looking for in terms of documentation? I can write things up and grammar check etc, not sure if you're looking for a little more nonce than that though. :rolleyes:

[mcvittees 0]

Just one request: Improve the VTOL flight model for the V-22 Osprey, please. It is not ideal for rapid insertions in its current state. :)

Neither is the real thing!Haha!;)

[scubaman3D 0]

Neither is the real thing!Haha!;)

globalsecurity.org indicates that an Osprey can climb at a vertical rate of 332 m/min

FAS.org says the maximum recommended rate of descent for a safe landing under 40kts airspeed is 244 m/min (thought its capable of a much faster rate).

Edited June 8, 2009 by scubaman3D

[Hell_Toupee 0]

Its not really capable of much faster rate, desending faster than that at low foward speed you can enter a vortex ring, common to all helicopters tho a bit more dangerous for the ospreys layout which can make it roll over.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

My personal suggestions on future ACE:

1) Don't try to do too much at once.

2) Rethink carefully the use of fast animations. In the beginning I though 'Yes, this is going to make my life so much easier'. In the end I just thought 'Nah, this is too easy and unrealistic'. Also it became inconsistant, in that in didn't work under all circumstances. I.e. going from prone to knee with a launcher would trigger the full anim, while it didn't if you moved forward at the same time. Or how the sit down 'gear' animation wasn't omitted if you only had a handgun.

3) Don't remove 'gear' and 'set timer', 'plant satchels' animations, even if they leave you a little vunerable. Some additional planning and carefulness from the player would usually avoid that. Also it indicates to others what a player is doing, which can be very important for a leader.

4) I'd like to see some improvements on the rucksack system:

* Disable the roll moves while rucksack is on. Today everyone are fighting with rucksacks with no second thoughts about it, and it is horrifying to watch. Completely unrealistic. The added weight system alone doesn't work as good as I was hoping it would be. For the most part, I only see it being exploited.

* Slow down the climb obstacle animation based on the total weight.

* In ACE some east models had rocket backpacks. I'd like to see this expanded into Missile and Rocket backpacks for ACE2. A regular backpack can't pack any rockets or missiles, you'd need a special rucksack for that. It should not be possible for a rocket/missile gunner to carry this rucksack pluss launcher, although he can carry one rocket/missile in the tube (regular inventory). This allows for realistically setup teams, like 5 missiles per each 3 man stinger team. A rocket rucksack should have much less 'regular space' than the other rucksacks.

5) Windage for sniper rifle simulations. Could help lessen the amount of wannabe snipers found on all the public servers if it was a little more challenging.

6) A spotter scope for the spotter. Flexible zoom with extremely clear optics.

7) A laser range finder, mostly for the spotter. Can not be used to designate targets with. Helps define the spotter if he is more capable on assisting the sniper.

8) Some additional binoculars. Maybe a high power mildot one that we can give squad leaders, and less powerful ones and more dirty ones for grunts if they get one. Personally I'm against binoculars for every grunt, but I also see their use for people who are forced to play with low resolutions. Especially important if they don't get scoped weapons.

9) Improved night vision goggles. The ones we have today are just way too convenient:

* NVGs are hard to aim with, not even compatible with some sights. You try putting your forehead to the sight for a center mounted single lens version :) Nothing you can do about it except make it less convenient, some examples below.

* Proper FOV if possible. NWDs experiments proved unsuccessful for Arma1. Maybe Arma2?

* Noise as in OFP, but moving the noise image around instead of cycling between three creating an obvious loop. Noise based on amplification level.

* Switchable auto gain or manual gain, but I don't think they should go as low as today. With no moon (phase based) or stars (overcast based), while not in urbain terrain (light pollution), NVGs would have problem amplifying 'no light'.

* As available light decrease (or higher gain is used), reduce the contrast of the image.

* If you have an IR bulb simulation (useful for reading the map in real life), or IR illuminator mounted (to aid if there are no lights), it's range should be limited.

Effect: Forces people to use illumination support instead of relying on far too convenient in game NVGs.

However, if NVGs become properly bad, the following must also be done:

10) If in night vision sights, most of the above is taken away. In some cases, like i.e. pilots, the bad effects could be removed to simulate a much better NVG device than the regular grunt.

