Inkompetent

Ohhh! Thanks for that! Interesting read indeed. I've been a bit lazy in reading the CMSF forum lately. Then that is one less factor where the Russian tanks are inferior, and I'd personally say that with equal protection, but with higher speed and 15 tonnes lighter the T-90 definitely is a match to the M1A2 in terrain where its speed can be utilized (i.e. not flat desert, but more uneven terrain)

Indeed for the first shots an Abrams is vastly superior in rate of fire IRL. With a rested loader they can practically shoot two shots like BAM-BAM, because the loader can insert another round the very instant the breach opens. For the first few minutes of fighting there's no chance the auto loader in the T72/90 can keep up. It's only in prolonged engagements where it can, and possibly become superior due to the loader in the Abrams getting tired. One of the best moves the Iraqi ever did with their crappy export-versions of the T-72s and their poorly trained crews was to drive into the american tank formations to cause confusion. In the thick clouds of smoke and dust it was near impossible to distinguish friend from foe even for the Abrams. Even though the T-90 has come far since the T-72 in regards of engine power, sensors and gyros for the cannon the only things that *are* better with a T-90 is its smaller size and its longer range and speed. The Abrams has a better cannon, more armour, better sensors, better ammunition. At close range I'd expect them to be fairly equal though. Up to who shoots first in a situation like that. But non the less the in-game tests looks interesting. Would be interesting to see the results of what Rommel mentions.

Basically it *is* scripting, just that it's done in a graphical editor. Every single item in the FSM sequence has to be scripted to do anything.

Just like a SQF script, just that you use execFSM instead of execVM.

It's not the number of mods that have an effect on the servers. It's what they do. In general any 100% clientside addon works well as long as the server permits it.

Good examples are looking at the missions. They generally use FSMs for hints, conversations and lots of extra stuff. And that sure sounds like nice use of it, Xeno. Seems to me like FSMs + functions can replace A LOT of the existing scripting.

I can guarantee you that some mods crash the server. That's why it is quite important that servers use verifysignatures and only allow addons that won't crash them. Properly made sound mods, model and texture replacements and other purely client-side stuff won't do the server any harm, but some stuff that affects the server and other clients can definitely crash them if they don't have the same addons. It has been proven time and again through the history of this series. Good examples are XAM and ACE. Both crashed servers that didn't have the same addon.

You can make them do quite a lot of things. However - I'm fairly confident that the default FSM has highest priority, so if an event happens that is covered by the default FSM it'll supercede the custom one and take over, which makes custom FSMs unreliable (i.e. they can't be used for overly complex systems since they are to be expected to be interrupted or cancelled). I hope I'm wrong with this though.

This is the problem. At the moment it ain't. Since it can cause random CTDs for the clients in multiplayer many choose to run with it off until that issue is fixed by BIS. Other than that it is indeed a very nice feature with all different channels :)

I totally understand the server admins. The gain from not having the hassle of hackers, especially when no admin is around to kick/ban them and restard the server/missions, is definitely outweighted by the loss of not being able to use (certain) mods and addons.

Well, what does it matter if one has mods for 500 additional units and weapons and whatever? As long as the mission doesn't use them they are wasted HDD space as far as that session is concerned,and no one else is affected by it either. It's when mods change the core classes and stuff in the game that there are issues.

Create a new profile and use that instead. You can edit the name of all custom profiles afaik. Just not the default one.

If you mean for infantry it is animation-dependant. So you'll have to speed up the movement animations to speed up the movement.

Great to see you active again, Solus! Really looking forward to see what your magic fingers will manage to put together :)

It can definitely be done. The problem is to making it work smoothly. I'm yet to see a good implementation of it, even though I've seen many working implementations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_state_machine Practically, it is a larger switch-case system generally used for digital systems, (often) constructed with graphical editors for a good diagram overview. In ArmA the application is mainly (only?) AI.

I don't think I've ever played a bad AAS mission actually, so have a go with all of them ^^

Sure. I could let the user set both the time and number themselves. Never done anything like it before, so nice to tread some new ground :)

Agreed that a throwaway-action would be nice, instead of having to use the slow action ["DROPWEAPON", unit, weapon]. Can be foul-scripted, but a proper implementation of it would be awesome.

Thank you, Old Bear! Mirror added to first post. And as a clarification on the battlefield clearing I thought of letting the tubes stay on the battlefield for 30 minutes, or starting to remove them for a maximum of X empty tubes simultanously. Guess about a hundred tubes or so, but nothing decided. I'm not sure I want to change the ammo size to even less at the moment (although people are of course free to change it in personal versions if they want to). I am however pondering how the ammunition can be removed completely without messing things up too badly.

Not currently possible indeed. And that's why BIS has to do it due to the engine changes needed to be able to fire a weapon without an external ammunition source (or where the ammunition is type=0 and the engine limits it so no more than 1 round can be carried at any time. I dunno)

I have pondered digging into this with my INKO Disposable addon actually, due to the issues I have with getting the AI to behave smoothly (like for example prioritizing taking cover after firing the AT rocket, and *then* switch to primary weapon) instead of being sitting, retarded ducks.

Even better: They shouldn't carry any ammunition at all. Should be a value in the configs telling the game that the weapon can be fired once, and then turn it unusable I *could* for example make my addon work like that, but for me it'd need a looping script per character to see when the AT launcher is being weaponed, and that's not feasible to run on every single unit on a server - thus I don't. Built in feature by BIS would sure be the best.

I'm with Alex72 here. I would like more stuff myself, but I don't expect it to come to any greater degree. We know what BIS' focus with ArmA is, and thus every little improvement to the vehicles to make them more realistic is a gift. Just imagine what the community would do with the game if we got clickable cockpits and working MFD displays... The aviation and armour would enter a completely new universe.

The only thing they'll be touching about performance afaik is their own custom models and scripts. Expect a slight performance decrease when running ACE2 because of the amount of scripts, but if it's anything like ACE1 it'll be soooooo worth it. @ jhoson14 It is one of the earliest tried techniques in ArmA1 to simulate FLIR. It is however limited by two things: The draw distance for light sources, and the amount of light sources that can be visible at one time. Even with just a couple of lights per person the limit was reached quite fast in ArmA1, and due to the draw distance limitations it wasn't a feasible solution in the end. I don't know how these two have improved for ArmA2, but I'd expect they haven't improved to the degree to make this a viable solution.