Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

Defunkt

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    2558

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Posts posted by Defunkt

  2. Posted

    Congratulations on the release. Been looking forward to seeing these units since watching a preview on YT a week or more ago.

     

    They're undoubtedly the product of a lot of sweat, care and attention to detail. Thank you!

     

    If I might also offer some constructive criticism, IMHO this randomization process should be an optional feature (ideally enabled/disabled globally via a removable PBO) rather than something that needs to be opted-out of for each unit (with indeterminate/incomplete results). It replaces something expected, predictable and (I think more importantly) handled natively by the engine with user-scripting which creates additional load, dependencies and the opportunity for bugs or mod conflicts. Not suggesting it should be removed but re-architected as an extension to the game's default mechanics rather than something which out of the box seeks to subvert those mechanics.

     

    Hopefully it goes without saying that you should make whatever you desire but I think the best of all worlds is possible here; fully specified loadouts for as many units as you care to define or feel it's appropriate to have listed in the editor, while retaining the ability to have still more variation through scripting. 2c.

    • Like 1

  5. Posted

    4 hours ago, stburr91 said:

    BI can't go after a new audience, they need content that will help retain what is left of their core community.  

     

    Arma is now a rather broad church (a good thing IMHO) and BI have seen the most growth over the past half-dozen years from non-military uses. You might hope or want for something else but I don't know that it has much bearing on what BI actually can't or need do.

     

    Left-over and unused assets already made seems entirely likely for this sort of fag-end release. Of course I don't know any more than the next person and it could be something entirely else, but I doubt more military assets is anybody's idea of 'unusual'.

  6. Posted

    17 hours ago, stburr91 said:

    Yeah, who the heck knows what "unusual" means. 

     

    I can't help but wonder if they might bust out some previously unseen Alien Invasion content from back when that was on the drawing board.

    • Like 1

  7. Posted

    Hadn't previously checked this out as I'd assumed it was just Chernarus with a whole lot of extra frame-killing assets scattered around it. There's a degree of truth to that assumption (it's an FPS killer) but the changes are so much more than superficial and really artfully done. Chernarus has never looked so good - well done. Now give me some frames back!

    • Like 1

  8. Posted

    Thanks. Honestly I'd have hoped there was a way to achieve this without scripting (and I'm not sure anything in those links suggests how it might be done with). Probably I'd investigate an FSM edit first.

     

    A video to illustrate what I mean; 

     

     

     

    Hopefully I've linked that 1:10 in. @jeza has three squad mates who exhibit the AWARE behaviour I'd like to avoid (in formation but weapons raised) while the local units (apparently not under his control and presumably following a waypoint) are doing what I'd like from my own AI in a 'patrol' mode keeping formation but with a relaxed stance.

     

    • Like 1

  9. Posted

    Pretty basic question but I'm really only recently delving into playing with AI; is it possible to have your squad keep a reasonably coherent formation while in SAFE mode?

     

    I find I often want to adopt a patrol/travel stance where weapons are lowered but setting the squad to SAFE to achieve this leads to them milling and moseying around like they're on a picnic. Every other mode and weapons are up like they're expecting imminent trouble.

     

    Any tips?

    • Like 1

  10. Posted

    Good work. I think the next thing would ideally be to work out exactly what config values influence these variations such that a script might be run on the whole config tree and spit out a large result set (which could be graphed as suggested above). In as much as you've identified a potential 'problem' - this might yield its solution, whether by allowing mod makers to see how their configs compare with others or mission makers to see what weapon sets inter-operate well.

  11. Posted

    Took a look yesterday, really interesting (obvious appeal for jets but not too shoddy as a combined arms map) and a horrendously large download. Couple of thoughts;

     

    1. Would it not be better to make CUP a dependency and flesh-out/override their dummy config classes? Saves on downloading duplicated assets and means the map would benefit from all CUP object upgrades. And if you reach the point where you consider it done or are tired of maintaining it they'd probably be quite happy then to incorporate it.

     

    2. Don't know if you're in a position to edit the height field but it would be cool to see the river carved out some and have the sea level set to fill it.

    • Like 1

  12. Posted

    Yeah, unfortunately HC is a poor substitute for proper parallelism (particularly as it requires missions to be specially written to use it) but it's all we've got.

     

    Hit me up if you do decide to investigate, would be happy to help out with any coding. If we got a test mission going with one standard HC module working we could then see if it that client can spawn its own agents.

