scotg

Ok, but then that means that pre-testing the animation in Buldozer will either have to be done separately for each wing, or that I'll have to use the same specific "user#" until ready to test in-game. I guess what I've learned is, as far as buldozer is concerned, there needs to be a specific number or extra variable assigned to the source term "user" in the model.cfg animations, or else it will auto-assign a number for you for each part.

Ok. I hadn't gotten that far just yet. I was operating only within buldozer at this point - with the files firebat1.p3d and model.cfg (and all textures and rvmats). In other words, I didn't get to the config.cpp file, yet. That being said, here's how that particular section looks in my model.cfg: class Leftwing: Rotation { type = "rotation"; source="user"; selection="wingL"; axis="wingL_axis"; minValue=0; maxValue=4; angle0=0; angle1=1.571;// i.e.: 90 deg animPeriod = 0.0; initPhase = 0.0; // memory = true;//(default assumed) }; class Rightwing: Rotation { type = "rotation"; source="user"; selection="wingR"; axis="wingR_axis"; minValue=0; maxValue=4; angle0=0; angle1=-1.571;// i.e.: 90 deg animPeriod = 0.0; initPhase = 0.0; // memory = true;//(default assumed) }; As you can see, the source is "user" for both, but in buldozer they appear as "user16" and "user17" and don't animate simultaneously. Can I put "user16" or some other specific number in both sources? EDIT: Yes. I can specify "user16" in the source, and both wings fold together. Derrrrr. It was a simple test that worked. Now I'm off to see why it was "user16 and -17" instead of 1-15 or 18+.

Here's a new question under the same topic: How do I specify two animations to happen under the same user-defined key? Further explanation: I have two wings that for now I want the player/user to be able to fold/unfold for storage, taxiing, etc. When I test the animation in Buldozer, they are automatically set to different occurrences (user16 for the left wing and user17 for the right one). It's my first time adding user defined animations to any model, so I was happy to see it sort of working, but I want them to work together, just like the ailerons or flaps do even in bd. I have yet to create the config.cpp file, but I don't think bd accesses that anyway. This is for a more standard airplane (i.e.: not a VTOL). As for previous help requests... The trouble with the Sky Hawk (green VTOL, above) not sitting on its landing skids has been resolved, sort of. I had to remove a supplemental ground contact memory point that I had placed to prevent landing hard on its tail. It was a remnant of something I do for helicopters, but since that point was higher than the other points it created an unstable ground balance as a VTOL. I have still no success with the flight pod/trubble bubble (white VTOL, above) working as a stable VTOL. I think its geometry is too compact and light weight to function predictably, at this point. As usual, any help is always appreciated!

Intel Z87 LPC Controller, acoording to Device Manager. While looking at the system devices, I can now confirm that I have PCIe x16 controller and two PCIe ports. One is in use by the 780, and the other is free. I'm too lazy to download CPU-Z right now. Maybe I'll get back to the download and speed test later today, or maybe tomorrow. I have a 100 GB SSD as my main drive, but also a 1TB HDD for storage. I had to turn off system backup on Windows a while back to save the SSD from filling up. From what I'm gathering, everyone is saying go for a 1060, 1070, or 1080. BUT, I'm also gathering that the 780 is still quite good, and I might be better off waiting for the next gen GPU. ArmA3 runs great on ultimate for me, but then again I haven't yet bought Apex/Tanoa. Performance is a key factor, but I'm also considering price, power efficiency, noise, and usage (i.e.: will I be buying any other games? Pro'lly not). I think the determining factor of moving forward will be once I do play on Tanoa and see how this setup can handle it. Most of my play is actually play testing my mods; I haven't even been online to play in over two years - but I will get back into it! Also, if I finally get a 4k display then I imagine that's the time to upgrade the GPU for sure. There's a lot of helpful information here, and I sincerely thank you guys, domokun, teabagginpeople, St. Jimmy, Beagle, Gera_CCT, and clawhammer. Incidentally, I never thought I'd see "thank you" and "teabaggin" in the same sentence. Now I've lived.

