Jump to content

k-hunter

Member
  • Content count

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

14 Good

About k-hunter

  • Rank
    Private First Class

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://badcompanypmc.com
  • Steam url id
    hk_hunterkiller

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    FOB Jamhoria
  • Interests
    - Still busy porting our Realism server to Arma 3...
    http://www.github.com/KHunter-Arma
  1. AI Driving - Feedback topic

    This is exactly where I'm having major issues. Both of these... Short background story: I've been working on a very comprehensive AI mod since Arma 2 that I'm now developing for Arma 3 and plan to even release it sometime soon hopefully. Anyway, one thing on which I've spent many hundreds of hours is trying to get AI in dynamic missions from point A to B with no failures... The points are usually very separated, with AI having to travel across the whole map and they often have to start from "outside" the map even. Each of my AI groups used for this task is almost always formed up of 1-3 troop transport trucks + sometimes an armed vehicle (could be a light vehicle or APC/IFV etc.). I've been working on a long script for this purpose that tries to handle all the clunkiness that the driving AI throws at me and get them one way or another to where they're supposed to reach. A separate instance of this script runs for each group. But despite using a few cheats (such as repairing transport vehicles every few seconds so they're not forced to move at 10% speed for the whole time after hitting a tree and losing wheels...), putting in all the "standard" stuff like COLUMN formation, CARELESS behaviour and all that, currently on most occasions about 25% of the groups don't end up reaching the target and instead get stuck (getting stuck either on or off-road seems to be equally likely) even though all groups started at almost the same position in a wide open area. And I'm not just talking about giving one move order and them either following it or not. I'm talking about a script worth a few hundred lines of code, closely tracking the movement of the group, favoring "move" over "doMove" for convoy movement, but reserving "doMove" for use if the other fails, and also makes use of some really awkward last-line-of-defense "teleport the convoy across the map to the other side of the target" function to completely change the path if all else fails. Alas, for the groups that fail, even this is not enough apparently. And here's where they exhibit either of those two problems I quoted. Bridges seem to be one of their greatest enemies, and other times they just seem incapable of moving any longer for no apparent purpose. At most I see the driver madly turning the steering wheel left and right in quick succession or turning the engine on/off even though the vehicle hasn't been moving for the last 30 minutes... So what I want to ask is, is there any workaround that can almost reliably get a "stuck" vehicle to start moving again? I've just learned about the forceFollowRoad and setDriveOnPath commands and will be using the former to test if it helps at all, though afaik CARELESS AI already do that as much as possible. I don't think I'll be getting into setDriveOnPath unless I want to go completely nuts and try to write a full-on high level path-finding algorithm (no thanks I'd rather be hired by BIS and get payed for that...).
  2. Any chance of seeing T-62s and T64s in this mod? :)
  3. So... ahem... is it rude for me to ask for a situation update on this? :)
  4. I unsubscribed & resubscribed which deletes and redownloads it as far as I know. So I did try that already and I got the exact same error with the same pbo... The weird thing is when I check the last modified date, it actually looks like the pbo was modified 2 days later than its signature (October 4th vs 6th) :\
  5. Hi pookie, Awesome stuff as always :) I've got a weird problem with a signature and I'm wondering if I'm the only one. I'm getting kicked when testing on dedicated for "wrong signature" for pook_SAM.pbo. I need to have that security on our server so I can't afford to turn off verification, but I really want to have this mod on there!! PS: I got the pack from Steam if it matters... yeah yeah I know...
  6. No zeroing at DMR & SVD in OA and CO Added by Val about 4 years ago. Updated almost 4 years ago. Iron sights for scoped weapons with sidemounted scope Added by TheMasta almost 6 years ago. Updated over 3 years ago. 6 years ago! 6! You don't understand what I'm saying. Actually you don't want to understand. Of course modders came into the scene to add such features because they were never added. But that wasn't the main purpose of such mods. Great mods like ACE made whole changes to the game, and these things came at the side. And it's all a package, so it's not like you can keep using ACE or any other mod without problems and say "I'm going to remove this component because it's now part of the core game and it causes compatibility issues". Instead it gets broken and goes fubar. I'll say it once again, not to try to make you understand, but to try to break Dwarden's silence on this. You're presenting new features as "fixes" and breaking whatever mod comes in your way. I'm forgetting about people who don't use mods? Do you have statistics? Do you know what percentage of the Arma 2 population uses mods and what doesn't? No, of course you don't. And you don't care anyway. As I've said you're a modder under the disguise of a game developer without any interest in making the best decisions for the community. I'll just wait until Dwarden shares his thoughts on this. Otherwise I'm through arguing with you.
  7. Schatten, it seems to me that you're the one who's forgetting, or rather dismissing, the people who do use mods. Although like everyone else here, I appreciate the work you put in, you're behaving not like a game developer, but a modder yourself. You have your own aim and you're blindly following it, not listening to or taking seriously any criticism by the folks who are actually going to have to use your work in the end. You're patching a game which is sold for money, you're not making a mod and if this is what you chose to do, you have to start listening to the customer base, just like BIS normally does, even though there are disagreements within the customer base (and that's for us to discuss here). Otherwise, you're not only making people disappointed, but by saying you put in a lot of effort and not caring about breaking mods, you're basically saying you don't care how much effort mod developers have put into their work back in the day. The turrets config name is an excellent example. Changing the name of it might make your corepatch look tidier, but it does nothing but create problems who swear by the mods they use, the mods that took years to develop and are no longer being worked on. There is a time and place for everything, and the stuff you're doing should have been done in the past. Since they weren't, there is no point in doing them now because the community is no longer strong enough to deal with its repercussions. Sorry, but it's about time you start giving a crap about what others are saying.
  8. If I looked for ways to insult your preferences in Arma (a game which has always been designed to be at least more realistic than anything else out there), I'd be able to do it in more ways than you can imagine. But that's not the point of having these discussions. So next time try being respectful when you're arguing against something, or you might as well just leave these forums and take your rant about dropping whatever server you had somewhere else.
  9. I understand that but perhaps adding an armpatch is not something that would take much time. That's what I meant when I said I don't know what it requires. Magazine models for the Czech rifle were being discussed earlier, so I see no problem in at least bringing this on the table. What I can say is this would be a change that no one would come here to complain about at least, unlike many of the changes already done which the rest of the community doesn't seem to like so much... On the other hand, having CDF soldiers in-game with custom arm patches and PMC units with no such feature doesn't make much sense.
  10. ACRE2 Stable Release

