FRL Airforce Addons release thread

[[frl]myke 14]

@Das Attorney

sorry for asking dumb questions: did you tried the correct AH-1Z? This addon doesn't replace the default one but gives a new under Blufor -> US -> Air -> AH-1Z TIR

If so, then please could you do me a favour. Place a unit (any unit) in the editor on island of your choice and in it's initline write this:

hintsilent format ["%1\n%2", (actionKeysNamesArray "LookLeftCont"),(actionKeysNamesArray "LookRightCont")];

And then write down what it exactly spits out when goin in preview?

[das attorney 858]

Hi Myke,

Yep, it was the AH1Z (TIR) model I was trying. I had another go with CBA enabled and also just on it's own, but no change (just in case).

I set up a unit as you suggested in the editor. It returns the following:

["TrackIR Rot Left"]
["TrackIR Rot Right"]

I hope that's useful for you. :)

[[frl]myke 14]

Indeed, thanks a lot. I'm sorry to bother you but could you also try the same thing with this line?

hintsilent format ["%1\n%2", (actionKeysNamesArray "leanLeft"),(actionKeysNamesArray "leanRight")];

[das attorney 858]

No worries at all,

It returned:

["Q", "TrackIR +rZ"]
["E", "TrackIR -rZ"]

Sorry for sounding silly, but the TrackIR support is for the M197? I wasn't sure if there was a new MCC camera ala Mando. Cheers.

[[frl]myke 14]

Aye, trackIR should control the M197 aswell as the optics turret.

[Sneaker-78- 0]

And no, don't even ask to turn it into a single-seater. Maybe a emergency option if a gunner was present but killed. Dunno yet. What i know, i wont turn it into a "yay-i-can-jump-in-and-gun-the-enemy-base-all-alone-i'm-so-f***ing-1337" chopper. Deal with it.

amen

Great work , it works just perfect here , and in de cobra the gunner has control over the gun like in real life ?

and in the Apache the pilot have the control right ?

Just a thought, but you can make it active only if there are 2 men in the chopper and of course you cant override it with manual fire.

[sickboy 13]

Myke I have some good news re SU DropBox support!

The initial issues preventing me from using it are no concern when combining it with zSync.

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/17455#note-3

Currently it already supports downloading from DropBox accounts, and I am in the process of handling the automatic repository preparation and upload too!

ETA later today, but at least before the end of the weekend!

[[frl]myke 14]

Myke I have some good news re SU DropBox support!

The initial issues preventing me from using it are no concern when combining it with zSync.

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/17455#note-3

Currently it already supports downloading from DropBox accounts, and I am in the process of handling the automatic repository preparation and upload too!

ETA later today, but at least before the end of the weekend!

That is a fantastic news. You might forgive my stupid questions but i'm not a programmer so a lot i read there on dev-heaven doesn't make much sense to me:

does the final (planned) implementation mean that i just upload my stuff (.zip? .7z?) to dropbox and people can use that link to keep updated?

[sickboy 13]

Myke;1867046']That is a fantastic news. You might forgive my stupid questions but i'm not a programmer so a lot i read there on dev-heaven doesn't make much sense to me:

does the final (planned) implementation mean that i just upload my stuff (.zip? .7z?) to dropbox and people can use that link to keep updated?

The implementation im working on currently will be;

1; Put modfolder with files somewhere

2; Run sixzsync tool (currently commandline, but can add ui). It will prepare the data for the modfolder and upload it to DropBox.

For the end user, they can do two things;

a) Directly install your mod by inputting the dropBox url to your mod in the Six Updater.

b) Browse your mod repository by entering the dropBox url to the repo config file, in the Six Updater, so in case you have multiple mods, they can select from these mods.

I have registered sixupdater:// url handler with the Updater. So we can easily make it so that you can even just add links to forum posts etc, which will open your mod / repository in the updater, without the user having to copy/paste anything :)

Edited March 3, 2011 by Sickboy

[[frl]myke 14]

(currently commandline, but can add ui).

Meh...

I know it's "1337" to use commandline tools but i am not 1337. :p

It's 2011, graphical User Interface should be standard IMHO. Please don't take offence, it's not meant that way.

[sickboy 13]

Myke;1867065']Meh...

I know it's "1337" to use commandline tools but i am not 1337. :p

It's 2011' date=' graphical User Interface should be standard IMHO. Please don't take offence, it's not meant that way.[/quote']

Yea I know, but there's only so much I can do at a time, im sure you know how hard it is to split time over the things you wanna do, have to do etc.

For hosting/server purposes the commandline makes sense for automation etc. Of course not for the end-user. And I agree, for the mod hosters it would be nice too.

But in the end, better commandline than nothing, or not?

Edited March 3, 2011 by Sickboy

[[frl]myke 14]

Yea I know, but there's only so much I can do at a time, im sure you know how hard it is to split time over the things you wanna do, have to do etc.

