The Man Without Qualities

well, I am not a coder, to mee it seems he is removing lots of player stats stuff which is stored in an DB. The player related templates as well. It is basically gear loadout which can be also used as template for AI soldiers (like at ARMA.RU). At ARMA.RU they have the same functionality of generating High Command Groups available to the commander, but no AI commander on top taking over when no human is assigned to that role.

Maybe you have an outdated version, had same issues in one of the RCs but Spayker fixed it before he dissappeared. @hottehotte and @rorydev Try to grab here: https://github.com/Spayker?tab=overview&from=2021-04-01&to=2021-04-30 https://github.com/Spayker?tab=repositories ...there are the latest changes included. You need all 4 WASP repos to make your own test setup. Once you manage to run the mission with excellent serve+HC FPS you are at least able to replicate and run the successful WASP server.

No signs of Spayker, maybe life caught him or he was pissed by community or BIS, dunno. Sad. @SpaykerMan or @Spayker : if it is cash, just get in contact to finance server for hosting WASP.

https://arma3-servers.net/server/199223/ wtf happened to my favorite mission? Server dead since 27th. Discord too. https://discord.me/arma3wasp

Well, BIS can't waste time with cruising around in T72 cus to tight for corona - they will make huge progress on A4 cus no distraction by normal life 🙂

gc8, vanilla BECTI for A3 by Benny is not much different from ....wasn't it WFBE in A2? ....so the very same general game concept which is there since OFP. Many "users" of BECTI core disabled AIcommander and AIsquadleader modules because of performance reasons. That makes games unfortunately very unbalanced and unfair depending on how long on side has to suffer from unfortunate player distribution. Nevertheless, I still play BECTI as SP on a dedicated from time to time, you can run it in persistance mode and I can jump in every few ours and see what AI comms did so far and join one side to have some fun.

OFPS is BECTI minus AI routines. They are still present in the code of the OFPS fork of BECTI, but not properly maintained and due to performance issues deactivated. Thats the minus. The big plus of the OFPS fork is the excellent maintenace of new added addon packs, almost all weapons/units are fairly good balanced and interact pretty realistic with the other addons. Another big plus are the defensive structures for base defense. Sometimes unrealistic combinations of defensive constructions + ship weaponary, but it gives BECTI a nice tower-game spin. It is worth to check the OFPS announcements for sheduled matches since a 2vs2 match with deactivated AI squads is not much fun. I am going to host a core BECTI with vanilla units soon since I recognized that the game browser is full of 80+ server with Antistasi + Liberation but all empty. How boring! The idea hosting the OFPS-fork as-is is dead since OFPS staff started banning people in discord and OFPS - server just for rising the idea or having just a different opinion. Hi Tookatee! 🙂 You fit perfectly in the footsteps of Spanish! Nevertheless, at OFPS there is the only available addon collection with well-maintained configs as we remember from the holy @DVD collections made for crCTI. Even a IFA3 setup is in progress, hope it will be released soon. @AllCanor95: try to catch Benny in Steam, he can tell you how to add another faction.

Well, at least I got ANY reaction, not just ignored(when I asked polite), so mission accomplished. I will spend the next 5 years guessing the hidden hints behind 🐿️

even no response by devs is telling very loud...

you bring no value add, true what you say, but if A4 would be a desaster, we would still have A3, right? Can we stop it here? I would rather get some hints from BI instead of you.

to few AI can be managed by server SW, we still live with that HC. Was a nice workaround some...100? years ago. But it is time for a capable server that can utilize server HW monsters and even clusters to be able to have maps complemented with masses of AI. What is wrong using your old phone/car/wife? Why you want a new?

Will there be a ArmA 4 before 2025? Will there be an A4 at all? BI came to conclusion that OFP/ArmA is dead and just not telling us? Any dev involved in anything that smells like a new engine?

??? I thought there is no future? All I need is: - brand new server/client SW without HC able to deal with hundreds of human players and thousands of AI Rest is chicki-chacka

The map that comes with GM DLC is a nono for BI AI. The border barriers (fence, ditches, tiny concrete walls) are obstacles that even a human cannot break through, even with tanks. Paths to avoid the border are limited/not existing. Hence, BECTI @ GM maps is DOA.

As soon as there is a prize target of <600€ for a X570+3700X combo met, I will give my X470+2700X combo to a friend and get a new. But it helps just for SP and pure client experience. MP still suffers from the bad utilization of server HW by BIS. BIS promised massive battles which I translate into 100 human players among 1000+ AI. BIS server SW + 2x HC on a monster server can't do that. Since the server must pump all he gets from the HC also throught the entire stack and sync it like all from a normal client, I do not see how BIS want to fullfill their promise with this approach. So I am happy with all eye-candy served by BIS, the MP experience is ...well...decades after initial promise still not simulating battles properly....maybe shooting of some gangs in the backyard is performing well.

bugs.....ever seen StarshipTroopers? That was an Alien movie FULL of bugs

Sure not! This is essential for Aliens - porting through walls!

