Helmut_AUT

Ah, didn't know that "Guard" Groups without "Guard" Triggers to defend will roam the whole island. So basically if I want to create a SpecOps missions where the player gets hunted by specifically designated "Response Team" if seen by any enemy patrol even just for a moment, I can set the "Response Team" to Guard Waypoint and they will come get me? EDIT: Just tested. This is really nice, since until now I always had a large trigger over the area with a "If detected by OPFOR" and a "Group domove" statement to chase my guys around. Now I can do the same just by setting a waypoint type.

Isn't the guy in the "Trial by Fire" mission (Kozlavski or whatever, the actor YOU are playing) the same name as the guy in OFP, and the talk in the Chopper ("Are you nervous? We'll have lots of support...") pretty much the same as in the first OFP Campaign mission?

Thanks for again answering, Dna. Didn't seem to work though. Normally the SecOps generates the first mission within 60 seconds after game launch - if I hit this script line, it still hasn't done anything 5 minutes later. Seems like the only way to disable secondary random missions and re-enable them later would be to delete old and spawn a new sec ops module. Should that work? But might be messy in multiplayer.

For the Guerillas it would really fit well, both as transport and also modified "bomber on the cheap".

Von_Paulus, thanks for benchmarking the 32 HDR precision thing. For others: Is it really the normal "HIGH" postprocessing kicking in at game start, complete with all effects, despite it being set to OFF? Or is it just a part of the HIGH effects? In that case it would mean that HDR 32 should be much slower, since you'd be covering blurryness caused by high PP effects, so I assume it isn't. Please vote on the issue at http://dev-heaven.net/issues/show/2196

Thanks. I have no clue where to get the class names in CfgSecOps (without de-pboing tons of files) so now I have at least a list of possible missions. Do I have to activate them all separatly, or can I also write: this setVariable ["settings", [[""ambush", "attack_location", "trap", "rescue", "patrol", "escort", "defend_location", "destroy", "search"], true, nil, nil, false]]; and basically set the mission pool from empty [] to full? Would SOM then start generating missions again, or is that disabled for good with the initial init on an empty mission pool? To be precise, I don't want to force a mission on the player, just get the SOM module to start generating missions randomly, which had been disabled at mission start.

Wonderful idea. It's true that in Arma the general concept of "RoE" or "Situations" is never really used, instead you have a handful of different things to take care of at the same time.

The Raven is in service with the Marines, replacing the older Dragon Eye. They are both a class smaller than the Pioneer, as they are hand/bungee launched and (my guess) available on Company Level or Battalion Level. At least that's what Wiki says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RQ-11_Raven The Firescout is too large again, it's a size system that we as normal players in A2 (commanding a Platoon, maybe Company) would never get hands on. Besides, I find armed UAVs a lot less fun than if they are good only for recon, and the player still has kill the targets himself.

My personal theory is that the engine doesn't properly read the config file (or ignores the setting there) upon first load, and only sets PP to correct values once the user changes it around.

This has been in A1 with the Stryker and M113, and it's very annoying. Maybe for a bug report at the tracker.

Remove it's ammo. That worked for me in 1.02 No ammo, waypoint for "Careless" behaviour, then it will stop being a dive bomber. Generally I still think the feature is cool in it's potential, but a small RQ-11 Raven - unarmed - would be better for the purpose, especially if you can hand-launch it as a kind of equipment, not as a script in the editor.

Sadly BIS included a lot of missions that are very loaded with AI, and the new "Micro-AI" needs a lot of CPU power. For comparison, I have an AMD 5000+ X2, and if I try to play the Warfare-Style missions on Chenarus, I get below 16 frames. Even if I'm looking at an empty field, where in the editor I can get 40 frames. It is really sad - and I hope BIS will find improvements in their CPU demands - that with CPUs better than "Optimal Recommended" we can not play the included missions. For me in testing with the editor, I found that 10 AI groups (about 80 soldiers) is the max. I can run before I go below 25 frames (the least I find playable). If you look at the benchmark here: http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,687620/ArmA-2-tested-Benchmarks-with-18-CPUs/Practice/ you will see that only some very recent CPUs (Intels less than a year old, AMDs from this year) get 25+ framerate in their test mission. I think they simple went overboard on CPU load. I can't see this game being a market success if you need a system less than a year old to actually play the campaign and SP scenarios shipped with it.

