Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

grey

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    85

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by grey

  1. Posted

    oh and one more thing... give us devastating mini-guns on our blackhawks please !! the rate of fire on machineguns in the game isnt impressive enough smile.gif in fact the machine gun blackhawk is pretty useless at the moment, the AI barely has a chance to target anything and the pilot doesnt make an effort to help his gunner get a shot on target either.. need a new AI model for craft with sidegunners perhaps? Eg a "circle targetted unit" ai attack pattern for proper fire support, and then we could have the ac-130 too smile.gif

  2. Posted

    since when does any helicopter in this game survive a direct hit with a 120mm cannon ? what have u been smoking smile.gif

    as for ai using heat... i think they might have done that on purpose smile.gif can u imagine how frustrating it would be to have your entire squad wiped out by a single shell landing 15 metres away from you? heat is VERY powerful at the moment, it would be just unfair for the ai to use it smile.gif they are good enough with the machine gun anyway

    if opflashpoint was done again, or perhaps as a note for independence lost, i agree with those who suggest that fixed wing aircraft should not be made player flyable. They should be AI only, we should observe them taking off and operating from airstrips, and flying overhead giving fire support, but the engine simply cant provide a large enough view distance for aircraft combat to be feasible. For helicopters however, i think flashpoint is fine as it is. Of course minor things like bouncing off trees and fast roping could be addressed, but helicopter combat in general is quite good, and the realism isnt _that_ bad. Same with tanks, i wouldnt change them much either, besides maybe adding the commander 50. cal machine gun etc, and fixing the commanding-when-ai-is-spotting targets problems.

  3. Posted

    i finally remembered about the idea in this thread and finally tried it today and it works!

    also, it seems that a unit can either be "non playable", "player" or "playable" ... but every mission regardless of mplayer or singleplayer status must have an entity called "player" anyway... and all the scripts would point to that unit, so the mission scripts shouldnt break in any way correct?

    finally i can play some of the classic battles of all 3 campaigns on lan with my mates

  6. Posted

    how do u know your arm or something isnt sticking out and thats where the ai shoots you?

    in my experience AI love shooting thru bushes and those damn picket fences (god i hate those) but trees are proper cover and do protect you.

  9. Posted

    The dedicated server that we use when we lan is at a friends house so i dont have the exact config file from it at the moment (ill get it next time i go).

    However the command suma was talking about is the MaxSizeNonguaranteed setting. If you look in the "server" subdirectory on your resistance CD, you will see a file called "Ds-admin.rtf". This is a text file documenting all the commands you can use with the dedicated server. It explains what each command is, the defaults values, and how it affects bandwidth usage vs lag. Grab those settings and put them into your .cfg file for the server, then start playing with them. However i must admit that we tweaked them for hours and got basically no change in that annoying long range jerking of enemy troops. Sadly this is built into the netcode it seems- suma did say that he was thinking about putting in a setting to allow additional updates for lan play in a future patch, so lets hope that goes ok.

    Edit: i just remembered that you dont have resistance (oops). The same admin text file is posted in a number of places though. Im pretty sure avon lady's FAQ has a link to it somewhere- do a search for dedicated server. It was posted on one of the major opf news sites from memory.

  11. Posted

    yeah i was complaining about the exact same problem in the following thread (towards the end suma answers our questions)

    http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=15958

    unfortunately there seems to be deeper issues are play here- eg at longer ranges enemies are updated less often and their animation is interpolated, but sometimes there are errors which makes that nasty jerking effect when they are running.

    annoying huh?

    your sstory sounds just like mine smile.gif

    i had to talk the others into giving flashpoint a go, and now its heaps of fun and lans are a regular occurance smile.gif

  12. Posted

    hey all

    has anyone successfully completed the Nogova version of the tank mission conquerers?

    we've tried a few times and we always seemingly wipe everything off the face of the earth and yet we cant even get it to acknowledge that the first objective has been met :/

    Also the briefing (which seems to have been simply copied from the old version of conquerers) mentions calling in a support team which doesnt exist, and the enemy reinforcement tank group never seems to leave its hideout in the valley (we go over there and kill them anyway).