11) Also related to NVGs, but could be used by a lot of things (IR Lasers, IR Strobes, Laser Designators and Laser Range Finders+++); battery simulation. Only a few years back, batteries would run dry after only 20-30 minutes of (NVG) use. The best batteries today (although not available in all used formats), can last up to 11 hours. Battery power (duration), and especially supply of, is a real concern. It should be too for realistic gameplay. I suggest a life span of about 3 hours, ±half an hour, for gameplay reasons. No mission in Arma has any real world durations for obvious reasons.

12) IR Lasers for guns that have them modelled. A light emmisive cylinder surface whose lenght is determined by a laser simulation. Light simular to IR strobes so that NVGs are needed. That would allow proper 'from the hip shooting' at night since you have problems using the sights, pluss it allows for target designation by the leader. For smoke effects, I'm not sure. Maybe a moving texture defining it's alpha value? I'm suggesting wildly here, I have no ideas what the engine can do.

13) New vehicle lighting system.

* The stupid visible cone on vehicle lights should vary in strenght based on humidity effects, like fog and rain. In heavy fog, the light cone should actually become a problem. Cone lenght could also be affected if possible.

* Combat lights, like those slitted lights you see on military vehicles. Press L one time to activate lights. Press is again to activate combat lights, Press L a third time to turn lights off.

* Chopper lights. Cone visibility as above. Press L one time to activate lights (beacon, strobes, navlights etc). Press L again to turn also the searchlight on. Press L a third time to turn lights off.

* C-130 lights. As chopper lights, but instead of searchlight, could be landing lights and a red hot light inside (prepare for ejection)?

14) The usual attachTo requests: Ammo crate transport, lifting, towing, fastroping etc. However, and this is extremely important: Fully customizable by the mission designer what is allowed to do in his mission. He might simulate operational limits by not allowing fastroping, or only allowing it to certain classes or slots. He will have full control over what vehicles can carry what ammo crates, and what they should be able to lift and tow. Also important so that non ACE classes can be added to the list of possible items.

15) Think twice about releasing vehicles with limited use due to engine limitations.

16) Don't mix in 'useless' stuff, like a lot of Iraqi units and desert vehicles, at least not for a very long time. I call it 'useless' since ACE would require other addons (the islands) to have any value.

17) About modularity. Most people would have to download and install all modules. You can only call a mission @ACE_Coop30_blabla... You can't possibly have all modules listed in the name. Getting kicked when you thought you had everything could become a hazzle, since there also so many other reasons for getting kicked.

18) Keep the fun and realism stuff, like:

* Magazine simulation (avoid pesky AK-74U sniper)

* Ballistics (rockets are most important)

* Backblast (a must for anything realistic)

* Spotting round to the SMAW (unless there already)

* Overpressure (tankers needs to be more careful)

* Tail rotors (simply because it is fun to see someone die for utter stupitidy)

* Weight and stamina (unless it is sufficiently modelled already)

* Weapon shake (try adding stamina effects here and see how it goes, people will be more aware of it). Could also become unplayable, who knows...

* Dispersion (now for weapon overheating only)

* Aiming aids (T&E, GL help, sight adjustments)

* CQB Sights (also a must for the weapons that support it)

* Grenade tossing modes

* HuntIR and IR Strobes

* Weapon Jamming

* Weapon Resting and Bipods

19) Features I don't like and could possibly be removed:

* Air FCS, mostly due to bugs and it completely breaking singleplayer. I would be more than happy with just dividing the piloting and gunnery realistically. Get it back in when it has matured.

* Auto Rotation. You heard me ;) With autolanding capable choppers immune to rotor strikes, adding auto rotation becomes too much of a good thing and too little of the bad things. If you get in rotor strikes, then I'm all for getting Auto Rotation back in.

* Digital Compass. Frankly I don't like it. If there, maybe it should have been added to all vehicles, including statics. Statics are little used for their vunerability, and the fact that you have to get out of the gun for checking directions. Put it into everything, and I think I'd be more happy about it.

* Disposable Weapon System. Too buggy for AI, and with the new system the M136 carrying abilities limits itself.

* Engine Start. Off by default as it completely breaks singleplayer. Can be on for multiplayer missions not involving AI if the designer wants it. So I say selectable for this one.

