shinRaiden

1) DM, your numbers indicative of the range, but probably rather on the low end of the scale. Exponentially. Given a 342kb file size for a 512x512 px texture (gives you slightly better than 1m resolution for a 50m2 OFP map cell, I'm rounding to 50 for simplicity), just to cover the 29.2% of the Earth comprising land surface, you're looking at over 18 petabytes of data. (1024x 1 TB). 2) Elevation points would be approximately 150tb. 3) Objects would be an indeterminate amount of more data. 4) Do you want those buildings destructible or enterable?

1) DM, your numbers indicative of the range, but probably rather on the low end of the scale. Exponentially. Given a 342kb file size for a 512x512 px texture (gives you slightly better than 1m resolution for a 50m2 OFP map cell, I'm rounding to 50 for simplicity), just to cover the 29.2% of the Earth comprising land surface, you're looking at over 18 petabytes of data. (1024x 1 TB). 2) Elevation points would be approximately 150tb. 3) Objects would be an indeterminate amount of more data. 4) Do you want those buildings destructible or enterable?

My mistake, I was under the impression that the two weren't tied together, and that a ban was actually = WL #6, not #5.

Thank you all for the clarification. As this was a cumulative action, of course it doesn't make sense to mention a PR in an arbitrary thread of the poster's. I agree that a "Gallow's row" thread would not be productive for the community either. I have not seen any other example of that anywhere, and being forced to implement that would be to admit 'defeat' to the zombie hordes. What I think might be better is what's commonly used on other boards, and that is to rewrite their custom title with "Banned". I would take it one step further and add the date in GMT as well. The community here is small enough and with the global timezones results in what should be limited to a few minute or maybe brief hours flareup instead running riot for potentially days until sun-up wherever the next moderator is. That way, if there's a particularly outrageous post that 'demands' rebuttal, we can see first if action has already been taken. Additionally, in my opinion the moderators have been fairly good about announcing direct action in threads, given the recent circumstances and tempers it's understandable why people would be upset over one or two isolated cases of locks or other actions without also explanations attached. @Wolle : Thanks for reading my posts more than once. They generally work better that way. @all : Now that that problem has been locked away, now is not the time to move on to the other items on our cranky lists. Let's stick to gaming now, and appropriate content dev'ing. @mods/all : When I referred to the widespread outrage, I did not mean in anyway that moderators should submit to mob rule. Rather, I wanted to illustrate a significant difference in opinion regarding compliance, and to illustrate the discontent increasing within the community.

WL's are meant for dealing with accidents like people posting drunk and so on, and are not intended or functional for flagrant abuses. That is what PR's or ban's are for. Here is a brief recap of privilege controls : * WL's : behavior reminders about accidental or non-malicious actions. * PR's : cooldowns for non-habitual or incidental malicious behavior * Ban's : termination of privileges for flagrant abuse * Netblock : protection against network attacks on company resources Forums Rule #2 should actually be #1 in absolute severity, as Wolle just said This is not a disagreement on his part with moderation decisions, this is flagrantly mocking them. That is subversive behavior, and the only excuse for it's presence on these forums is that Mod's were offline and not able to blackhole the thread. is saying that that his behavior is not flamebaiting nor a violation of Rule #1. That single misjudgment alone on the part of the moderators has done more to damage the community than any other. There has to my knowledge been no explanation to the community as to the justification by the moderators of why the community should be subjected to constant vitriolic abuse by this individual. The fact that you have such a large spontaneous outrage from all corners of the community over the condoning of this individual's behavior needs to weigh heavily in the moderators evaluations. We the community are not asking that he be crucified as an example to others. We're saying that I&C has demonstrated a consistent belligerent and destructive pattern of behavior on these forums, has been single-handedly responsible for widespread discord and malcontent, has been a contagious cause of widespread and flagrant mocking of forum rules 1 and 2, frequent abuse of rules 5, 7, 8, and 9, has consistently ignored or attacked moderators efforts to maintain civility on these forums, is consistently in violation of the registration acceptable use policy and should have his access privileges revoked forthright. <span style='font-size:17pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:red'>The number of community members willing to have their account privileges suspended due to deliberate violations of rule 17 in publicly complaining about the absence of action in this case clearly indicates a serious and immediate crisis in community management.</span></span>

IF it were the case that BIS got all the revenue, I suppose your $30 may have paid for annoying part of an hour of Suma's time when he could have been programming instead. Considering the mountains of vitriolic complaining you've abused these forums with, I suppose you've wasted a lot more of BIS's time than that, so if anything you OWE BIS a whole lot more cash to compensate the developers for productivity time lost.

