KaRRiLLioN

What you need to do is have a small cube or something, doesn't matter and put one of each texture on each side of the cube that you want to use and hide the cube in the model. Then in the eventhandlers for the plane, have it exec an init script that checks the classname for the vehicle and setObjectTexture depending on the classname and then you can have just 1 model but several different textures instead of having to use a different p3d for each texture. I've done this quite frequently on a smaller scale for addon packs for my server and it works very well in MP without issues. Â For example there was a tank with 6 models and the only difference was the textures, so I created a selection in O2 and listed it in CfgModels then in the class's hidden selections. I then placed a tiny cube inside the model so it wouldn't be visible and applied a different texture to each side so all 6 textures would already be processed by OFP. Â In the init.sqs I had it look for the classnames. ?typeOf _vcl == "Tank1" : _vcl setObjectTexture [0,{\texpath\tex.paa}] Now I know these textures are very large so I don't really know what kind of an impact there'd be having all the textures already loaded, but I do know if someone made a mission with several different plane types then it's a moot point cause they'd already be loaded.

You can get the zip file with the master config and the Jagdpanzer in two separate folders that you'll need to pbo. There are two p3d models in the Jagpanzer folder. The BCW_Jagdpanzer.p3d is the Jean Cristophe model which works fine, then the BCW_Jagdpanzer2.p3d file is the one which starts with its treads partially undergound only when it's on a dedicated server and a player is not in it. You can join a dedicated server and see the models in action but you'll need to have the addons on the server obviously. I have some missions with these in it but you need the entire ww2 pack and I don't have the messed up Jagdpanzer in the pack anymore. What I usually do is at home I have another machine that I set up a dedicated server on and then test items on. I worked on this and the other two models I mentioned but could never figure out what caused them to behave oddly in MP but not in SP or when a player was in them. If the vcl is local to you then it sits on the ground properly, but if it's local to the dedicated server then it behaves oddly. Anyway get the zip at this link: ftp://addons:corn@208.63.124.254/BCW_Test.zip You'll have to adjust the config.cpp in the BCW_Config.pbo to add the 2nd Jagdpanzer model, btw. ATM it's configged with the first one. If you want the entire pack to play with it's here: ftp://addons:corn@208.63.124.254/@bcw1.zip and the config items here: ftp://addons:corn@208.63.124.254/@bcwconfig.zip There are several coop missions and such on my server (see sig) to see the issue in.

Sorry it took me so long to get back to this; I've been afk for a few days. I can post the files on my FTP. Â I've been working on a large compilation pack for my server which unifies all of the best WWII stuff and have pretty much finished it except for these oddities. I already replaced one of the troublesome tanks, the Jagdpanzer V by John, I think, with the one by Jean Cristophe--it suffers no such issues. I'll post the master config and troublesome units on the ftp for you and PM you the dload info. Alternatively I also have around 20-30 WWII coops I made already on the server several of which use the vehicles in question and you're welcome to download the entire pack from my OFPwatch server (see sig) if you want to see the issue in action on the server. Just LMK which you prefer. Thanks!

Has anyone actually PM's Suma or someone at BIS to ask for the formula? Â I can't see why they wouldn't divulge it. Przezdzieblo, from my tests it appeared that adding indirect dmg does something to the equation. In my first test I had direct dmg 200, indirect 0, range 0. Â The hit event handler returned a dmg of .10384 and an overal dmg of .10384--identical as expected. Â Every hit after that was identical dmg, regardless of where on the tank I hit. Next I added 10 indirect dmg with 0 range to the same ammo. Â It returned .0937258 dmg. Â Notice that the direct dmg amount decreased when I added indirect dmg. Next I had 10 indirect dmg with 1 range. Â Results were .0937158 hit dmg, .0980274 overall dmg, so the direct dmg stayed constant, then the extra 1 range I guess hit some other vertexes if that's what OFP looks for. I increased range and it did increased damage slightly after that. Anyway, it's odd how adding indirect dmg will lower the direct dmg amount. Â It's all somewhat confusing anyway. Oh and Sanctuary, I know that OFP defaults to the Geo LOD if there's no Hit Points or Fire LOD, but how it discerns where something is hit...I don't think it can but just assigns the usual dmg without disabling anything. Then again I haven't tested that so I don't know for sure.

Ok, so all it really does is act as a multiplier for armor. Example 1: 1000 armor, 1 armorstructural. Â I take a 300+300 hit / 1 armorstructural = 600 or 60% damage amount to the tank. Example 2: 500 armor, 2 armor structural take the 300+300 hit / 2 = 300 or 60% damage to tank. So in otherwords armorstructural really provides no useful function, you might as well give your tank 1000 armor with 1 armorstructural instead of 500 with 2 armorstructural, right? Or is my math completely off? I read that quote earlier in the thread but was seeing if anyone had discovered some other hidden use for armorstructural besides the multiplier effect.

Technically it wasn't a bump as I was trying to find out if armorstructural is anything besides a multiplier for global armor.