For hosting/server purposes the commandline makes sense for automation etc. Of course not for the end-user. And I agree, for the mod hosters it would be nice too.

But in the end, better commandline than nothing, or not?

More than true, couldn't agree more. :D

And i also speak just for myself as the lazy basterd i am: i will probably wait to make use of it until there is a GUI to use.

Again, no offence intended. Just stating my point and i completely understand that there might be quite a few dozens more important features to implement/issues to solve than a GUI.

[sickboy 13]

I'll inform you once I get there, UI for the repo manager should be rather simple so probably next days :)

---------- Post added at 16:17 ---------- Previous post was at 15:21 ----------

Actually... Bad news Myke, the http servers of Dropbox actually do not support the HTTP range command, which we need to do partial downloads.... grmbl.

That basically throws dropbox support again off the table... At least, DropBox can be used for initial install and even updates, but it would not use differential update - so there would be no real benefits compared to downloading it normally, other than having the Updater manage it..

Sorry for getting hopes up.

Edited March 3, 2011 by Sickboy

[[frl]myke 14]

so there would be no real benefits compared to downloading it normally, other than having the Updater manage it.

Could the updater determine if it was updated on dropbox? If yes, what more benefit could it need besides that? I mean, sure it would be nice to only download the changed/added bits but even if it has to download the complete package that's already a huge benefit compared to the alternative which is keep track of every addon used manually...checking several Forums if there is an update valaibale or not.

[sickboy 13]

Myke;1867130']Could the updater determine if it was updated on dropbox? If yes' date=' what more benefit could it need besides that? I mean, sure it would be nice to only download the changed/added bits but even if it has to download the complete package that's already a huge benefit compared to the alternative which is keep track of every addon used manually...checking several Forums if there is an update valaibale or not.[/quote']Yes it can.

No differential updates means (lots of) overhead of data during update compared to diff-update, which for me is one of the major features of the updater ;D

But you are right, even without the differential update it is useful. I shall add it anyway.

[[frl]myke 14]

No differential updates means (lots of) overhead of data during update compared to diff-update, which for me is one of the major features of the updater ;D

Right, a "feature", while i see the main "purpose" in easier tracking for updates. ;)

Else it would mean (lots of) overhead for the people to keep track :D

Finally, i guess people have still the option to not use SU for dropbox downloads.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Myke;1864815']I really wish people would be more curious' date=' spend more time on researching, trying, playing around. Sometimes people are really fast in saying "can't be done" instead just trying it.[/quote']

Ha, unfortunately I have a habit of immediately recognizing the limitations of things (or go looking for them), but I assure you I do spend a lot of time researching and experimenting. More than half of the projects I start just end up sitting on my desktop because of some limitation or another. For me it's usually never as black and white as "can be done" or "can't be done", but there always seems to be something that makes it a "can sort of be done but..." situation.

Myke;1864815']And about the AI concerns: hell' date=' it isn't that hard and unique to make a fake turret to use as data source if the gunner is AI and then by script using this data (animationPhase anyone?) to animate the real things. [/quote']

That's quite a work-around; care to explain it in more detail? I can see how it would allow you to slave the dummy turret to the actual one, but what do you do with the weapons? Do you just have two different turrets with 2 different weapons; one using the invisible turret and the other using the script controlled one (belonging to the pilot)? IMO, still not a perfect solution (and thus one of those "sort of can be done" things ;)), but that actually gives me some interesting ideas (sometimes I wish I could model :().

Also, it's easy for you to say it's not hard, but for the record I am not an artist and I usually just have to work with the models BI provides (unedited), so I suppose I can overlook certain tricks you can do with the models.

Edited March 3, 2011 by Big Dawg KS

[[frl]myke 14]

The fake turret is just a target for the controls input of the AI to get data that can be catched with anmiationPhase command. After that, this data is just passed to the now user (script) controlled real turrets.

	while {(alive _plane) && (alive _unit) && (_unit in _plane)} do {
		_head = _plane animationPhase "fakeTurret";
		_eye = _plane animationPhase "FakeGun";
		{_plane animate [_x, (_head * 0.3)]} foreach ["MainTurret","SensorTurret"];
		{_plane animate [_x, (_eye * 0.3)]} foreach ["MainGun","Sensors"];
	};

I think it is self explanatory. This is the part that handles AI gunner. So i have both turrets following the AI view. AI can easily fight targets with all weapons, in fact you wont notice any difference ingame.