  13. Posted

    Seeing as there's a spurt of development going on, can I ask if the use of a Headless Client has ever been explored in any way?

     

    Imagining something like a 'Headless Horde' module which might allow a single Horde Leader to be run from a HC and spawn additional subordinate units/agents which would be local to the HC.

     

    EDIT: I should've said, I think spectral beings are a stroke of genius given how hard it is to keep AI from walking through walls.

    • Like 3

  14. Posted

    I was deep into the original Insurgency source mod (previously Counter-Strike and before that Action Quake 2) when I ran across one of Dsylexci's ArmA (1) videos - and it looked like everything I'd ever wanted. Turned out not to be (my machine had more GPU than CPU and I couldn't run it very well) - but I was all over A2 when it released (bought the German-only edition on day one). Was never really aware of Operation Flashpoint but I'd never have tried it anyway - the character models have always seemed to me comically bad (where Arma 1's looked amazing).

    • Like 2

  17. Posted

    I think the key to smarter AI in A3 would be to offload higher-level functions (i.e. Finding Cover) and particularly prioritization (determining which units require the most frequent updates - because they're under fire or engaged in CQB) to a separate thread or even separate machine. This is more or less what the Headless Client seeks to achieve but the degree to which missions need to be specially written/deployed to utilize it makes it next to useless to the vast majority of players who just want to throw something together in the editor.

     

    I've dallied with the idea of trying to create an extension which an AI mod like VCOM could feed with periodic updates to unit state and location which are then constantly prioritized in a separate thread such that the mod could then also query the extension for; who do I most need to deal with next and what should they broadly be doing? Without access to map data this evaluation would be fairly rudimentary based principally on the threat/efficacy/morale/awareness and especially proximity of enemy or friendly units but it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that it could pass some finer-grained evaluation off to another game instance (think Headless Server) to perform LOS/cover checks (in SQF with actual map data). Just 'Blue Sky' thinking at this stage but it's going to be a long while until Arma 4 (and even longer until content compares to what's available in A3) - so, maybe one day.

     

    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1

  21. Posted

    Remaking the overlay textures at 2048 appears sure to yield a better look through high-powered scopes but the best result (shown below) will require support from a small script.

     

    Likely this will be released as an alternate edition and signed with a different key (so server-ops can decide to allow either or both).

     

    Spoiler

    C83FF47A3E1417EECAC3E0ABEAF9695284140051

    4E37B25EEF499A31925E1E7CCC06A2C5F7192D55

    A0C87F27120FDE0FF184A406F589946F89B391D8

    3396B8CCB652293D67F7844DBD53A2198A2590CD Vanilla ;-)

     

    • Like 7
    • Thanks 2

  23. Posted

    1 hour ago, Zero Two said:

    So then will this improve FPS because of lower res on textures?
    Also where to find Eo 3? I don't know about this mod.

     

    No, the difference in resolution for that one texture won't make an appreciable difference to FPS (and I mean to upgrade it back to 2048 in the next version anyway). For most of the time I was working on this the framerate cost was 1-2 FPS. More recently, I checked the final version just before I uploaded it and actually registered a small 0-1 FPS gain (YMMV). Suffice to say there's not much in it either way.

     

    EOReal3 is a colour correction preset by EvilOrgan and is included within this mod.

  24. Posted

    Thanks. Dunno, if you're dead set on running that level of saturation this probably isn't the mod you're looking for. This is what I see (on Malden, right?) at those coordinates;

     

    Spoiler

    malden.jpg

     

    Which I personally prefer to either your before or after (just my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions).

     

    EDIT:: I may make an alternative/optional build that restores the correction over blend distance code to see if that improves matters for high saturation use.

    • Like 5

  25. Posted

    2 hours ago, GordonWeedman said:

    As nice as this is, I've noticed the detailed textures you get when terrain is within ~20 meters are also changed. Is this supposed to happen?

     

    Not entirely unexpected. The global colour correction and also the new noise will influence the detail textures (which are blended over top) but it shouldn't be by much. In fact I did try making these changes gradual over the detail blend distance but it appeared to have so little effect (and/or I wasn't sure it was 'better') that it didn't seem worth the extra instructions. If you find the difference large or unsightly I'd be interested in looking at a couple of comparison shots.

×