LHD – how far can the game engine be pushed?

[vshadow 0]

I was wondering if this would be possible on the Arma 2 engine.

As everyone knows there is an LHD in game (yay) there has all ready been static LHD and moving LHD mods. But what I was wondering is how possible would it be to:

(Order of less complicated to complicated)

All of the following would be a reference to a moving LHD

-A Patrolling LHD along the coast to be used as a respawn base for the USMC and some equipment? (know static can be used like this as far as I know)

-Could a moving LHD be able to allow people to land aircraft on it for refuelling/rearming then take off again wile ship is still moving?

-Could the all ready modelled weapons (but unusable) be edited to be used?

-(Now the big one :eek:) how possible/ impossible would it be to script an interior i.e. the inner hangar, and have it walk able and still have the ship moving?

I have never done modelling or much scripting for ofp or arma but I’m thinking about giving it a try, but I was just wondering how much the engine could be pushed especially with the attach to command which I’m not sure of the limits of yet.

So would any of this be possible, and would any one use it really? :bounce3:

[STALKERGB 6]

for the interior it would seem alot of it has already been modelled just there is no access to it, as far as i'm aware there would be no major problems if the rest of the ship was modelled (if it was still static) might have some issues if it was moving about. I would assume once the model of the LHD is out then the weapons on it can be edited to be used, AFAIK it has been done in ARMA.

trying to get stuff to stay on the LHD if it was moving might present a problem as i'm not sure how the geometry would react.

[vshadow 0]

Yea things falling off is what I have heard people talk about in the past which is why I wondered if it was possible at all.

[Faulk_Wulf 10]

What about using the AttatchTo command? People have used it to man side-guns on the helos while piloting, putting bikes into pick-ups, putting ...anything... into C130Js, and players on top of an APC.

AttachTo while it moves and then have it detach when someone gets in and starts the vehicle up. (I assume while you're taxi-ing or such that the movement of the carrier would matter much less.)

Keeping in mind this is just an observation from seeing other addons/mods-- not from any actual modding.

[rocket 9]

The more scripting you have, the more movement you have, the more lag and performance issues you will have. I made an LHA for Armed Assault, and I had it refueling, spawning, and etc... I even made a moving variant (and that was without the AttachTo command) - so anything is possible.

But I ended up finding that for all that effort, it wasn't really that useful. It caused lag issues and it just wasn't practical.

In terms of physical geometry of objects when the LHA is moving, it would require some major scripting. Unless you want to "strap" everything to the LHA as it moves, to get that working you need to essentially replace the engine physics yourself, rather than simply adding momentum to objects, because otherwise they can act unpredictably. I did manage to get this "working" in ArmA, but the result wasn't really worth the performance and lag price.

The same problem occurs in FSX, and many other games. Physics is extremely difficult to model effectively in complex games and you always have to end up "fudging" it to look right.

[vshadow 0]

So you are saying its possible but incredibly lagy? (is lagy a word?)

[STALKERGB 6]

So you are saying its possible but incredibly lagy? (is lagy a word?)

i think that is essentially what is being said, and will alot of work to go with that :)

I think the attachto command would only work if the object is static, so men walking around the deck etc would still have the geometry issues.

[vshadow 0]

Pity as if it did allow the walking around deck I was thinking of the possibilities there could be for other things, the destroyers, the little fishing boats, actually jumping out the back of the C-130.:D

Then again I like hoping for more than possible. :)

[rocket 9]

Physics is not really physics in any game, you don't get relative momentum and such. So when you move one object, any objects on top of it tend to fall off. You can also rapidly get weird results from interactions between objects. This is because the engine is a balance between performance and results... physics has to be faked as best as it can.

Its quite common to end up with runaway calculations when 3d physics is involved with a game. Try hitting a rock in game at full speed in an M1A1, occasionally you'll be catapulted into the air. That's not really BIS's fault, its a limitation with current ability to model physics in realtime during a complex game, on retail computers.

[Alexei Vostrikov 10]

i did a lot of testing and i'm working on a usable LHD and driveable as mobile marine base, well it works, but the problem is that whatever is on deck while the ship moves if is not "attached" just "stand still" while the ship move under him.

I'm still working to fix this issue, for the rest as long as you attach everything to the boat and "stop" to 0 speed before doing any operation it works...

[vshadow 0]

Thanks for that info it’s nice to know that it may be possible to do, and that there are people with a lode more experience than me looking in to it is nice to know as well.

