Jump to content

dwringer

Member
  • Content Count

    331
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Everything posted by dwringer

  1. The position it seems to be referencing is the line that says: _box = _this select 0; Are you still calling the script with _fill = [this] execVM "crate_filler.sqf"; from within the crate's init field? I have copy-pasted it just now and tested it, and examined my arma.rpt thoroughly, but I do not see or encounter errors. Or perhaps this is an issue with something in my code being run on the server that I failed to comprehend? I have only been able to test it locally, but the line of code that you're getting an error from is identical to the one in the OP except i changed the word "_crate" to "_box". EDIT: I reproduced something similar to your error in my .rpt by calling it without brackets around "this". This is what i got: So just make sure you're using brackets ;) If that's really not the issue, then I apologize :!
  2. That weapon may not work but this one will: "R_60mm_HE" Might not really be a big enough explosion, but you can repeat the line multiple times or just say something like: _bomb = for "_i" from 1 to 3 do {"R_60mm_HE" createVehicle (getPos ied);}; ...which will make three of them explode at once. Check the sticky at the top for classnames and find Sickboy's post on that thread for more ammo types that you could potentially try using.
  3. Hey man, this is really great stuff, I confess I am pretty clueless about MP scripting. However, I have combined your script with the other info I have found online thus far, and made some changes that should enable this thing to be very easily expanded as the classes in-game are changed. I went through the classnames alongside those in a post from another forum by Pzar, and there are a couple others in this one. If you like, feel free to use this script and take all the credit for yourself. When called like your script, afaik it functions identically. Sorry if there are bugs :) /* Arma 3 Weapon Crate Filler MP Compatible. Loops when using default quantities. Does not loop with optional args set. Updated: 7 March 2013 Authors: Riouken Pzar dwringer Arguments: [box (&optional numBag numItem numMod numWeapon numAmmo)] */ if (!isServer) exitWith {}; ///init private ["_box", "_loop", "_wait", "_numWeapon", "_numAmmo", "_numMod", "_numItem", "_numBag", "_natoWeapons", "_opforWeapons", "_launchers", "_oculars", "_cartAmmo", "_launcherAmmo", "_glAmmo", "_manAmmo", "_attachments", "_items", "_hats", "_dress", "_chest", "_backpacks"]; _box = _this select 0; _loop = true; // Defaults: _wait = 500; _numBag = 0; _numItem = 50; _numMod = 50; _numWeapon = 50; _numAmmo = 200; switch (count _this) do { case 2 : { _numBag = _this select 1;}; case 3 : { _numBag = _this select 1; _numItem = _this select 2;}; case 4 : { _numBag = _this select 1; _numItem = _this select 2; _numMod = _this select 3;}; case 5 : { _numBag = _this select 1; _numItem = _this select 2; _numMod = _this select 3; _numWeapon = _this select 4;}; case 6 : { _numBag = _this select 1; _numItem = _this select 2; _numMod = _this select 3; _numWeapon = _this select 4; _numAmmo = _this select 5;};}; _natoWeapons = [ "arifle_MX_F", "arifle_MX_GL_F", "arifle_MX_SW_F", "arifle_MXC_F", "arifle_MXM_F", "arifle_SDAR_F", "arifle_TRG20_F", "arifle_TRG21_F", "arifle_TRG21_GL_F", "hgun_P07_F", "LMG_Mk200_F", "srifle_EBR_F" ]; _opforWeapons = [ "arifle_Khaybar_C_F", "arifle_Khaybar_F", "arifle_Khaybar_GL_F", "hgun_Rook40_F" ]; _launchers = [ "launch_NLAW_F", "launch_RPG32_F" ]; _oculars = [ "Binocular" ]; _cartAmmo = [ "30Rnd_65x39_caseless_green", "30Rnd_65x39_caseless_green_mag_Tracer", "30Rnd_65x39_caseless_mag", "30Rnd_65x39_caseless_mag_Tracer", "100Rnd_65x39_caseless_mag", "100Rnd_65x39_caseless_mag_Tracer", "20Rnd_762x45_mag", "20Rnd_556x45_UW_mag", "30Rnd_556x45_Stanag", "30Rnd_65x39_case_mag", "30Rnd_65x39_case_mag_Tracer", "16Rnd_9x21_Mag", "30Rnd_9x21_Mag", "200Rnd_65x39_cased_box", "200Rnd_65x39_cased_box_Tracer" ]; _launcherAmmo = [ "NLAW_F", "RPG32_F", "RPG32_AA_F" ]; _glAmmo = [ "1Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell", "UGL_FlareWhite_F", "UGL_FlareGreen_F", "UGL_FlareRed_F", "UGL_FlareYellow_F", "UGL_FlareCIR_F", "1Rnd_Smoke_Grenade_shell", "1Rnd_SmokeRed_Grenade_shell", "1Rnd_SmokeGreen_Grenade_shell", "1Rnd_SmokeYellow_Grenade_shell", "1Rnd_SmokePurple_Grenade_shell", "1Rnd_SmokeBlue_Grenade_shell", "1Rnd_SmokeOrange_Grenade_shell", "3Rnd_HE_Grenade_shell", "3Rnd_UGL_FlareWhite_F", "3Rnd_UGL_FlareGreen_F", "3Rnd_UGL_FlareRed_F", "3Rnd_UGL_FlareYellow_F", "3Rnd_UGL_FlareCIR_F", "3Rnd_Smoke_Grenade_shell", "3Rnd_SmokeRed_Grenade_shell", "3Rnd_SmokeGreen_Grenade_shell", "3Rnd_SmokeYellow_Grenade_shell", "3Rnd_SmokePurple_Grenade_shell", "3Rnd_SmokeBlue_Grenade_shell", "3Rnd_SmokeOrange_Grenade_shell" ]; // Omitted FlareGreen_F, FlareRed_F, FlareWhite_F, FlareYellow_F, because while they -do- work // and load up, I was unable to find a launcher for these ones yet. _manAmmo = [ "APERSBoundingMine_Range_Mag", "APERSMine_Range_Mag", "ATMine_Range_Mag", "Chemlight_blue", "Chemlight_green", "Chemlight_red", "Chemlight_yellow", "ClaymoreDirectionalMine_Remote_Mag", "DemoCharge_Remote_Mag", "HandGrenade", "HandGrenade_Stone", "MiniGrenade", "SatchelCharge_Remote_Mag", "SLAMDirectionalMine_Wire_Mag", "SmokeShell", "SmokeShellBlue", "SmokeShellGreen", "SmokeShellOrange", "SmokeShellPurple", "SmokeShellRed", "SmokeShellYellow" ]; _attachments = [ "acc_flashlight", "acc_pointer_IR", "muzzle_snds_B", "muzzle_snds_H", "muzzle_snds_H_MG", "muzzle_snds_L", "optic_Aco", "optic_ACO_grn", "optic_Arco", "optic_Hamr", "optic_Holosight" ]; // (I omitted Zasleh2 because it comes up as a blank box for me) _items = [ "FirstAidKit", "ItemCompass", "ItemGPS", "ItemMap", "ItemRadio", "ItemWatch", "Medikit", "MineDetector", "NVGoggles", "ToolKit" ]; _hats = [ "H_Cap_blu", "H_Cap_brn_SERO", "H_Cap_headphones", "H_Cap_red", "H_HelmetB", "H_HelmetB_light", "H_HelmetB_paint", "H_HelmetO_ocamo", "H_MilCap_mcamo", "H_MilCap_ocamo", "H_PilotHelmetHeli_B", "H_PilotHelmetHeli_O" ]; // (left the booniehats out due to no textures) _dress = [ "U_B_CombatUniform_mcam", "U_B_CombatUniform_mcam_tshirt", "U_B_CombatUniform_mcam_vest", "U_B_HeliPilotCoveralls", "U_B_Wetsuit", "U_BasicBody", "U_C_Commoner1_1", "U_C_Commoner1_2", "U_C_Commoner1_3", "U_C_Poloshirt_blue", "U_C_Poloshirt_burgundy", "U_C_Poloshirt_redwhite", "U_C_Poloshirt_salmon", "U_C_Poloshirt_stripped", "U_C_Poloshirt_tricolour", "U_OI_CombatUniform_ocamo", "U_OI_PilotCoveralls", "U_OI_Wetsuit" // "U_Rangemaster" ]; // (Note you can only wear your faction's clothing, and I'm not sure // who can even wear rangemaster, so it is commented out) _chest = [ "V_BandollierB_cbr", "V_BandollierB_khk", "V_BandollierB_rgr", "V_Chestrig_khk", "V_ChestrigB_rgr", "V_HarnessO_brn", "V_HarnessOGL_brn", "V_PlateCarrier1_cbr", "V_PlateCarrier1_rgr", "V_PlateCarrier2_rgr", "V_PlateCarrierGL_rgr", "V_Rangemaster_belt", "V_RebreatherB", "V_RebreatherIR", "V_TacVest_brn", "V_TacVest_khk", "V_TacVest_oli" ]; _backpacks = [ "B_AssaultPack_Base", "B_AssaultPack_blk", "B_AssaultPack_blk_DiverExp", "B_AssaultPack_blk_DiverTL", "B_AssaultPack_cbr", "B_AssaultPack_dgtl", "B_AssaultPack_khk", "B_AssaultPack_khk_holder", "B_AssaultPack_mcamo", "B_AssaultPack_ocamo", "B_AssaultPack_rgr", "B_AssaultPack_rgr_Medic", "B_AssaultPack_rgr_Repair", "B_AssaultPack_sgg", "B_Bergen_Base", "B_Bergen_sgg", "B_Bergen_sgg_Exp", "B_Carryall_Base", "B_Carryall_ocamo", "B_Carryall_oucamo", "B_Carryall_oucamo_Exp", "B_FieldPack_Base", "B_FieldPack_blk", "B_FieldPack_blk_DiverExp", "B_FieldPack_blk_DiverTL", "B_FieldPack_cbr", "B_FieldPack_cbr_AT", "B_FieldPack_cbr_Repair", "B_FieldPack_ocamo", "B_FieldPack_ocamo_Medic", "B_FieldPack_oucamo", "B_Kitbag_Base", "B_Kitbag_cbr", "B_Kitbag_mcamo", "B_Kitbag_sgg", "Bag_Base" ]; // (B_Mk6, B_Mk6Mortar_Support, B_Mk6Mortar_Wpn, and