* Fixed Wing Reverse. Replace it with using the new tractors and and towbar using new attachTo. More restrictive for the pilots, but also enhances teamplay.

* Map System. I am not able to test yet, but I assume this is not relevant anymore?

* Round Count. Doesn't the new builtin system improve on this on the higher difficulties? Also, some magazines are transparent. Others have slits.

* Wounding system. Should not have been released in it's current state, despite being a beta. Far too many problems with it, AIs that couldn't be killed realistically being the worst. Lets first see what Arma2 has to offer. Don't get me wrong, I looooooved the ideas, I just think it did too much bad than good.

20) 3rd person improvements. One of the biggest immersion killers is all those public servers having this enabled. I would say force a tight 3rd person for infantry so that they cannot use it to see over walls. For vehicles, a more top down view with limited forward visibility. It helps on spatial awareness which is hard to come by with the game mechanics (lacking mirrors, disability to move/lean body in a cockpit etc), but doesn't provide any additional exploitable situational awareness (driver having full access to see the close threats around him). Rarely do I see a tank crewed by three guys.

21) Improve some artillery ammunition classes. Arma2 artillery illumination uses GL flares :( Each flare should have much brighter light emmision, 800m delivery height, and burn time of 60 seconds (105mm). I can find values for mortars as well, but I don't have them in front of me.

22) Some "generic usage dummy items". Some can be given addon functionality later on as we get to try out different approaches. Others could be used simply for inventory checks in missions. Ideas as follows:

* Wirecutters (scissors type).

* Wirecutters (gas type).

* Shovel.

* ELT (Emergency Locator Transmitter).

* ELT Tracker Radio/Antenna.

* Batteries.

* Documents (briefcase style).

* ID Papers/Passport.

* Intelligence documents.

* Letter.

* Diary.

* USB Stick.

* Dummy item #1.

* Dummy item #2.

* Dummy item #3.

Basically just a bunch of dummy inventory items with graphics that fits into the 'general slot' in the inventory system, where compass and map etc is located.

If Dummy item # could use a mission specific image file, that would be extremely useful too. Mission specific name also?

Well, that's just a couple of ideas that could keep the ACE team busy for a few years, lol :D

Sorry if I write too much, but the wait for Arma2 is intolerable. I've got to do something to help pass the time. :p

[sickboy 13]

Thats a nice wishlist CarlGustaffa, will surely take things under consideration :)

Some more thoughts about the Modularity:

ACE will consist out of 3 mod folders, the naming is WIP though:

CBA

ACE-Core

ACE-Extras

CBA contains common base systems like ExtendedEventhandlers and can be shared with other mods. VERY VERY small.

ACE-Core contains our ACE systems. Small

ACE-Extras contains our ACE models/textures/sound replacements and additions HUUUGE

The extra's folder will not add classes, just populate classes. This way there will never be missions that break or crash due to missing classes etc.

The ACE-Extras are basically optional. We will distribute them in our Main Mod, but there is no technical limitation to disable it. Making the mod 100's of megabytes smaller :)

The ACE-Core, altough required, will be configurable. This will be mostly simply turning on and off systems, and the usual configuration of keys and components.

We're also evaluating making the system inits server-sided.. This could at least improve testing/debugging, disabling systems without editing missions or removing addon files on server and/or client.

All of this is mostly in the pipeline, probably some tweaks here and there, and possibly we can achieve more things down the road, but got enough on our plate for now :D

Edited June 9, 2009 by Sickboy

[afp 1]

It sounds great, Sickboy.

Also keep in mind that people may disable some features because of extra system power required, so resources consuming features should be configurable... For example, a feature like being cut by the hellicopter tail engine is not really needed, if the processor checks for all helicopters and all players if in tail vicinity, every second... tho it is nice to have it if you can "afford" it.

Edited June 9, 2009 by afp

[moosenoodles 0]

Not sure if its been mentioned, but how about a GUI with checkboxes that can move and add the required addons at will?

One drop in folder listed via GUI and then maybe a possible server sided mod that can hook with it to show what that server at that time is running mod wise so you can disable non essential ace mods to help with your own performance gains etc?

:D

[sickboy 13]

Depending on the Developer support for the Mod, GUIs might be possible.