    Are we missing some soldier hiding in a building somewhere or something? Because our objective just gets stuck on "wait for others" at the first base.

  14. Posted

    these are co-op missions right?

    our server, too, gets fairly low fps in co-op multi

    we never get higher than 32 and it drops just like you describe

    we have a 1.2 duron 512 w2k server as well

    id like to know what XP users get for server fps values on busy cooperative missions, maybe its better than win2k?

  17. Posted

    thanks for the replies- so i gather you would recommend larger frames for LAN games ? (and can a setting be "too big" and start causing some kind of side effect? thats what i was really getting at- is there no side effect from large values besides more bandwidth used which doesnt really matter on lan)

    And also, as you have said that there is less updates the further away a soldier is, would that not be a good function to implement so that those on good connections/LANs can benefit from their connection? Or would it require massive surgery to the code? smile.gif

    cheers suma

  18. Posted

    hi

    im not sure if its our imagination, but do AI tanks engage at greater ranges in multiplayer now than before?

    As we know multiplayer view distance is capped at 900, but could it be possible that AI doesnt suffer from the same cap?

    The reason i ask this is after playing the main co-op mission included with resistance (the attack on the city) it seems that the bradleys get cracked open by the t80s sitting pretty in the city mere moments after leaving their spawn- far beyond what a human can see even with full scope on. Also two t72s come in patrol from the far right (perspective: looking from spawn to the city) and they pop u from incredible ranges if u dare use a vehicle as well.

    Anybody else notice this? or are we just paranoid smile.gif

    Still its quite a fun mission that one, even without hte vehicles smile.gif

  19. Posted

    i have some questions suma please answer me!

    a) is the FPS value given in the monitor thingo capped in any way on dedicated servers in sockets mode, or will it always go as high as it can?

    b) when viewing enemy AI soldiers from a long distance away through a scope, their movement seems to "warp" every few metres as they run along in formation. Is this a feature built into the netcode? Eg for objects a certain distance away, they shall be updated less often? Or can certain netcode settings be tweaked to force the server to update the positions of these soldiers more often? We are running on lan and still at long ranges AI soldiers "warp" sometimes entire metres at a time which makes sniping annoying. Can any settings fix/help this?

    c) In the admin notes for dedicated server, the setting MaxSizeNonguaranteed is described "Maximum size of non-guaranteed packet in bytes (without headers). Non-guaranteed messages are used for repetitive updates like soldier or vehicle position. Increasing this value may improve bandwidth requirement, but it may increase lag. Default: 256". By improve bandwidth requirement i suppose one means it doesnt require as much. However for a LAN game is it neccessarily good to increase this value? Because if you make this value too big, could the server be "waiting" to get more data to pack into a larger frame, and therefore send less updates of enemy soldier positions? Therefore by this reasoning would it be better to set this to a very small value so the server is forced to send lots of small packets thereby updating soldier position more frequently and eliminating the "warping" effect? Sorry if this last question is a bit newbie/obvious.

    Thanks suma

  23. Posted

    oops servers fps seems to be constant at 32 not 35 in sockets

    in dplay it varies it seems

    what are other people's ded servers running at in FPS when using the #monitor command?

    also weve spent the last hour trying various settings in sockets with no visible change in the amount of updates for enemy soldiers- do these settings even do anything anymore :/

    wish there was some more info about this out there

  25. Posted

    yes its really annoying

    stupid nvidia what were they thinking, honestly the whole pre-rendering frames thing is just a dirty hack to get them better scores in benchmarks

    very low cos its totally useless for games

    u may need a program like nvmax to set the pre-rendered frames setting to 1. that should fix the problem

×