gossamersolid
-
Content Count
4642 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
-
Medals
-
Posts posted by gossamersolid
-
-
You're fighting a losing battle, much like prohibition of alcohol in North America in the last century.
-
3
-
-
I was going crazy trying to find if there was a new command to change the vertical alignment of text against a marker...
-
2
-
-
Just a small tip in the future, when you look up a command on the BIKI:
https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/hideObjectGlobal
Look at the top where it marks what the locality of arguments and effects are. hideObjectGlobal needs to be run on the server, but its arguments and effects are global. This means you run the command once on the server and it'll be handled for all clients at the engine level.
-
6 hours ago, commy2 said:Why would you fill the map with millions of markers? That will kill performance when looking at the map ingame.
Look above at the video I posted. It was a discussion on finding the balance between looks and performance.
My current implementation does not appear to cause performance issues from what I can see.As mentioned much earlier, if drawPolygon had the ability to render fills and not just a "border" style, I wouldn't have to resort to markers.
-
5 hours ago, h - said:That's pretty impressive considering that the array size limit is like 10 million elements or something
See I read the element count was very high and you should basically never hit it, but after outputting 25mx25m markers all over Malden and putting them into arrays (so I can reference them later), the variable was always appearing to have a value of nil - no errors in the RPT. So I started deleting elements and all of the sudden it got the value assigned as expected.
You could most likely replicate it if you use my code posted earlier on a larger map like Altis and make 5mx5m squares. Keep in mind you'll probably be waiting a long time for it to finish processing.
-
2 hours ago, Tankbuster said:That's really cool @gossamersolid. 'Zones' and real military style front lines was something I always wanted for my pet mission, but there was never anything that looked just right, until now. :) It might be too late to integrate it into the mission as I eventually went with a town-target type thing rather than zones. But that does look SO nice!
Thanks. I've been wanting to do something like this for a while (hence the reason I think being able to draw a fill on those polygons I mentioned earlier would make this more possible - cleaner).
I tried doing smaller squares at first so that it looked nicer, but I seemingly hit the max size of an array when trying to store the marker information for later (so I can manipulate the colours and such).
-
2
-
-
On 7/17/2017 at 3:01 PM, Tankbuster said:Yes please!
As promised, here's the video:
If you want to run the script or take a look at it, here that is: https://pastebin.com/Rjugu1nC
It builds "zones" based around flag objects (classname: Flag_Green_F - so you'll need at least one of those, bare minimum).
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, da12thMonkey said:Mentioned in the USAF changelog: RHS_ENGINE_STARTUP_OFF = true;
So it's just a global var, not per vehicle?
-
Quick question, is there any way to disable the scripted engine warmup process found in some RHS vehicles?
I've noticed that the AI sometimes derps while it's waiting for the engine to startup (as in they'll spam issue orders). If it's not possible, that's fine, just wondering. -
8 hours ago, Tankbuster said:Do the markers behave when the player zooms the map in and out?
Yes. They're 100x100 rectangles touching each other. Appears to be completely seamless at any zoom level (as far as I can see).
I'll get a picture (or even a video) when I can. -
7 hours ago, killzone_kid said:This is definitely a step in the right direction, but I would prefer if drawPolygon had the ability to set a fill texture much like drawTriangle does. I'm basically splitting the map up into zones that are polygons (some are simple, some are more complex in shape).
To workaround, I've currently filled the map using little 100x100m square markers to have the illusion that it's a more complex shape.
-
2
-
-
On 6/30/2017 at 9:11 PM, fn_Quiksilver said:the createGroup alternative syntax is great too.
Hmmm, just read it could take up to a minute to delete the empty group. While it's certainly more easy/elegant, if you already have a small snippet written in your unit killed EH function to handle it, then there's pretty much no point. I'm unsure why it cannot be instant. They could easily do the same thing we've had to do, but rather than using SQF, it could be at engine level.
Whatever, guess it's an easy alternative if you don't care about empty groups sitting around for up to a minute.
-
On 6/23/2017 at 10:46 AM, killzone_kid said:
Why not set autodelete on the group and let the engine to take care of clean up?
https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/deleteGroupWhenEmpty
Oh this is a thing now?
I forgot to delete groups at one point in time in my mission and around an hour in, nobody's AI would spawn anymore and I couldn't figure it out at the time. Eventually I had figured out that there were a huge amount of groups with 0 units in them, at which point time I realized I need to manually clean them if everybody in the group dies. Guess this command would help with that.
-
Why are you still playing on 1.64? The current version is 1.70.
EDIT: Oh, you're on the mac port? I don't know if those are officially supported as being stable. You might have to dual boot into windows if you want to play.
-
Ah this thread seems to have got some nice varied responses now. Thanks for everybody who provided their opinions/suggestions.
It seems like most people agree that the thing that makes warfare great is the scale and freedom you get within ArmA, put into 1 gamemode.