For anyone interested, here are some pics of the vtol we've been talking about: Parked Flight Over Stratis Maybe it helps to put the technical talk into perspective. I'm still developing the instrument layout and interior. I will eventually be adding dynamic decals for identification numbers, insignias, and warning labels. Meantime, I have another small VTOL on ground problem. See pics below. Here's what this 2nd vehicle looks like when loaded as an airplane/VTOL: Day Off - empty Ruh Roh, Trubbled Bubble - with pilot, pre-flight Here it is scripted with a helicopter config.cpp: Sitting Trubble - empty Flight Prep - with pilot, pre-flight The helicopter version sits properly when at rest, but heli physx involves leaning forward to move forward, which looks and is wrong for this vehicle. Unfortunately, the VTOL config causes the craft to spawn semi-hovering. The model is placed at the center of the world (Max) or pin (OB). Its mass is very low, as should be expected for a flying golf cart. I tried to "fake" the rested tilt look by tilting all LODs the proper amount. This made it look better at spawning, but also impossible to control as it is. Helicopters have settings for lift power. Do airplanes have a similar setting but for thrust? I feel like that could help with its instability.

This was the main point of my question, though, yall.

I almost missed your question. Intel Core i5-4670 3.40GHz 16 GB RAM Win 10 64 Read my reply to teabagginpeople below to find out more. In mid-late 2012, it was a beast, LOL! Now, it's still holding in there but admittedly needs updating. NOTE: turns out my GPU is a GTX 780, *not* the ti version. I built this computer myself in 2012 with "future upgrades" in mind. I did my research and came to an affordable conclusion, but I've forgotten a lot of what I did since and have yet to upgrade its hardware. Geez, I can't believe it has been so long. Anyway, I thought I remembered getting a motherboard with PCIe x16 capabilities, but the device manager just says "PCI bus." I'm not sure if that's a descriptive shortcoming or not. PSU is a JX-600. I'm not well versed in psu models, so I have no idea how well it can handle another gpu. On the other hand, I can trust that I had expansion on the brain when I picked out my psu, whatever that's worth. I've got a lot of air volume in a rather plain black, well ventilated, large "Corsair" tower. In addition to the fans included with the tower, psu, and gpu, I installed a chip fan and three additional tower fans to help with the flow direction. It's only noisy when it first starts up, but then it goes into a low hum... or I'm a little deaf. Re. your opinion: That sounds closer to what my first current idea was, until I remembered my "future upgrades" idea from four years ago. If I go with a new gpu, and the 1070 is still out of my $$ range, what about a 1050ti? Whaddiya think the 780 will fetch?

So I'm just now looking into another GTX780Ti to link. I mostly only play/edit/mod Arma3, and sometimes minesweeper LOL! Seriously though, I also use Photoshop, 3DS Max, Object Builder, Arma 3, and play music - often all at the same time. What I had read elsewhere was that having two cards, SLI or not, can have one card dedicated to physx while the remainder of its "power" and the other card are dedicated to graphics. I've also been reading, in these forums, how Arma3 depends mostly on CPU (I suppose in a more typical running only Arma 3 at 1920x1080 scenario), so I'm thinking if that's true about a 2nd GPU processing physx then could there be a legit benefit there? GPU/CPU tech with A3 is all kind of new to me, so please no biting my head off.

I have a few vehicles and some soldier gear that are assigned to custom factions. Each one specifies its faction fully with all the information enclosed in its own directory. For example: there are BadGuys and GoodGuys, and their faction icons are stored in each vehicle's or gear's /data/ui/faction folder. What I'd like to do is have a central folder where the factions' configs and artwork are stored, so that each component doesn't have to store redundant data within its own directories. Hence, it'll be a factions pool to which all assets reference their alignments. How would one go about doing that?

At the time I wrote this, my canopy was "functioning," meaning that even though there was object clipping occurring it was still opening and closing in game. Tweaking around with the min/max values and adding a secondary animation for the delayed components made the timing work perfect in buldozer. Once I packed it and tried it in-game, however, it now spawns in "open" state and doesn't close/open when getting in/out. It does make the character wait for the duration of the animation - whacky. I'm gonna play around with timing values again to see if maybe I got it all backwards. EDIT: Turns out it was not backwards, but I had changed animPeriod = 0.0 to animPeriod = 3.0 for all components, making the time lapse so slow that it looked like it was doing nothing. I was thinking that was the time, but I guess it's the time adjuster. Making it a 1.0 helped, but putting it back to 0.0 made everything back to normal. Now I've noticed a delay in the start of the canopy animation, as if the cabin sequence is waiting on another sequence to start. The delay only occurs when entering the vehicle, not when already seated and turning it off then on.

POOP! I find it odd that it can leave a trail but not redirect its location and angle. What about hiding the effects? maybe make it show/hide at key angles using a lot more mempoints?