[rocket 9]

could try:

_lhaPos = position _lha;
_objectsOnTop = _lhaPos nearObjects ["All",20];
{_x AttachTo [_lha,[0,0,1]];} forEach _objectsOnTop;

As a good starting point. That will attach everything within 20 meters to the object. Might need to play with offsets a bit, mind you.

[eightball024 10]

too bad there aren't static and kinetic friction interactions in the game. Would be a great way to lock stuff onto moving objects without needing to deal with attachments and cargo objects. I'm not sure how much more complex (lag) it would make things, but it would definitely make destructible terrain a lot more realistic when it occurs. I've seen an A10 crash into some trees and it just stops and gets stuck in the trees. I've ran into rocks with tanks and they haven't been pushed or rolled etc. It would also make stopping a heli a lot easier if the skids provided friction with the ground so a nose flare and power down wasn't required to keep it from moving forward.

[rocket 9]

Unfortunately, that would cause the FPS to drop to next to nothing. Modelling those interactions is extremely costly on CPU time.

[Feint 137]

Physics is not really physics in any game, you don't get relative momentum and such. So when you move one object, any objects on top of it tend to fall off. You can also rapidly get weird results from interactions between objects. This is because the engine is a balance between performance and results... physics has to be faked as best as it can.

Its quite common to end up with runaway calculations when 3d physics is involved with a game. Try hitting a rock in game at full speed in an M1A1, occasionally you'll be catapulted into the air. That's not really BIS's fault, its a limitation with current ability to model physics in realtime during a complex game, on retail computers.

After playing some of the PhysX enhanced games and even Half Life 2, I think what you are saying here is not entirely accurate. Realtime physics can be accurately modeled on retail computers. However, BIS has CHOSEN to eliminate physics from their engine. They've admitted that it's a conscious choice. My guess is that the main diff between Arma games and something like HL2 is that HL2 mainly deals with the physics of an individual room or two while Arma has to deal with a much larger game world. And I assume that a computer managing the numbers for a room might be doable, managing the numbers for an entire island wouldn't necessarily work. So as a patch, BIS has created it's own fake physics which is low level but works for a lot of situations. Of course, when you want to do things like have friction on surfaces, that's where things get dicey with the BIS pseudo physics.

In answer to the OP, look around some of the Youtube videos of Arma where a lot of these questions were answered. But the short answer is no, you can't land on a moving ship. There are also a lot of problems with large ships. Gnat has done a lot of research into this problem and some of the issues seem unsolvable. For all of the geniuses working on this game, some things just aren't possible with the limitations of the engine.

Also, someone else wrote about not being able to get to all of the rooms in the carrier. I think you can get to every room that has been modeled. There's ladder and stairway access on the sides of the deck if you explore around.

[wjpenn 10]

Regardless if the carrier moves or not can it be finished? To clarify my point can the lifts be in working order to have practical working hangar bay. Its really not feasible to have "carrier ops" goin to add to the realism of the gameplay. Instead the gaming community is forced to have missions where we magically appear in the middle of Chernarus or Utes surrounded by the russians or what have you. Right now you have to clutter the deck of the assualt carrier with repair, ammo, and fuel trucks, ammo crates of all sorts and whatever vehicles you are goin to airlift to the battles. It doesnt make for a "practical" assault carrier. So my question is can what we have to work with (Khe Sahn) be finished to provide a practical ship for an intended use that in my opinion it is meant for? Working lifts and a hangar bay thats useful is a start. Granted im no modeller or scripter but i will definately help if someone needs help and learn something in the process.

[Commando84 0]

Can't a script be added to the current carrier that repairs and rearms and refuels choppers and planes when they land on the deck?

Sort of like some of the features the LSD ship had for ofp? :)

[quiet_man 8]

what might be possible but a bit complex is to add commands to the action menue that let you change position on the ship without walking/rolling simillar how you change position in a vehicle.

e.g.

after landing you get an "secure" command that fixes the plane (pretty realstic)

then you would get the options to move to an parking place or even into hangar (simple solution to warp or move via script to predefined location)

when the pilot exits he would get "attached" to a nearby location and could get the action for moving to other location on the ship. Not walking but moved by script to this location.

it would be crude and the script would have to do some management (e.g. track which positions are in use and so on) but relatively easy to understand for players at it is consistant with the way you manage your position in vehicles and requires less network traffic.

QuietMan

[Hvymtal 1251]

Simple solution: a command that will make anything that is on top of a vehicle (including marine assault carriers) be attached to it, makes for less lag