I am a milsimmer too, yes, I playtest every crappy island, but only the finest make me porting a CTI onto.

Don' teach me what I have to expect. A3 is not eol...well, technically you are right, but if there is no A4, A3 will live forever 🙂

It is just a DLC, nobody needs ti buy. The odd thing is the signal BIS is sending to the community. It looks like BIS is selling out all unfinished stuff/addons rotting at some SSDs and wrapped hastily a alien story around because with alien+timetravel you can explain any curiousity. When I look through the forum, I get the impression that the community wants rather things fixed before new (potentionally also buggy) assets are added. IMHO, every dime, evey dev-minute spend into addon dev is wasted, to have a successor for A3 befoe 2035. I would give BIS every year 200€ for bugfixes, just maintenance of A3 + dev of A4 until....

Turning to Alien stuff is the solution for every issue in the A3 issue: whenever we see a strange simulation, BIS can claim its intended, it should reflect a disturbance space-time continuum. My personal opinion: The last thing we need is another DLC...any other content - community does an excellent job already. Save your time for fixing A3 and dev A4.

Ok, here my GENERAL Question (mainly for BIS management to answer): When (well not even the year, which decade would be accurate nuff) we will get A4 and what will be the major evolution steps in engine developement. Everything before 2035 would be welcome. After 2035 A3 would not feature "future weapons" anymore.

This set of questions is meant for BIS devs, I am not interesteted in the opinions of the community. So please do not spam this thread with your opinions how wrong am I with my own view. Situation: ArmA series is sold as "military simulation" supporting "massive battles". Reality is that involving more then 200-300 AI and/or human players results into heavy performance issues. Massive use of headless clients along with the server solves the problem partly but results into other issues while syncing server with HCs. Conclusion: "military simulation" is true for a lot of aspects of simulation, but "massive battles" is absolutely not true. Having a few normal sized motorized infantry units with supporting units simulated, and that for 2 factions exceeds already the capabilities of A3. I understood from various statements by Spanels that basic design decicions in the server-client task sharing were based on the fact that during OFP developement weak computer platforms and slow internet connectivity were present. Hence, load was pushed to clients, the resulting sync issues were partly compensated with a kind of "prediction" of future positions of moving objects...but in a MilSim with many moving objects that worked not very successful, we all remember "rubberbanding" and units spawning around due to prediction/sync rematching. Requirement: I do not know how much work it would cause for a total redesign but I see the need of a capable server software that collects more or less just the controller input of all clients and all other computing is done on a server HW with many CPUs and a ArmA server SW able to utilize all cores. I do not see a big benefit installing several HCs at the very same server HW and to let server and HCs communicate through the entire IP stack - even if local. Plus having the need to keep HCs as clone from addon content and all other related issues. I consider headless client as a workaround to buy time until a capable server SW is developed....but will this ever happen? I would be happy if BIS devs could post here some estimations how much CPU cores + RAM would be necessary to to all that at server which is today done spread to clients but also considering CPU saving due to less sync tasking. And I would like to know if a server centric approach was / is part of ongoing considerations, but skipped due to blocking issues x/y/z. My personal opinion: Currently I am satisfied up to happy with the amount and quality of available in-game-assets (islands/units/simulation of physics), the only big problem left over is the missing massive MP gaming experience due to limited server performance issues.

Well, I am talking about the game made by BIS = Bohemia Interactive Studios, not by Bohemia Interactive Simulations. Could be that I am wrong with abbreviations, but I remembers since OFP the game manufacturer as BIS and the military simulation manufacturer as BISIM. But good point! How is the same issue treated in the professional version?

maybe the distributed design aproach might be one of the generic roots for all problems. If I remeber inteviews with BIS Spanels the made the netcode design years back having in mind that there are weak computers and slow internet connectivity. Hence they distribute the load of AI calc to the clients as far as they can and to overcome the weak connectivity with the server (and hence the inaccurate sync) the do a kind of prediction at server. That way "rubberbanding" occurs as well as units "spawning around" for a few meters. If now 3 vehicles meet somewhere, one owned by server, one by client A and one by client B, it is up to the server to merge all events and feed the results back to the clients. That has some delay and might explain why vehicles sometimes smash into each other, maybe client B was not aware about the fact that client A vehicle made a sudden move. If everything (controler input of all clients) would be merged at server before executed (simulated) it might change the entire behavior. As for oldstyle MP-shooter. Dunno if the methods I described are still in code like that, but if so, I have doubts that changes to the AI routines would result into any significant improvements.