While we stew on why the exhaust effects aren't moving, here's a quick few new items to work on: 1) The custom landing skids are animating just fine, but the craft does seem to roll around on them too easily, as if they were wheels. It spawns just fine, but the moment the engine comes on I can turn the entire vehicle before I can lift off. It also raises off the ground about 2in(5cm) and seems a little bouncy. If I land it with gear up and tilt it back on its tail, part of the craft will sink into ground. It then will reach a certain angle of tilt and finally pop itself up out of the ground, about 35 degrees. 2) Is there a pilot animation that sits as though in an F16 cockpit, where the stick is on the pilot's right armrest area? 3) How can I make certain animations delay? Specifically, the canopy has a double hinge, and there needs to be enough time for the first hinge to open before the next one can fully swing out. Testing it in game, and there's major matter phasing going on.

New problem... It seems straight forward, but the exhaust effects are not moving with the engines as they turn for VTOL mode. Also, I have two additional exhausts hard-fixed, but there's no visual effect at all. I have them all set like: "engines", "", "rotor_1", "engines", "rotor_2", "engines", "rotor_3", "", "exhaust1", "engines", "exhaust2", "engines", "exhaust1_dir", "engines", "exhaust2_dir", "engines", "exhaust3", "", "exhaust4", "", Maybe I've exhausted the limits of the engine? EDIT: I guess I deleted my exhaust 3 and 4 parameters in the config.cpp. Re-inserting the proper lines makes all 4 appear.

I wanted to revisit this before it becomes outdated and gets closed. It's still on my mind, but it has been on a back burner. First, I agree with your two cents on confusing experimenting and addon making; it truly can take its toll on your motivation. Often, though, this comes more in the form of other modders's opinions who would railroad people into developing only strictly into the confines of the established game. More importantly, however, I wanted to ask you if you ever tried using proxies for your suspensions? I realize it's an experiment, but it is one that already sort of works. Since a character's proxy can follow a memory point within the confines of its own skeleton (e.g.: holding the steering wheel or pilot stick), why not make a "character," with IK bones (or whatever more advanced bones characters use compared to vehicles), of your suspension and attach it to the model separately? The only roadblock I can see with this is: would the suspension require a crew spot for it to work? IF such an experiment works, then it'll surely make more unique and more visually appealing addons. Look a the Apache chopper those guys made, which has an interactive dashboard and pilot-controllable turret with IHAADS. I imagine there was some serious experimenting there, but it paid off. I think if we didn't experiment, then we'd still all be playing pong - or worse: pinball.

I'm looking at the model.cfg for the Offroad pick-up truck, and wondering exactly what are all the the wheel bones. Every wheel has a standard number ranging from wheel_1_1 and wheel_2_1 to wheel_1_4 and wheel_2_4. Right off, I count EIGHT wheels for the Offroad. Each number has additional bones associated to its base wheel, and they seem to be attached to the chassis in this order: wheel_x_x_damper_land, wheel_x_x_damper, wheel_x_x_steering, wheel_x_x, wheel_x_x_unhide, and wheel_x_x_hide. This is a potential of forty-eight bones. Am I correct to assume that the bones prior to the wheel itself are suspension parts? If so, then looking at a typical wishbone suspension, which part would be the A-arm, and which is the spring? What do the _unhide & _hide parts do? My guess is for tire damage or maybe lose a hubcap... Could it be either, both, or none of the above? I've got a 4x4 vehicle with independent wishbone suspension, and I just need to know how complex I can make its suspension in-game given what's available from the Offroad as a template.

well, so far I have been a lot more successful in getting the VTOL to fly properly, but just flying and not animating. The main issue was because I had the whole model sitting on the center of gravity like it was the ground. I'm still having absolutely no luck with getting the parts to move. I've checked my skeleton and named selections again and again; I've tried other config.cpp and model.cfg file as templates, including BIS samples and the Blackout model.cfg. I've tried renaming the model and its class in CfgModels. My first car, the LM002, is working well, and all parts are moving. The little helicopter I'm working on has working rotors and pilot stick; even its turret works if I include a gunner potion. So it's a real headscratcher why I can't get this one to animate apart from flying. I wanna say it's not errors in the configs, since the ones I referenced worked in other vehicles just fine. Also, whatever vehicle .cfg file I used I made sure to also use its .cpp file. I'm sure I missed a step or two, but which one(s)? <headdesk> EDIT: Feeling retarded... It was a missing comma in my model.cfg SkeletonBones. The BIS AddonBuilder went ahead and created the PBO anyway, but I guess I should learn to use mikero tools since supposedly they wouldn't let such an error pass... and since I did give the guy money. I'm actually scared I'd get nothing accomplished at all using mikeroTools; with all the extra clutter I haven't cut from my scripts I might never see results.