Weapon_Bag_Base omitted due to acting funny, also note // that the *_Medic *_AT etc bags come with stuff in them, and who doesn't like free stuff. Also, *_Base just // comes up as a generic bag, but it does work) ///run while {_loop && (alive _box)} do { clearMagazineCargo _box; clearWeaponCargo _box; clearItemCargoGlobal _box; {_box addWeaponCargoGlobal [_x, _numWeapon];} forEach (_natoWeapons + _opforWeapons + _launchers + _oculars); {_box addMagazineCargoGlobal [_x, _numAmmo];} forEach (_cartAmmo + _launcherAmmo + _glAmmo + _manAmmo); {_box addItemCargoGlobal [_x, _numMod];} forEach (_attachments); {_box addItemCargoGlobal [_x, _numItem];} forEach (_items + _hats + _dress + _chest); {_box addBackpackCargoGlobal [_x, _numBag];} forEach (_backpacks); if ((count _this) > 1) then { _loop = false;} else { sleep _wait;}; }; // Also Glasses, I could not get these into a box, so you have to set them on something (or more correctly, // someone!) with a glasses/goggles slot, this also overrides any they have set in preferences, and // interestingly enough, none is implemented as an object, instead of just deleting them: //this addGoggles "G_Diving"; //this addGoggles "G_Shades_Black"; //this addGoggles "G_Shades_Blue"; //this addGoggles "G_Sport_Blackred"; //this addGoggles "G_Tatical_Clear"; //this addGoggles "None";
  4. That's nonsense; I get 6 core utilization, and most of them stay around 50% but are by no means capped at 50%. How does seeing 4 cores in use imply only 2 cores being used properly? It implies 4 cores are being used, no more and no less. As I said, mine uses six with no issues. The OS also reports additional CPU's to represent the hyperthreading - essentially, an extra set of registers for the cores - being used to a limited extent. Also, the game does not operate well when it is using a CPU to 100%. Your goal should never be to use 100% of a CPU if you're simulating a system as dynamic as this one. There is ALWAYS more calculating that the engine could be doing. But here's a fun example. Load up an Arma game on a pc with an insufficient CPU. Get a machine gun. Try to scientifically determine the rate-of-fire for your weapon. If your cpu is being stressed, it's going to be highly variable because the engine has to make so many compromises in what it decides to compute when that it can't keep up.
  5. Assuming you've got a legitimate version of the game, I'd say it may just be that you're overtorquing the engines. This would especially be the case if you notice it most prominently on the Medium, and least on the Light. Keep an eye on the Torque indicator if you have instruments enabled, and/or try to keep the torque needles from getting too high if you are using the virtual cockpit. That's my only suggestion really, since you said maneuvering works fine.
  6. Happens to everyone afaik. BIS will also not provide support, afaik, except perhaps to disprove this line of my post. You should, however, be able to search the forums for this issue for several fixes that have worked for people. I think it basically comes down to opening your [c:\program files (x86)?]\steam\steamapps\common\take on helicopters\ folder, and looking around for the Take on Hinds installer (I think it's an .exe file in there or a well-labeled subdirectory). Run that installer "As Administrator" by right clicking on it and, if given the option, selecting it, or if not, clicking properties, going to the compatibility tab, and then selecting "Run as Administrator". Also, I don't mean to come off as too negative toward BIS lately, even though that's what happened in my last couple of posts. I just think this product is sorely undersupported. Unfortunately their entire company is probably going through some tough times right now with the [REDACTED].
  7. dwringer