The whole "Global Warming " farce is the biggest attempted armed robbery in the history of the world. Who was the biggest US supporter of the Kyoto Treaty? Enron, because they positioned themselves as the king of energy trading. All this BS about save the planet etc is just a cover for moving it around - and charging a fortune for the moving - not actual reductions. Cases in point : 1) Ethanol : This has nothing to do with reducing per-capita consumption, this is just about shifting markets. Corn diversion to Ethanol has already had catastropic effects on the corn markets, with the result that people in Mexico have been hit with an exponential rise in the cost of their daily bread. 2) Carbon trading : Again, nothing to do with reductions. There is an entire industry devoted to destroying profitable jobs-producing businesses for divestment and tax writeoffs, idling the factories, and selling the lack of pollution credits to those who can't be bothered to support basic public sanitation in third world countries. 3) NIMBY'ism : Congratulations Naples, Italy, your efforts in combating the 'scourge' of polluting landfills means that your city is now backfilled with an epic Vesuvius of poopy diapers, McDonalds wrappers, and Starbucks Latte cups. Start shoveling what you've been dishing out to others. 4) Commie coddlers : You want to know why people are dieing in Dafur and Iran is building nukes and oil's going through the roof? Who's paying the bills of the people doing that? It all goes back to one place, Beijing. The rest of the world, we may have our nigglies and annoy each other, but we all accept that we all need oil, as much for Cuba and Bolivia as for the US and France. Beijing doesn't think that way, the world beyond the wall doesn't exist, and if it did there's only barbarians anyways. When you put yourself in a sandbox like that, it's going to make for a big mess for a long time to come. 5) Nuke n00bers : Name one messup that wasn't operator error or stupid engineering. There's nothing wrong with nuke tech, it's the n00bers at Chernobyl who didn't read the manual for a system that would never have been authorized outside the Dear Leader's gulag. Instead the luddites hopped up on shrooms want us all back at a hunter-gather state, and blame humans as being a cancer on the world. Last I recall, Osama bin Laden has similar opinions about infidels like them.

Ah then the community might find this very useful especially in terms of poly count references, scale etc. I use a program called 3D Ripper DX which rips models out of games directly. Very good for 3ds Max users as they can view the game textures as well but I use Maya and all I get are the models. Great still That'll be a handy tool for the re-skinners Officer uniform UV Officer uniform texture Oh I have Lightwave 7.0 as well for modeling and did you get the texture networks working in that or was that a manual job? They say that they will be releasing a Maya plugin which would hopefully allow for 1 click texture integration for the models. Ah, so you're modifying and distributing BIS's copyrighted content without their knowledge or permission then, and making it available to users who have not purchased a license to use that content. Thanks for the clarification.

We'all be spek'n English here, un iffer you don't speak English whatch'er going an buy'in a Yankee game fer anyways? If you're be looking for canned DODS-sprechen, then it's the euro-commie edition of the game you be after. Ya'll do take care now, m'kay?

We'all be spek'n English here, un iffer you don't speak English whatch'er going an buy'in a Yankee game fer anyways? If you're be looking for canned DODS-sprechen, then it's the euro-commie edition of the game you be after. Ya'll do take care now, m'kay?

This doesn't have anything to do with separation of powers. This directive only applies to administrative functions and agencies already under the executive branch. That says that the Executive Branch's chief coordinator shall coordinate with the other branches' coordinators. If you want to explore possible changes in government, it's this section that you should be looking at : Now let's look at the situation a little deeper. There's no obvious concern on the strictly Federal level, it's just a matter of cracking the whip on the DC agencies to get their plans in gear (hello, Y2K, this stuff should have been done 10 years ago, its not just a 9/11 thing) and coordinate them. Does that give the President more power over the Executive branch? If the answer is yes, then what was going on (or not) before hand? That's a worrying question there. Switching over to Federal-State relations is where you have a case for things getting murky. The states are all technically their own authorities (except in interstate activities) and duplicate all their agencies. The National Guard likewise is state's resources, not the Federal government. However, that doesn't mean they can't be bought off, see all the bits in section (16). All those goodies in training and money, does that come free? Most likely not. That's the way funded mandates work, you get the money by agreeing to show up when called. If you want DC's money for new radios, you have to agree to let them run the radio net. And so on. This is where you get the dissolution of the Federal-State checks. By outsourcing their emergency services, the local governments can then shift those monies over to political projects. Things may have been quite a bit different in New Orleans if the locals hadn't been skimming the levee money for local graft. Had they done their job as they should have, it's much less likely that their established constituency would not have had to be airlifted out and scattered across the country.