    Thanks for the answer. I had a look at the API and saw that already but I just wasn't sure what "spectator" meant in this case. Now I see I hadn't read all of it before. I guess dead guys are moved to a "dead" channel automatically anyway by the looks of it and they can't hear anyone. This is nice.
  11. Alright I've been meaning to say this but I keep forgetting. It's perhaps kind of a big request (I have no idea what it requires really), but can we get arm patches (squad xml logo on arm) on the units that are missing them? It's a shame BIS left most models with this feature lacking, especially for OA. That being said, many OA vehicles don't have the logo either... This is one of the great features of Arma, especially to those that play as a unit with their own original logo. It would be awesome to finally have it on all (or at least most) units and vehicles.
  12. ACRE2 Stable Release

    I'm going to swoop right in here to ask a question. It might sound a bit stupid because I don't even play Arma 3 and what I'm about to ask might already be in ACRE2, but I run an Arma 2 unit and we will be switching to A3 soon enough, so I'd rather ask now. So the question is: is there a way to force the speakers on TS3 to mute when someone dies? So if a teammate is dead, he can't hear his mates talking near his dead body. I don't think this is possible with ACRE1 anyway, but perhaps with ACRE2? If it's not there yet, then consider this as a kind and very hopeful request for the future! :)
  13. A config class switch matrix, if I understand it right, is not going to work with modded buildings unless you add them as well. I'm not the most experienced person here, but just throwing it out there. How about using boundingbox on the house to see if they're on the roof, if the line intersect method is unfeasible?
  14. I agree this is great. Especially if you get a bunch of AI to occupy a house, this should be awesome.
  15. Yep that definitely fixes the problem in Fallujah! "Normal" speeds are achievable again in the right places when CorePatch_CCP_67951_OA is removed. But off-road speed becomes fast again. Here's a better explanation. With the patch: road > dirt road > runway > off-road > taxiway (with taxiway speed becoming unbearable) Without the patch: road > runway > off-road > taxiway > dirt road but if that can't be fixed without breaking the functionality again, I'd happily accept the case without the patch over the other. CorePatch_CCP_67951_OA doesn't include a file for Clafghan, and removing it doesn't make any difference. Perhaps it was always like that...
×