The negatives seem to rely around the quality of the players (not doing what's best for the team, sitting there with sniper + rocket combo, etc) and that matches go for far too long.
I know I tried to address the match length issue in my CTI implementation for ArmA 3 with a ticket system. Each team had x amount of tickets (I think 1000), each time a player died the team had 1 ticket subtracted. If your team owned more territories over the enemy team, the enemy team had a ticket "bleed", meaning they lose x amount of tickets (that increases as the other team has more and more territory over your team) every minute. I thought it was a great way to make the fighting more focused and stop the whole 24 hour match length issue, but it just caused people to rage quit when their team had less than 100 tickets (even though the bleed stopped at either 25 or 50 tickets, meaning they could still make a come back).
There's a very fine line to walk between restricting the player's choices (having capturable zones connected so the fighting is contained) versus the freedom that people expect from the gamemode. -
I know CTI isn't as popular of a gamemode that it used to be, back in the ArmA 2 and prior days, but for nostalgia's sakes - let's discuss it a bit.
What is everybody's favourite and least favourite aspects of the gamemode as a whole.
Favourite
-
Making use of most/all of the game's assets in one mission
-
The amazing feeling of playing over the entire giant map
-
Those rare moments where you see the enemy MHQ driving around and you blow it up
-
Mixing and matching gear to make the loadout I want
Least Favourite
-
Length of matches. This has always been an issue, but it's gotten worse as ArmA's maps have gotten bigger. Also I don't have as much time to dedicate to playing games as I used to
-
Commander role. Nobody ever wants to play it, which ended up with me and one other person in my community always having to do it. I've yet to see an actual good AI commander either (base placement is something only humans are capable of, in my opinion).
-
Driving 10 minutes, dying, walking 15 minutes, dying, etc
-
2
-
-
Are we ever going to see the drawPolygon command expanded? We really need the ability to set a brush/fill mode. Also it'd be great to have command(s) to get entities/objects within a polygon (array coordinates provided) rather than having to rely on radii from a center location like we currently do.
-
1
-
-
On 4/2/2017 at 7:36 AM, lexx said:Sure, I am also missing out on the work required to keep them updated. Especially if I haven't played A3 in a while and basically have to check out every single mod for changes.
Yeah I agree with you here.
It's unfortunate to miss out on some good mods out there, but the process of keeping them all manually up-to-date just isn't worth the effort anymore. Either it's because my attitude towards it has changed as the years have went on and/or workshop has made me lazy.Also as I've pointed out before, if you ever want to play with other people, workshop is simply the easiest route. I had way too many headaches getting people to unzip a folder the arma root and add a parameter to the shortcut or use a launcher. It's amazing how difficult this process was for people (because, it really isn't difficult).
-
31 minutes ago, darksidesixofficial said:Steam is the biggest downfall to the Arma series. Steam actually creates problems that literally no other game in the world has (steam ticket check kicks from servers), and it's actually cancer.
No it's not.
It's probably the best thing to happen to the series. More exposure and easier mod installation/updates for a vast majority of the playerbase.
It's actually viable to run a public server with required mods now because the launcher + workshop allow people to easily join. Before it was a complete headache.
-
8
-
-
Speaking of ArmA extensions, whatever happened to a non blocking version of callExtension (spawnExtension?). Also why is the 10KB return limit there in the first place? If there's a reason for a hard limit, why can't it be something much larger?
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, esfumato said:some missions don't use the scroll mouse menu. Just assign a key to open the menus. For example, Sa-Matra King of the Hill or Sa-Matras wasteland. So as long as you can assing a key to your option is fine.
and these are two examples are extremely un-intuitive ways to implement menus because unless somebody tells you about the key to press, you have no clue there is a menu. At least the action menu is something that's just so built into ArmA that people will see an entry there.
-
11 hours ago, esfumato said:The word should not be "Improve the action menu system" should be "complete remove and destroy forever that ..." And adapt to the systems that all the games use right now.
I wouldn't say get rid of it.
It's still very useful for scripted content to put an easily visible option. -
This is amazing. Further down the line, we'll have a very complete WW2 asset pack available in ArmA 3.
-
3 hours ago, Lagussi said:Any chance to get you back, Gossamer? I really like your missions!
It's flattering that you enjoy my work, but I don't currently have plans to work on GWAR3.
I am in the process of possibly joining the development team of a fairly popular gamemode though. We'll see how things go.-
3
-
RH Pistol pack
in ARMA 3 - ADDONS & MODS: COMPLETE
Posted
I don't think it's necessarily something BI can fix.
If you think about it, this has always been something that can be done. Before steam workshop, what stopped somebody from downloading your mod and uploading it to one of many websites out there that allow you to easily upload files?
Pretty much the only workaround is that you post your mod to steam workshop so at least you're getting the recognition.
Honestly, I know some people (including yourself) don't like what the steam workshop is, but it's not going anywhere - it's here to stay.