    Patch V1.06

    Well no, I understand the complexities involved and I dont expect it to be always simple. There are so many different distributions of each product involved, I would never expect them to even be as compatible as they are, really. The issue to me seems that if somebody buys all the products together on Steam, for example, they don't seem to work together out-of-the-box. This may seem like a minor point, but to me it is the biggest issue because Steam is probably the biggest single content-delivery platform. Whether the products being on Steam at all is just a 'courtesy' is debatable. I know a lot of people don't like the system. I actually bought Arma twice just to have a copy on Steam, though, and have done so with a couple of other titles too. My own opinions are not necessarily shared by many, but I just wanted to be clear. I don't want to come across as too critical, I know how complicated it is just by how many different situations pop up here on the forums and how little idea I have as to how they could be resolved. PS Frankly the only issues I had were in getting the TOH DLC's to work, my Rearmed experience was as smooth as it gets, and that's with Steam versions of everything. However, I had some directory junctions in place already so I recognize that everyone who plays anything but vanilla has a very unique installation of the system.
  8. dwringer

    Patch V1.06

    Despite the impression you may get, nobody that I'm aware of got everything working as such "out of the box". kju has been giving people assistance in this kind of thread ever since the last patch. Some of us got things working, most probably gave up and stopped coming back to the forum. I hate to sound cynical but as far as I see it, that's how it is. The core fan base for this game seems to consist of about 10 people. EDIT: also, I've noticed no comment on my last post... afaik the game itself supports setting the order from within the Expansions menu.
  9. dwringer