Rock and a Hard place. The constitution makes elementary provision for succession in the presidency in extra-electoral situations, and that was expanded on by congress. Continuity of National Command Authority is fairly well covered and has been even pre-Cold War. Continuity of regulatory and operational command is another matter entirely. Previously, it had been up to the individual agencies to implement and maintain their own continuity of operations plans, and those plans have continually evolved over time. This Directive mandates that all agencies implement and maintain robust continuity of operations and regulatory powers programs. That is a very good thing. As was evidenced in New Orleans, the local continuity plans consistently are "head for the hills and wait for the Federal Government to bail us out." I disagree with that policy, but you also have to be pragmatic and make provision to cover those who don't view it as expedient to cover themselves, or in actual need have their resources entirely vacated. Where the debate on this comes in is the theoretical premise that this would consolidate absolute power in declared emergency situations (Third World et. al.), with the potential for the Executive branch to find agencies of government not in compliance and exercise powers over those agencies. The concern then is that there would be insufficient resources for appeals through the courts, and the administrative authority to enforce judicial actions remains with the Executive branch, creating a catch-22 where the Executive branch would have to be trusted with implementing decisions potentially made against it, in situations where martial law etc gives clear constitutional authority for the suspension of habeas corpus etc. On the surface, the premise of mandating continuity of operations and authority is a very good principle. In the Cold War, the assumption was that things would be so nuked that all you would need is a token congress, a couple judges, and the President on a plane with the Football. Post 9/11 however a different situation has to be considered, that is the state of limbo. The Stock Markets were able to operationally recover within a day or two, if not hours, because of the business continuity plans in place. Yeah, there wasn't anybody to come in and the data lines were in trouble, but the parts were all there just waiting to be turned on. But until they got turned on the economy was on pause. Secondly, look at the Anthrax mailings. Before they overhauled the mail handling processes, when one of the mailers came in they had to lockdown the entire building, and wait for decon and medical evaluations for all the staffers. That's downtime, and downtime is generally a bad thing in our 24x7 world. Post-9/11 the agencies started looking at their own independent continuity plans. Most were billed to GWOT expansion, but a lot of the facilities were overcrowded and out of date anyway. What I suspect is driving a lot of the controversy is that a proper continuity of operations plan insists that your redundant facility have significant geographical and infrastructure separation from the primary operational center. So all of a sudden 'lifers' that thought they'd 'arrived' and they were finally in the 'inner circle' of social elites are getting told they're going to be working a long ways from downtown, and definitely outside the beltway. Faced with that humiliation of reality trumping personal petty pandering, they start throwing public hissy fits over the conspiracy theories the crackpots stay up all night dreaming up.

The problem with that is it's entirely unreasonable to expect that modders should have to make their content conform to BIS's engine. It's unfair and impractical. When they've got an idea, it should as the modder envisions it, and not crippled by so-called conformity to someone else's 'standards' which don't reflect the accurate realism studied by the modder themselves. If ArmA can't handle multi-million poly models, that's the engine's fault, not the modder's, and BIS needs to fix that glaring deficiency immediately before moving on to anything else. The same goes for shadows. The modder shouldn't have to worry about shadows at all, are shadows modeled in real life? Of course not, real life is what ray traced dynamic shadows try to imitate, that again is the engine's fault, not the modder's, for that lack of crucial functionality.

I'm surprised that none of the CoC guys have chimed in here, they're the ones with the most historical baggage in the circus of poking at the message sizes. What I strongly suspect, based on your prior posts about this being a "Mega-Coop-Dynamic War mission", is that you're passing some data somewhere that's resulting in a relatively large amount of data being transfered. Whether it's an overload of your data, or if ArmA data is being tacked onto it I don't know and I'm too busy to do a code audit anyway. What you need to do is look at the sizes of dataset's you're working with. Mother-of-all Arrays slammed around can cause you problems. Or you can get size creep in plenty of other places. Look through your code and see where your largest chunks of logic are, and see how they can be cleaned up, whether you change to incremental element updates, working locally with full arrays while syncing with indexes, that kind of stuff.

If you're trying to send an update that contains info on all the content in a session, of course there's going to be problems as you've indicated. You're going to need to look at re-coding your message handling system to send more smaller messages.

