dslyecxi

Amazing as always, Kegetys. I'm looking forward to using this as a way to do some kind of limited after-action review functionality. Having someone on the server run the spectator script, with all of the fancy names and indications of where people are shooting, etc, and then record it for later reference... it should prove to be very useful.

I'm not going to get involved with the "debate" between some people in this thread, but I will step in to say that I very much enjoy my TrackIR4+TrackClipPro and most definitely feel that it is worth the price of admission. Those who have picked one up on my recommendation have said the same, and there have been quite a few of them. That's good enough for me. For those that can't afford a $150 peripheral for their system, the less costly alternatives are worth investigating... however, I doubt they'll provide the same high level of quality that a TIR4 has. If you're willing (or forced) to settle for less, I suppose the webcam "solutions" might suit you just fine. It's up to you to discover. Personally, $150 for something that adds so much to the experience is not a very hefty price tag. Hell, the average video card is twice that if not more.

That turned out nicely. Good job, and thanks for posting the pics.

It's terribly amusing that you are fixating so heavily on the crosshair and COMPLETELY missing what the actual issues are. Removing the crosshair or altering the level of zoom is not going to fix this problem. There's much more to it than that.

I'm working on a new tactics page for my group, to replace our old old (which is a bit outdated, but you might find something useful in it: http://dslyecxi.com/ofpttp.html ). I'll post about it here once it's up, it's going to be rather comprehensive. I'm guessing it'll have the kind of things you're looking for. Aside from that, there will be training videos put out in the future more than likely... once my group switches over to ArmA. Hopefully those will be useful to you as well.

I have heard this question asked hundreds of times, unfortunately. I guess it's just hard for some people to picture how it works. =/ In short, no, it is not uncomfortable. You can scale the amount of head movement required to be as much or as little as you want.

Not to rain on your parade or anything, but the amount of effort that was poured into games like R6V and GRAW to get that kind of functionality in them is probably far beyond what mod teams can do. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that without proper functionality coded into the game from the start, there's not a chance in hell that a really slick version of it will be possible by modders. Game2, who knows. ArmA? Doubt it.

Maruk 1. The server had more than enough playable slots. In fact we had over 120. 2. Please read the original post: ...I set the maxplayers in the config to, say, 99 and it bumps it down to 65 in gamespy. In addition if you put in, say, 200, you can only have 20... I dont know if the problem is with the game or gamespy, but there is indeed a problem. At the very least it wont recognize 3 digit numbers for the maxplayers. You still have not clearly stated that you actually had more than 65 human players try to connect to the server. Please understand that when it comes to reporting bugs, being able to answer the critical questions is very, very, very important, and thus far you have NOT given the proper confirmation. What it SAYS and what it DOES are two different things, and you have NOT made it clear that you have actually had 66 live human players try to connect to the server.

To be clear: 1. You created a mission for the retail game with more than 65 slots. 2. You managed to get 66 no-kidding real people to try to connect to it. 3. The 66th person could not connect. What the server browser says, and what can actually happen, are two different things. If you are assuming that it will not work based upon what the server says, but not actually getting 66 people on the server to test it, you can't actually confirm that it's anything more than a display bug.

Do you know this for absolute certainty? Have you had 65 people on the server and then had the 66th one be unable to connect? Until someone can PROVE that, this all just seems to be panic over hearsay and assumption.

I didn't say that I made it, I just asked if that was the one he was referring to.

Which French one? This one? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5989683749063371667&hl=en

Hopefully once the mod tools are released someone will get to work on making actual 3D M203 sights that can be used in a realistic fashion, ala Infiltration. Those look good, but with respect to the M203 and ArmA's 3D irons, it seems very temporary to worry about doing a 2D version when they're so relatively useless compared to their 3D counterparts.