    Patch V1.06

    Not sure if this is a solution as I havent COMPLETELY tested it but, the ingame Expansions menu actually allows you to select each (not the core game files, though) and click Up or Down to reorder them. I for one hate using third party apps except when it's prohibitive not to (ie when joining multiplayer games to sync mods, etc), and this should be a fix that doesn't require any, that also doesn't require .cfg editing. Of course editing the .cfg is probably not such a bad idea either.
  10. If you have any complaints about the flight model (or any physics in ANY sim, tbh), I highly suggest leaving the difficulty on Veteran or Expert. If your joystick truly is well-calibrated, check the rudder. If you have a twist-rudder stick like I do, there's a very good chance the potentiometer (the piece that detects left/right twisting) inside is full of metal shavings, dirt, ash, congealed pieces of substandard lubricants, who knows what. I don't know what the factory conditions must be like where they make these things but afaik every single one in the world has this problem. No exaggeration ;) This will internally cause impedance problems or something (I know nothing about electrical engineering) and lead to a rudder that is jerky. A way to get an idea of whether this is happening is by getting in a light chopper, looking at your feet, and twisting back and forth. Your feet should not be moving on the pedals except during the twist-phase of what you're doing, and it should be a slow, deliberate measured move. If you see the guy's feet jerking left and right, acting 'touchy', or in any way not matching EXACTLY the motion of your hand, you are suffering from this problem. The only real solution of which I am aware- and the one which has worked flawlessly for me - is to open up your joystick to gain access to the potentiometer and spray some TV Tuner/Electrical Contact Cleaner/Lubricant into it. You can get it at radio shack, make SURE you get the kind designed for TV tuners that cleans AND lubricates. Just stick the nozzle into a gap on the side of the potentiometer and give it a single spray. Let the propellants evaporate from the area, work the joystick back and forth a few times, and then plug her in. If you were successful, the joystick should operate better than when it was brand new. If this isn't your issue, then I'm at a loss. The problems you're describing are not inherent to the sim but indicative of some other error.
  11. Thanks for the support, hopefully you aren't expecting a very finished product ;) I have done some more updates, removing the copy/pasted houses and adding more 'essential' landmarks, as well as interstate highway bridges. Also I made a rudimentary improvement to the layer mask so there are some paved areas, although it's pretty shoddy atm. Download is available as soon as the link becomes active again, which should be just a few minutes after this post appears. EDIT: Sorry, I think I actually broke the map with that revision by linking to textures in a path to a different map on my tools drive... fixed in the latest, and should be working now.
  12. Hello everyone, I have been working on a terrain for the last couple of weeks, and initially was using nothing but Arma2 assets and a buldozer.exe copied from my A2OA executable (and \bin folder supplemented with extracted bin.pbo from my a2oa directory). Everything worked exactly like I would expected it to, and the terrain rendered just fine in Arma 2. When I loaded the map in Take On Helicopters: Rearmed, however, I noticed that the satellite texture had some segments overlapping around the edges of the terrain (only the last one or two segments per side on a 31x31 segment (12288km)^2 map). I can set up buldozer.exe from my TakeOn-H.exe and the bin.pbo -> \bin files from TOH in Visitor and edit using TOH assets, but when I do that buldozer shows me the same texture issues around the terrain borders. Is there a config setting I need to be adjusting where the default has changed from Arma2 that controls this type of behavior? Or is there something about the mask import process that needs to be modified to alleviate this? I have also encountered a secondary issue. Granted, I'm not sure if I'm going about this the right way at all. I have extracted a couple of TOH pbo's onto my tools drive. While the Arma 2 pbo's are extracted into my P:\ca\ directory structure, the TOH pbo's have been placed in P:\hsim\* . I did this after reading the pbo_prefix.txt files and trying to match the directory structure to what I saw there. Unfortunately, when I export this, I get a map that plays just fine but doesn't show any icons in the map for any TOH assets. All the Arma 2 buildings are represented by dark rectangles/squares as usual, but the map is simply blank where any TOH structures should appear. In the 3d world, the structures are in fact present, and they have working collision detection. I found some silent errors from the export process in a log file that indicated error code 52 (or 53?) from the various TOH p3d's. I'm not sure if that's related. I have copied all the *.cpp files from all the hsim pbo's I have extracted into my own namespace [i understand some people discourage using one's own namespace, but without a technical reason why this should be forbidden I choose to use one]. PBO's extracted thus far are: structures_us_h plants_us_h hsim_rearmed_core_h One possible issue I am confused about: There was a ca.pbo to be extracted directly to my P:\Ca\ directory, that had its own config.cpp I have found no corresponding hsim.pbo. Does anyone have any advice or info about this, and might that be related to these issues? Sorry, I know this is a lot to ask of a community that appears to be entirely dead. I dunno where else to look, though ;) Thanks!