The sample plane actually has a super low mass of 10 in geoPhys, whereas it has a mass of around 6500 and buoyancy value of 1 in Geo, but I kind of get what you're saying. Maybe what I don't get is what physx actually does? Priority right now, however, is figuring out why the animations don't work... I thought it may have been something to do with the model itself, but if it's the config then should I re-post in that forum section?

Ok, so... wrapping my brain around all that. If my geoPhys looks different than my geo, LODs, shadow, etc, then will that affect anything else besides how it moves? Think like this: If I have an object that looks like a brick, is durable like a brick, compact like a brick, and hits hard like brick, yet it's also nimble and can fly like a bumblebee AND an eagle (because technology :-P ), then changing its distribution of mass is simply a matter of location in geoPhys rather than relative appearance in geo LOD. Is that right? BTW, It may sound like a heckuva beastly aircraft, but I'm not just making some over-powered, small, dominating-the-game vehicle here. It will be able to dominate for only short bursts, if at all, because its small size will not allow it to carry much fuel, ammo, or armor. That's the tradeoff. Ok I'm still not sure why I don't see animations or parts movement. I looked at the USAF mod with its CV-22 for an example of how to set up some things. Because of that, my vehicle flies like a good ol' VTOL now (aside from the above issues with mass distribution causing squirreliness). However, its rudders, flaps, ailerons, engines, and gear are still just static. I double checked all names, and even if I had mistyped one or two of the named selections, then still at least something would be working. Within their CV-22 .pbo file, there was a _BASEBODY.p3d - which I can't tell if I need something similar for my set up or what. All its extra .sqf scripts pertain to the ramps and loading/lapesing, the big wing folding/packing up animations, moving around inside the cargo area, and the custom menus. None of which do I need for my little one-man assault VTOL. Seeing as how BIS have yet to release their VTOLs from encryption, the USAF mod was the best example I could find. Basically, I need to find out what am I missing that the CV-22 isn't, in order to make my aircraft look better as it flies and lands. For those following and helping: A great big thanks to you guys. I'm sorry my posts are so long, but I just try to be a thorough as possible when helping others to help me. Thanks for your continued patience!!

Two things now: 1) Although I gave this VTOL skids, it still works better and looks better if they are retracting. I'm back on the case; go figure. 2) Upon making the switch from heli to a VTOL, I've discovered that none of the parts animations are working. Also, the flight is very squirrely and seems inconsistent. Is there an extra LOD needed for aircraft? The sample plane has a "geometry phys" LOD, but I've seen some other .p3d's with "4e+013 physx" LODs. Are these the same? I can't tell, because I can only see a visual 3D representation of the sample plane.

That's kind of what I have been doing with the instruments' and wheels' axes. I make it a point to have two vertices within any rotating element so I can copy-paste them exactly where they should go into the memLOD, even if it's just two points of a triangle floating within a non-cylinder object. I just wanted to check if maybe it wouldn't work with gears for some reason, but apparently that's not the problem.

will the animations work if the axis isn't strictly aligned on X, Y, or Z?

Last time I checked the sample heli, it had fixed gear. I think it was a dumbed down version of the Orca. I still have not gotten the gear retracting to work, but after some play testing I decided to put skids on this vehicle and make it a VTOL. That means it will absolutely have to take off and land like a heli, but once it's good and aloft it will be able to fly like a plane. I suppose in the strictest usage of "VTOL" (vertical take off and landing), that's appropriate. Otherwise with wheels and gear, it would have technically been a VSTOL. Any rate, the knowledge gained here is not moot because I have a few other aircraft, for future development, featuring retractable gear. I will have to update the progress/setbacks on any of those projects' gear here, but later.

BTW, this is for a "heli" - quotes because it has no rotors but flies just like a chopper. I might have to make it a VTOL, using an airplane template. I've been looking over that page as well. So far I'm still not sure which of my source names might be off. I don't stray from the established source names, but I do rename my named selections so I can remember what it is in English. I'm importing .obj files for the model. Should I import them with gears retracted or extended initially? That probably has no bearing on the lack of animation, but it occurs to me it might be good to know once I solve the main problem here.

That's what I was hoping, but it turned out to not work so far. Gonna re-visit some working models' scripts.

I'm hoping that with the JETS DLC, there will be some well implemented anit-aircraft support - mobile and stationary. It would be ideal if some AA assets could be relocated, like on a towable trailer, and then deployed.