However, please don't take this as a promise, more like a maybe :)

Regarding performance issues; we will keep improving our code, and will try to take different machines into account.

I'm not sure about the performance implications of the tailrotor script though :P

[afp 1]

Nah, it was just a sample :). But the sum of few tens of features like that may be eventually visible...

EDIT: I guess its even worse with features involving big network traffic...

Edited June 9, 2009 by afp

[NoRailgunner 0]

In fact "CBA" or "ACE2 - Extras" (addons like vehicles, sounds, effects etc) or "ACE2 Core" will be working like any other standalone addon/mod with no dependancy? :)

Will be the main focus on ACE2 Core on AI, gameplay things and "realism" issues?

[sickboy 13]

In fact "CBA" or "ACE2 - Extras" (addons like vehicles, sounds, effects etc) or "ACE2 Core" will be working like any other standalone addon/mod with no dependancy? :)

Will be the main focus on ACE2 Core on AI, gameplay things and "realism" issues?

Yes that's the focus of Core.

ACE2 Core and Extras both require CBA.

ACE2 Core can run without Extras.

CBA can be used seperately.

More configuration.

Edited June 9, 2009 by Sickboy

[maxter 10]

So if a server I want to join uses the ACE2 Core, but with some features disabled, I would have to know exactly what pbo's to enable/disable to be able to join, or is there a way to solve this? I'm thinking I would get kicked off because of "illegal" bisigns if I try to join with the "wrong" pbo's enabled, but I might be missing something.

[sickboy 13]

So if a server I want to join uses the ACE2 Core, but with some features disabled, I would have to know exactly what pbo's to enable/disable to be able to join, or is there a way to solve this? I'm thinking I would get kicked off because of "illegal" bisigns if I try to join with the "wrong" pbo's enabled, but I might be missing something.

Nope. You can only configure Core features, as client or server, but you should not remove any pbo's :)

Not sure yet how we will work out the Modfolders.

IMO it should always be okay to join a server which only runs Core. Even if you run Core + Extras.

The other way around might be a problem; joining a server that runs ACE Core + Extras, and you wish to join only with Core.

Basically we're trying to make every usergroup happy:

• Have every part of the Mod, and join any server with ACE
  
• Have only the Core part of the Mod
  
• Have only the Core part of the Mod, possibly parts of Extra, possibly with custom replacements (Probably mostly Community/Clans)
  

We hope that the CBA initiative opens up our (and other's) base systems to a broader public, improve compatibility and possibly encourage others.

[maxter 10]

Ok, cool, I was thinking of just using a "disabled" folder, but it seems you've figured out a way that makes it way easier to deal with and with minimum effort needed to join a server, and as long as that's the case modularity is always a good thing.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

When you ave joined an ACE server, there should be means for the player to check which modules are active on that server/mission. I.e. if they disabled the stamina system because they don't like it, I should be able to see this and find myself a server who doesn't want to play action shooter. I'm suggesting a special button on a configurator panel or something.

As for naming, how about ACEC and ACEE?

Btw, if we were using ACEE to get new USMC models and/or weapon, it should be possible for us to disable disable stuff like Iraqi Insurgents on our server if we know we'll never use them. Reduces the memory cost for the server. People joining could have everything or just what is needed and never know the difference.

[Panda_pl 0]

Ok, I seem to see two groups of people who want things disabled/removed.

a) people who want to run the mod without certain features (stamina, wounds etc)

b) people who want to run the mod without certain pbos (weapons, soldiers etc)

I suppose a) is easy: add a possibility for disabling systems via adding a game logic to mission. Leave them on by default, since most people will probably preffer 1 or 2 of systems disabled.

B) I am thinking of people who have removed pbos and want to join a mission that requires them - will that cause problems or not. If not and they get kicked then all is fine.

I have serious doubts about config-related features, such as weapon sway. I cannot imagine people having to reboot the game to join a server just because this single server didn't want weapon sway.

So what then? Have two sets of weapons and soldiers in config just for the purpose - and then the mission maker decides by placing units and ammoboxes with or without the config feature? Perhabs that's the only option, unless you can change configs ia script somehow or something simmilar.