If only they'd bring back soundstorm... I was going to say that I don't know what the EAX support is on the pro lines, then I remembered that ArmA uses OpenAL instead so scratch that worry. There's two parts to a quality audio system for gaming - one is the compatibility for multichannel surround sound (the emu series should have adequate OpenAL support if it's new enough); the second is digitally exporting the audio to a proper external receiver. That's what I did with my old rig, it had a soundstorm chip on the nforce2 mobo that did real-time repackaging of the multi-channel audio to Dolby Digital, which was then pushed out via SPDIF to the front of my Audigy2 platinum. That alone gave me more than enough processing to have crystal clear audio with no interference at all. I've got an Auzentech Meridian on order that I'm curious to see how it performs.

The issue isn't with the server tuning, the issue is with your scripting. You're trying to slam too much info around, which is exceeding the buffer sizes. Look through your code to see how you can streamline it.

512MB will make a substantial impact on your visual detail. The 8600 may have better performance at medium details. The 8600 will be a better long term option for Vista compatibility.

So you're saying that 1) BIS has no news 2) BIS should tell us news Am I the only one to see the contradiction there? "Please tell us about the news you don't have". I seem to recall BIS is still busy with ArmA making patches, you're suggesting that they abandon ArmA as-is and go on to something else? Just wondering, that's kinda not making sense...

Says who? You have no clue whats going on in WrpTool development, heh maybe thats why you checked #wrptool today to see if it still exists. To everybody, WrpTool development continues, dont let persons like shinraiden say otherwise. WRPtool development was in jeopardy when you hijacked ODOL Explorer to attack the community, and stopped the day you told BIS to get stuffed. I got a nasty and ignorant flaming PM from one of your new gullible minions claiming that #wrptool was alive and well, and in all fairness decided to check it out. Sure enough, it was you in your own little world as usual. How about you be a little more forthcoming with factual information about your real role in actual WRPtool programming, and not just PR spinning.

You're flamebaiting again on the subject of CWR, which you have done before, and resulted in various thread locks and warnings. That behavior is as destructive as that you claim BIS to be involved in. I share information about how the process used here is wrong, and inherently flawed, based on information shared from BIS and posted on the community wiki, and you accuse me of encouraging the suppression of information? CWR hasn't been against sharing the info, in large measure they constantly have to wait on BIS to finalize and communicate it. Given the hostile nature of these forums, and the irrational impatience expressed by many, is it any wonder that they had to resort to discussion bans so they could let Prague dictate things on their own timetable? As for IP, you have your position and I have mine. I refer mainly to the long time ban from Prague on community redistribution of Nogova maps, on the premise that Resistance was optional and not everyone had it. IIRC, Prague stated that legally the community is over a barrel the moment they touch any BIS content, as opposed to purely self-created content. I don't know if there's publisher obligations either. BIS can give CWR whatever they want to from BIS's own data source, but who 'owns' what's on the OFP cd's we bought? I don't know, and that's the question I'm asking. -edit- That list of objects is just a list of content with a similar visual appearance that was released through totally different publishers for different products. I'm referring to the number of models and textures in the ace_everon package which were added from the OFP release, and thus made available to ArmA users without confirmation that they are in possession and compliance with an OFP license.

So if you were BIS, and you had to pick one task, which would it be? Work on a patch to hopefully shut up the spammers? Or police the forums for IP violations and community misbehavior?

If this is a M1A2, where's the CITV and the loader's ring mounted M240?

um... First off, this method involves hex editing old format maps, which were missing landscape flags to begin with. The hex editing merely replaces index references to .paa files with references to .rvmat files. As a result, the limitation of 512 textures is not removed since the old format maps do not have provision for using full-map satellite textures. You could create an artificial tile derived from each of the old OFP texture tiles, but that's not the only problem. Furthermore, WRPtool development is closed and it was hard locked to 512 textures anyway. Secondly, the layer mask is missing in the public downloaded version. The layer segments also require the new map file format. Not having the layer mask tiles means that clutter and probably environmental sounds won't work right or at all. Thirdly, there is a substantial amount of OFP content packaged along with the map. Understandably, it's essential to duplicate the map. However, BIS policy for a very long time (and I'm not aware of it changing) was that content was not to be made available to those who did not have the original game. There appears to be a significant number of ArmA users who don't have OFP. This is technically ripping content from one game and making it available to users who may have not purchased it. It's one thing for BIS to authorize and support a research and prototyping project. It's a totally different matter for the community to take matters into their own hands and hope BIS doesn't mind.

If your RAID is off a generic motherboard chip and not off a dedicated RAID card, you're going to get some noticeable CPU and bandwidth penalties.