Heh, sorry. I tried to keep it fairly concise, since it's the first one of its sort that I've done. I actually don't use a joystick. There was one video I made where I was using one (showing off low-altitude, high-speed LB flight), but after that I gave the mouse another shot and found it to allow more precise flying in almost all situations. There are some drawbacks to it - minor ones, really - but all in all, for my purposes, I find it to be the ideal control method. I'll keep that in mind. Not too sure if I want to do another helo vid... I like the idea of doing videos with my group (Shack Tactical), but that would require us to have transitioned fully over to ArmA, and as of now that hasn't happened. We'll have to wait and see what develops. I would also love to do some training videos of Wargames League for ArmA once it's out, so I might save some of my ideas for that. We'll see.

I created this video in the hopes that some of the ArmA community might find it useful in giving them the basic idea of how to deal with a fast insertion or extraction with the MH-6 Littlebird. It's a bit over five minutes long, and covers various considerations that must be made before, during, and after any MH-6 insertion/extraction. http://ofp.umbr.net/videos/arma_mh6_training.wmv If the response is positive, I'm considering doing more training videos in the future. Anyhow... enjoy. Update: Here's the Google Video version. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7298324059526566734&hl=en

The group will then be named "Any name you like" with the GroupColorX. The first parameter must not appear in more groups or it won't work. The X in GroupColorX has to be one of these found in the Biki (setGroupId) or the editing guide. Please read the thread next time before posting your solution. I know about SetGroupID. That does NOT put the group name at the slot select screen, which is what I'm asking for.

Speed that up if you plan to ever use it in a hot environment.

Yeah, I know about that. I'd like to actually name the groups at the start, though, as that'd be a more ideal way to get it done. It seems stupid to be able to name them once the mission starts, yet not have any control over it at the slot-select screen.

Well, it wouldn't, since it only takes effect when the mission starts. How about editing the mission.sqm file? If you can find a command that does this in the mission.sqm file, that would be useful. The SetGroupID thing is useless for what I'm asking for, though.

Bear in mind that this is not a complaint. You mentioned a working ejection port - were you referring to the movement of the bolt, or is the ejection port cover supposed to be sealed at the start and then open once a round has been fired? If it's the latter, the video didn't show that off as far as I saw.

This is a problem with Armed Assault, not the TrackIR's. While the latest video might be slightly out of sync (probably not, since I use a fairly reliable method to sync them up), the main issue is that ArmA has built-in limitations to how fast you can move your view. These need to be removed (via patch) for the best experience. I hope that BIS does so. If you want to see how responsive a TrackIR typically is, look at my Aces High 2 video. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-989585601896924025

Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz, 2GB PC2-6400 RAM, Raptor 15,000rpm HDD, and a Radeon X1950XTX. If you want to go all-out, get the high-end Nvidia 8800... it should run it much better. Well, in the context of what I was doing, there wasn't any real need for it. The TrackIR in a helo is for when you want to look at something in a direction other than the one your nose is pointed. If you're flying low and fast, you don't have time to look around, since you're concentrating on not hitting stuff that is rapidly coming up to you from the front. On the other hand, if I had been flying higher up, without the danger of slamming into trees/lightpoles/buildings/etc, I would have been scanning around a lot more. It's a shame we can't record this stuff and play it back from a third-person view. I'd like to see how close some of those maneuvers were.

Fun flight in a Littlebird at low-alt, high-speed in the 1.02 flight model: Google Video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-265556773972488507&hl=en Hires Download: http://ofp.umbr.net/videos/dec15_littlebird_flight.wmv

I used a joystick for all of that. It's pretty hard to get a good feel for the helo's inertia from a video, but my impression is that it is much improved over previous FM's. The 1.02 patch (which looks like it will be available today to the public) also added a few more nice tweaks to the helo FM's. Once you get in-game and take a flight with the Hip, KA-50, and Littlebird, you'll quickly see how the FM has been improved to reflect the weight/maneuverability on all helos accordingly. With the 1.02 patch practically here, I don't think it'd be worth it to record a video showing my control inputs - those that have a Czech/German copy can just give it a go and see how they like it. I'm guessing that most everyone will enjoy the changes.

What he said. The odds are 10 to 1 that the game list needs to be updated.