  13. I haven't created any classes other than the map itself. I put my map in a P:\[namespace]\Mapname\ directory, rather than putting the map directory in the root of the P:\ drive. Basically, I followed SgtAce's Arma2 map tutorial to the letter and started expanding from there. Thus the config.cpp I'm using for my map is derived from the one he used, which in turn appears to be modified from the Utes island config. The .cpp files that I copied, I did so because it is specified to be a requirement in order to use ladders/doors/etc on buildings in the map. There is a p:\namespace\ca\ and a p:\namespace\hsim\ holding all the copied *.cpp's. The p3d's themselves (and rvmats, etc, everything from the pbo's) are held in p:\ca\* and p:\hsim\* (with their pbo prefixes appended to the directory as appropriate). This seems unusual to me, but this is from following the Simple Terrain Tutorial from the BIS Community wiki. EDIT/PS: Everything works fine when I make it only with A2 assets and load the map in A2. It's when opening the A2 map in TOH, or making the map TOH-specific, that the other problems become evident. Neither actually impacts the way the simulation works, just a texture issue and a map UI issue really. EDIT 2: Here's a shot of what I'm talking about regarding the terrain. This doesn't happen using Arma 2/OA's executable or loading the map in A2[OA]: Aand one more follow up . . . I can confirm that this occurs only on the North and East edges of the terrain. The infinite-texture-tiling algorithm seems to be a little overzealous in where it starts drawing I guess?
  14. Hah, sorry I let the links die on these. I'm afraid there are a couple of issues left in the scripts that I haven't fixed yet, or at least archived the fixed versions. It works fine enough though so it's gonna have to stay as is for now. I appreciate the offer Sven, but I couldn't very well ask you for that when I had my own hosting I was too lazy to FTP into. Now I did so the files should stay put :)
  15. Hey everybody, This is my second release of a mission (the first one being pretty experimental and uneventful); no big storyline or complexity here but I tried to make it interesting and replayable; and, above all, challenging. Here's a link: http://dwringer.net/a2m/dwr_wajnam_0_2a.rar Just extract this PBO to your Take On Helicopters/missions/ directory and it should show up in your Single Player Challenges list. (You will need two addons in addition to Take On Rearmed w/A2:Combined Operations. These are: Fayshkhabur v1.1, and AH6 HUD for TOH - links and more information are provided below and in the readme.) Wajnam Style Version 0.2a by dwringer Mission Outline: ---------------- You are placed in a Helicopter (Light) [Military], re- presenting an AH-6J, about 4km from Abu Wajnam Airstrip. Follow the mission plan, survive, and you should be suc- cessful. Changelog: ---------- 0.2a -Reworked DAC OPFOR patrol zones -Slight chance of seeing some armor just outside the AO -Further adjustment to AT targeting behavior -Razor team insertion trigger adjustment -End condition adjustment, should happen sooner now 0.12b -Made C130 insertion speed more realistic (although extreme) 0.11b -Fixed issue with date/time script selecting 0th day of month -Improved Anti-Tank team targeting behavior 0.1b -Added more invisible helipads for Razor team insertion -Size increased and enemy count made more restrictive on Razor team insertion trigger -A10 now only has about a 60% chance to appear -Tweaked AT team position/composition for reliability -Halved Razor team insertion helicopter health regen rate (until damaged 58% or more, regenerates 5% life every 2 seconds - was 10%) Features: --------- -Random date and time Anywhere from January 1, 1985 to December 31, 2020. * Most missions take place during the day; about 80% of the time when night would have been randomly selected, the time will instead be set to either sunrise or sunset. There is still, consequently, about a 10% chance of getting a mission in extreme darkness. -Random weather pattern (sans extremes) -Randomly selected weapon loadout * See the "Spoiler:" tag at the end of this post for the readme, which details all the loadouts available Requirements: ------------- AH-6 Heads-Up Display by AnimalMother92 TOH port by Rahonavis from http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?139600-Littlebird-HUD Fayshkhabur by =KCT=BlackMamba from http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?134624-Fayshkhabur-V1-0-Released Arma 2: Combined Operations Take on Helicopters: Rearmed Includes Additional scripts by: ----------------------------- Silola (DAC used for patrols in/around the town) rübe (script to calculate sunrise/sunset for a given date) EDIT: Title says OA but it should really be CO, sorry about that.
  16. dwringer