And my apoligies if i sounded too harsh, it wasn't by intention. Just what you wrote

Unfortunately I think using Myke's approach still wouldn't work well for the apache gun. The animation sources used for turrets cannot be controlled by script. Perhaps you could just use user animations to aim the gun and remove the turret aiming animation sources, but then it would be totally unusable by AI.

sounded to me like you could possibly have the required background knowledge to come to such conclusions. So i've just misinterpreted your post then. No offence intended.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Myke;1867334']AI can easily fight targets with all weapons' date=' in fact you wont notice any difference ingame.[/quote']

Interesting. I would not have guessed the AI would be able to use the weapon if it wasn't fixed to the turret they were directly controlling. Nice find. Too bad it still requires being set up in the model; there are a lot of applications this could be useful for. Just too bad we don't have MLODs of BI models.

Myke;1867334']sounded to me like you could possibly have the required background knowledge to come to such conclusions. So i've just misinterpreted your post then. No offence intended

Actually Myke, I did, I just totally forgot that you could infact get the animationPhase of turrets (or just didn't think of it). I would have still guessed that the AI would have problems with it though; considering they have trouble with most other things.

[[frl]myke 14]

Ok, refined the recognition routines to determine if either TrackIR or Freetrack are present or not. So now i need some feedback from you out there:

- does it work at your side with TrackIR?

- does it work with Freetrack?

- does it work for those without any of this (just disabling the controller still recognizes it, manual override function will follow later)?

I need as much feedback as possible.

For Freetrack/TrackIR users: how is the control over optics/gun? i'm thinking about of reducing movement capabilities in highest zoom level for the price of reduced moving capabilities...means you look in the general direction you want in lower zoom modes and for "fine controls" in this area you zoom completely in. Downside is, you have to zoom out if you want to turn the gun from completely left to completely right.

For non-headtracking users: does it work as you're used to? Can you control the gun/optics like nothing has changed?

Download: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9367994/GLT_AH1Z.7z

Still, it's pre-beta so don't even think of placing it in a mission for regular use. But you surealy can play around in the editor and create SP missions for yourself if you want. ;)

[das attorney 858]

Hi Myke,

Just gave it a little test - everything seems good here. Working fine from the gunner position in camera and default view. :)

Will chime in if I hit any problems, but good so far.

EDIT: Only Issue I can see is that the cannon does not rotate proportionally with the screen so if I'm trying to make a shot to 90 deg right (for instance), the cursor is off the left side of the screen. This is exacerbated when zooming. It could be my TrackIR setup though, so I'll have a play with that instead. Might have to make a new profile for this kind of thing.

No spam in the RPT too - nice! :)

Edited March 4, 2011 by Das Attorney

[[frl]myke 14]

EDIT: Only Issue I can see is that the cannon does not rotate proportionally with the screen so if I'm trying to make a shot to 90 deg right (for instance), the cursor is off the left side of the screen. This is exacerbated when zooming. It could be my TrackIR setup though, so I'll have a play with that instead. Might have to make a new profile for this kind of thing.

Please remember that this only properly works in optics enabled view. In regular first person TrackIR controls head movement as usual. I could adapt the gun movement to this head movement but i think it is rather pointless as everyone might have different TrackIR settings (curves) so what works for one wouldn't work for others and vice versa.

But i will think about the problem and see if i can find a solution. But don't bet on it.

[das attorney 858]

I've been trying it on optics mode and it's much better than the regular first person mode. Good point about the regular mode 'curve'.

I'm finding it's a little harder to aim than with mouse, but that might be due to the AI pilot lurching forward and throwing my aim off, plus I'm not very well practiced with the head gum cam yet.

Good work though - very creative thinking.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Myke;1867753']- does it work for those without any of this (just disabling the controller still recognizes it' date=' manual override function will follow later)?[/quote']

Yea you're going to probably want to add a way for the user to override it. Unfortunately I don't have my TIR with me, but it still thinks I'm using it. Also, IMO it should also work if you're in the pilot seat; maybe in this case it'd also be beneficial to have key or action that temporarily gives control back to the gunner.

One more thing, it'd probably be a good idea to make an MP compatable version to see how it might work in MP. There are a few locality issues to worry about (I think animations are local, so the animations will have to be broadcasted, and obviously the input should only be taken from the local client).

[[frl]myke 14]

Ok, i think i have the movement itself done, next step will be to tweak and adjust the script, call them when needed and abort them once no longer needed. Also tweaking the config itself properly.

Here is what it will be in final:

- TrackIR/Freetrack control disabled by default

- Gunner may enable headtracking for Gun and optics

- no control for the Pilot....get yourself a gunner, that's why there is a second seat there.

Besides that it will come in 3 variants (maybe one or two more):

- 16 x AGM-114 (not yet sure if L or K version), 2 AIM-9M

- 8 x AGM-114, 38 x Hydra70 FFAR, 2 x AIM-9M

- 76 x Hydra70 FFAR, 2 x AIM-9M

Probably i will include leaning for Pilot (disabled by default).

Here is a little vid showing the AH-1Z with TrackIR controlling gun and optics:

f8AFcUsm4YM