[Alphadelta 10]

My dream for A.C.E 2:

Include everything from A.C.E 1 that we've come to love. It's already perfect so just port it as is

PLUS:

A Iraqi-Afghani-esque map - Something about half the size of Sarhani with some variation; small afghan like villages in greenzones, small Iraqi style towns connected by major roads, terrorist training camps, something akin to cave systems, hill top fire base positions etc etc

Some units - A selection of different looking islamic militant units; big bearded taliban chaps, al queda guys, iraqi militia types.

Some hardware - Some crappy looking 1970's ex soviet armour; BTR-60's, BMP1/2, ZU-23, T-55's.

Some missions - Port domination to the new island and set it up so that the Al-queda and Iraqi chaps are holding the small towns, and the taliban types are holding the villages and training camps.

This sounds like a lot of work but for me it would be the final 10% needed to complete A.C.E as the ultimate modern infantry sim.

Cheers

[icfhoop 0]

I agree with Alphadelta, we already have a few beautiful maps, (Avgani, Razani, Afghan-Village), but a new one would be nice as well, maybe the Green Zone:rolleyes:. But the biggest thing I would like to see in the mod, is a lot of focus on the conflict in A-Stan, such as new Al Quaeda Units, SEALS, Marines, etc. . But I have no doubt either way this mode will be epic .

[PTV-Jobo 820]

I have to say I'm pro-modular. If I have a squad and we use certain things, I think it's a bit unfair the rest of the community forces us to have 100 gigs (so to speak) worth of stuff we have no need of on top of the stuff we do need. What then? Tell everyone to pay for a bigger HD or something? Bit unfair, especially when people are wanting what ACE 1 had with the addition of even more stuff. It's great don't get me wrong--and I'm sure I'd use it all at times--but we also should find a balance somewhere and not always be like "screw the people who want modularity, make us use everything and, oh yeah...here's a list of 500 other things I want ACE to make".

With that said, I'm extremely happy the team is looking into modularity to help the clans/squads/etc who absolutely love and have to have ACE but for whatever reason do not desire to run 100% of everything all the time.

Either way, I have a lot of confidence in the ACE team that no matter what they choose to do for Arma 2 which be just as kickass as it is in arma 1 if not 100 fold better. :) Can't wait till the US release of Arma 2 and seeing ACE 2 in the future. :D

[Orton 0]

ace mod is cool but take out the heavy breathing you run 5 meters and you are laying on the ground getting air.That was the time i hated ACE mod so please take that out.

[7 0]

ace mod is cool but take out the heavy breathing you run 5 meters and you are laying on the ground getting air.That was the time i hated ACE mod so please take that out.

Don't carry 70 kgs worth of gear.

[frederf 0]

Laugh, I really like ACE's philosophy. It's enough realism and personal limitations that it forces the player to slow down and realize he's not a god and might even have to rely on teammates *gasp.*

I say be uncompromising in ACE2's vision of how to play the game. Don't make it easy to turn off advanced medical or stamina. People often need a good 2,000V prod to get them to try something healthy but they are better off for it. On the other hand not activating all the missile scripts for helicopter weapons to make the game run smoother is no big deal if the mission is strictly infantry. Make every ACE2 feature meaningful, purposeful, and correct and you won't have to worry about enabling and disabling concerns.

I would suggest that ACE2 build upon ACE1 and WGL in the same tradition and try not to be come the front seat of a taxi cab, full of useless and disjointed knicknacks. Look for simple, clean, and every day improvements to ArmA2 that seem obvious in retrospect and are not high dollar toys. Seek to remove as much clutter from the interface as possible.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I completely agree. Disabling such significant features should not be possible with a simple mission command. It has the potential to break too many public servers out there that wants the 'cheap play mode'. If such modes becomes popular (and they will), these servers might become populated with fast paced players who will never learn to play properly, leaving the deserted servers for the rest of us. I'd rather play with a fast player who is forced to think, than play alone.

However, during the development phase of a feature, it should be able to turn it off by mission specific script. Maybe the feature breaks the mission.

See my first point above - "Not go for everything at once". Implement a few features, make it stable, then after a beta make it full version. If (when) a future feature breaks the first one, 'all' that is needed is to release a small hotfix that allows the server to disable the first one until a fully combined feature works. When everything works again, the disable instruction is ignored or produces a hint or something.