    Really disheartened.

    I'm not sure if it's just not obvious or what, but MSFS WAS actually marketed as a flight simulator; it's just that they didn't really bother marketing it at all as MS canned the entire team before they even finished implementing the expansion pack. But if you look at what MSFS stands for ... uh, well I'm not gonna spoon feed that part ;p The problem we have here is that everyone expects every product to include every innovation from every preceding product in a lineage arbitrarily decided by the customer's fickle desires at that given time. I still think TKOH is a good simulator. Is it a technical helicopter operation simulator? Hell no.
  17. Sorry, after a somewhat more advanced search I found the answer to my problem. Downloaded Wilbur, opened heightmap and resaved it, works perfectly now. This post can be deleted.
  18. Hello everyone, I decided to release this follow up to my last mission, which finds the player in a slightly different role. It is still short, with no dialog, and there are a lot of glitches that will show up from time to time (for instance, after insertion, if your sniper team members decide to try and use the ladder they will glitch for a few moments until they or the engine figure out their attempts at leaving the rooftop are futile). I have cleaned up the mission.sqf, however, and this one no longer requires the HUD addon. (The next time I do a release of the last one, I will have cleaned up the mission.sqm there as well, but I don't plan on removing the HUD dependency from it. :P) It should be completely playable, however, and it provides several opportunities for sharpening skills used all over the place elsewhere in the game, starting from the instant the mission begins. Abu Wajnam: One Minute After Version 0.1a by dwringer http://dwringer.net/a2m/dwr_oneminuteafter_0_1a.rar Includes Additional scripts by: ----------------------------- Silola (DAC used for patrols) rübe (script to calculate sunrise/sunset for a given date) Mission Outline: ---------------- Abu Wajnam airfield has just been siezed by American forces; you, the pilot of Razor team's insertion helicopter, have just finished the task of commandeering a refueling truck and readying your helicopter for the next assignment. Con- sidering you and your men have been under fire the entire time, this assignment is not altogether unwelcome. Features: --------- -Random date and time Anywhere from January 1, 1985 to December 31, 2020. * Most missions take place during the day; about 80% of the time when night would have been randomly selected, the time will instead be set to either sunrise or sunset. There is still, consequently, about a 10% chance of getting a mission in extreme darkness. -Random weather pattern (sans extremes) Requirements: ------------- Fayshkhabur by =KCT=BlackMamba from http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?134624-Fayshkhabur-V1-0-Released Arma 2: Combined Operations Take on Helicopters: Rearmed w/ Take on Hinds
  19. TOH will use all the video cards you can throw at it, so go ahead and drop a grand or so on a couple more of those ;) EDIT: actually I don't know how true that is having never used more than 1. But save up for the 790 when they get invented and you might get to where TOH wants you to be:)
  20. You may want to brush up on your knowledge. Arma 2 can use more than 4 cores/threads, as can TOH. I have personally seen threads running on at least 6 logical cores, and since this is a 6-core processor that is fine with me. It's actually the OS's responsibility to spread the threading across the cores. It is Arma's responsibility to spread the processing into multiple threads. If you want to complain about something, neither of these areas has seen much progress relative to the capability advancements in processors. You and I are as much to blame as anyone else, unless you have personally invested a lot of time in progressing the field of software engineering? Anyway, I will agree that it'd be nice to see MORE parallelization in the engine. I'm pretty sure BIS agrees, which is why it's something they've continually worked on over the years.
  21. Lol, I guess that guy made it and set a bunch of records. And good idea on the steam sale, I too have bought two copies of Arma 2 in order to have one through steam (while other people refuse to use the service, haha) Anyway, I found some serious issues with my time/date randomization script which I have fixed, and I also improved the targeting behavior of the anti-tank teams in destroying the Shilka. The link is above in the original post.
  22. Hrm, sorry about that... perhaps you can use A2Free combined with the full version of Operation Arrowhead together integrated with TOH. It might also be possible to remove the standard A2 assets, provided you still have Operation Arrowhead, but honestly I'm not sure which ones are which. If anybody wants an un-pbo'd copy of the mission to mess with, I'd be glad to give one to you provided you don't make further releases without my personal authorization. I can confirm that the end condition at least appears to be reachable, but I've never succeeded the mission well enough to know if it actually fires. Basically, once Razor team lands and gets out of their insertion helicopter, they are supposed to go into the control tower and begin a Seek and Destroy waypoint for at least 45 seconds. Whether or not this will trigger victory is still unknown to me, and there's no debriefing anyway. Thanks everyone for the support, I hope you are all able to get things working. That said, I have made an update- (linked above) Changelog: ---------- 0.1b -Added more invisible helipads for Razor team insertion -Size increased and enemy count made more restrictive on Razor team insertion trigger -A10 now only has about a 60% chance to appear -Tweaked AT team position/composition for reliability -Halved Razor team insertion helicopter health regen rate (until damaged 58% or more, regenerates 5% life every 2 seconds - was 10%)
  23. dwringer