Does HDR Precision cost performance? I think it might just improve the shader detail so it doesn't look blurry, but the shader causing the effect would still be running. If you can, benchmark this please - one with HDR32 and no blur, the other by deactivating blur and then benchmarking. I have a feeling it will be different performance-wise.

This is a bug, not fillrate-related. Please also see this thread: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=75258&page=3 There's an entry in the official bug tracker here: http://dev-heaven.net/issues/show/2196 Please vote for the issue. I'm haven't tested yet if the game really sets PP to HIGH or VERY HIGH - does it have motion blur after load? To me it seems PP generally is deactivated when this error occurs, but the distant "depth of field" shaders come into effect despite PP set to OFF or LOW at startup. Only by resetting the PP level does it go away.

Wolle, thanks for making those. A2 definitly fits the OFP-Feel. Can you tell us if they are AI heavy (more than 10 Squads) or not so? I really need a few A2 missions that won't max out my CPU, and about 10 groups (100 soldiers) in total is the sweet spot so far. I know Battlefield is probably larger.

Okay, even after a few days I still haven't a clue. By default, when selecting an unit or all units, A2 now opens the "spacebar menu" instead of what we normally had under "backspace". In that "spacebar menu" - for lack of a better term? I have a few items that are ALWAYS grayed out. There is something that translates to "Unit-Movement", next is "Unit-Firemode" and the last is "Commander-Unit". What are these three items good for? How can I for example order an unit to use supressive fire (shouldn't that be possible now?). It's a shame that the spacebar menu no longer allows to select team by color - or does it somehow? All that's left from A1 is "Shift + Select Teammember" to select a whole color team. Why so complicated?

Agree I like tabbing out for editing or FRAPS benchmarks, but ALT F4 always makes me feel stupid...

So you are saying the circle indicates when the parameters are good for a drop? Never noticed that.

This is something better fixed by BIS IMHO. With weapon addons, it really gets confusing when there are multiple packs out and you are trying to play online or user-created missions.

Was hoping for a bit more performance improvements (not just option to disable shader, real better performance for same things, also CPU/AI related performance optimizations), and it introduced an error where graphics can be blurry with PostProcessing LOW or OFF (see offical bug tracker item). But overall, pretty good and going in the right direction.

Well, I'd say worst case (if it doesn't work) is to disable random SecOps missions on one module. You'd still have double the support, you could however give on player for example Transport and Arty, the other gets Supply Drop and Air Strike. Since SecOps seems to need a clear idea which group it is synched with, chances are it won't work otherwise.

If you look at Chenarus, you see a lot of places that resemble river beds, complete with bridges over them. I'm not quite sure what the problem was filling them with virtual water, but I think the Team wanted to do it.

Whisper, thanks for the idea but I'm not lowering the res. Ran trough a village yesterday after an exploration flight with the Venom (crew of three also rendered on screen as they followed me), and I had 30+ frames unless very close to some buildings. Right now my main performance worries are the CPU (which makes included missions unplayable, thanks BIS for that...) and the occasional graphic slowdown which is related to special effects. But otherwise the card can put out decent framerate - Arma1 in woods and tight villages didn't get much above 25 either, I'm used to that. It's the rare slowdown that kills me. If the game didn't dip so deeply - sometimes lower than 20 - when rendering smoke, I might actually turn up some settings to match the card speed more closely with the frame limit of the CPU. Besides, I tried some "High" settings yesterday - maybe it's me, but the vehicles and objects always seem to use pretty low LODs, even with a VD at 3000, even on high. That's the one visual thing I don't like - the heavy use of low-level LODs pretty close in distance, but it doesn't seem to be changed much by object detail.

So we can switch the "Pseudo-FLIR" off in the UAV with N? Or only toggle polarity? Main problem I see with that kind of implementation is that it's still basically a re-colored daylight view. It's not truly thermal, unlike VBS2 which seems to use a separate texture for hot items. BTW, FLIR has even more potential and "need" now since camouflage works pretty well in A2. Contrary to NVGs, a real thermal sight will make people stand out much better from the background.

Haven't been able yet to get an AI subordinate targeting a tank with the LD in A2. I will try it again.