    Flight dynamics (important issues)

    Well no insult was taken. I just think people tend to get into camps around certain sims and become very hostile toward any alternatives. I will certainly concede to your experience with other products. However, you will find that solving an equation on any computer and simulating the real-time applications of the equations in a system controlled by a player - a chaotic force - are two very different things, and it becomes a whole lot more complicated than finding the instantaneous forces with a standard equation. The processing needs can differ wildly based on what the helicopter is doing, and in some situations compromises must be made. Imagine if you put down 100 helicopters, each in their own groups, and scripted them all with some control inputs you recorded from doing aerobatics. The game has to be able to handle that by design. EDIT: And sure, they all do, and many will agree that others do it better than TOH. I will argue, however, that the simulation capabilities outside of specific parts of the flight model are second to none. You can certainly recreate scenarios that are impossible with any one other product.
  24. dwringer

    Flight dynamics (important issues)

    Instead of basing one's opinion of the flight model's authenticity on the opinions of others, something I try not to do, I am forced to compare this game to other things I've tried such as FSX. No, the flight model in FSX doesn't accurately represent a real helicopter. That said, one can still learn to fly with it, and a lot of people - pros included - do. X-Plane from my understanding is more of a modeling simulator. Thus it will make the mathematicians happy, but it is in no way guaranteed to be more accurate than FSX, or TOH, or anything else when it comes to representing actual characteristics of flying. Keep in mind that a flight model can be perfect for 95% of the things you do; it's the 5% of crazy maneuvers that will put it to the test and yield strange results. TOH gives me strange results sometimes when I come in to a hover from a strange angle low to the ground. AFAIK every simulator does, and real helicopters do as well. Modeling a chaotic system is not exactly simple computationally, so the best solution short of investing in a server cluster to run your enhanced flight models is to fit simplified curves to available data. Any sim worth its salt does this, TOH included. That said, I have no issues with the TOH flight model now that I've been playing for a couple or three weeks. Of course not being a real helicopter pilot I can't tell you how it compares. Not being a real helicopter pilot who happens to be a fanboy of a specific sim, I can't give you that kind of biased opinion either. Nevertheless, the game matches the vast majority of my expectations from the way I understand physics and helicopter flight dynamics. Maybe not all, especially regarding the deflection of air currents and stuff like that. But if I wanted that, I'd fly a real helicopter. And to the guy who insulted the flight model comparing it to RC helicopters... :confused:
×