I hope this isn't considered digging up an old thread but since it has so much data on OFP armor, I thought this would be the best place to ask. After testing a lot with OFP it seems that in addition to the armor value, it also depends somwhat on the size of the unit in question. Â Also, armorstructural seems to be simply a multiplier for the global armor setting. For example I set a tank to global armor of 500 and armorstructural to 2. Â I shot a round with 200 direct dmg, 1 indirect dmg and 1 indirect range. Â I can't remember the exact figures but the hit EH returned a damage of 10%. Â I then took the same tank, set armor to 1000 armor, armorstructural of 1 and the same ammo round did identical damage. Â So from what I can tell the OFP armorstructural setting only multiplies times the global armor, i.e. 500 armor * 2 armorstructural = 1000 armor. Also each and every hit did identical damage regardless of where on the tank it hit. The only hitpoint that caused a premature death was the engine one. If you set it to say .85 and deal that amount of damage to the tank there then it dies before global armor hits 0. This is the mystery to me because it doesn't seem to affect the vehicle in any other way that I can tell. Â I then took a large set of tanks varying in sizes and used the same ammo round to find how much armor would return a 10% damage ratio per hit. Â The armor values varied wildly. Â I had to set smaller tanks to much higher armor values to achieve the same amount of damage. We also experimented by making a 1x1 cube and giving it armor, shooting it with a bullet with 1 direct dmg and then made a 10x10 cube with same armor. Â The bullet did much less damage to the 10x10 cube. Unfortunately our discussions were on ICQ and I don't keep a history so I couldn't copy over the exact figures. Also with the tanks, the hitpoints assigned to various parts of the tanks were blackened and disabled in the same # of hits regardless of armorstructural. So my primary questions is, does armorstructural actually change anything aside from increasing the global armor?

I'm trying to binarize an addon, but each time I do and compile it, the vehicle is invisible in-game, although the mlod version works fine. I have all of the directories set up correctly afaik. I have an O: drive where oxygen is, then I have Bin, Data3D, Data, O and Worlds directories within it. Here are some of the errors I'm getting: I get around 100 lines like this with different STR's: I found these in the resource.bin and stringtable which is in my binarize directory. After that is says: After this is says it's converting the model, but then I get several texture errors like so: Then after about 40 lines of those errors, I get about 15 lines like so: I'm assuming that's related to the errors before it. I looked through the data.pbo in both my Res and root OFP folder for those textures, but couldn't find them. Anyway, after that it copies the other files. I then move the new p3d's into the original directory and overwrite the mlod versions (after making a backup of course). Once I compile them with PBO-X uncompressed and load up ofp, the vehicles are invisible in-game. It's been a long while since I've binarized, but I don't remember having this issue. Am I missing something? I've been scouring these forums for answers, but with OFPEC down I've found nothing useful.

Yep, I knew it had to be something simple. I'm making a master config in a separate pbo and didn't realize that binarize needed it in the same directory as the addon. Thanks to vektorboson for helping me realize that!

Thanks, but using it with a command prompt isn't an issue with me since I assume the GUI version is simply an overlay. Here's what makes no sense to me. Â I binarize the model, I even created some fake .pac files to fill in for the missing ones from data. Â It still gives me a ton of missing string errors, but I'm not sure how those affect it. Â Does anyone else get those when they binarize? Anyway, after I binarized it, I opened it up in ODOL Explorer and there it was, textured and everything just as it should look. Â I compile it with PBO-X, start up the game, and voila, it's invisible but there. Â I can get into it and everything functions BUT IT'S INVISIBLE!! *tears out hair* After a successful binarize, does anyone get errors at all? Â I can understand the 'Strange convex' type errors being harmful, but I'm getting none of those, only missing string errors and string id errors. I also copied Sancuary's .bat file just to make sure--no difference. There's something very simple, I'm sure, that is the cause of this, but I just can't find enough documentation to pinpoint it. Needless to say I am inches away from becoming quite insane.

All binarize files are in the same directory as the unpbo'd data dir's. I de-pbo'd the res and normal ofp data files to search for the missing textures, but I'm not sure that could be the reason it's not working. I must be missing something simple. I actually modified the bat file after reading through a ton of searches on the forum and did it like so: When you binarize do you get any missing texture errors, or do you get any of those errors about strings? Â I have binarized before but it's been so long. Â I just don't remember if I ever got those errors before. The other strange thing is I can open the binarized addon in ODOL Explorer and see it, but in-game it's invisible. Â I can get into it, drive it, etc., but it just can't be seen. Â It's very odd.

@Vektorbosen - it's the version from the breathe site.

I'm trying to binarize an addon, but each time I do and compile it, the vehicle is invisible in-game, although the mlod version works fine. I have all of the directories set up correctly afaik. I have an O: drive where oxygen is, then I have Bin, Data3D, Data, O and Worlds directories within it. Here are some of the errors I'm getting: I get around 100 lines like this with different STR's: I found these in the resource.bin and stringtable which is in my binarize directory. After that is says: After this is says it's converting the model, but then I get several texture errors like so: Then after about 40 lines of those errors, I get about 15 lines like so: I'm assuming that's related to the errors before it. I looked through the data.pbo in both my Res and root OFP folder for those textures, but couldn't find them. Anyway, after that it copies the other files. I then move the new p3d's into the original directory and overwrite the mlod versions (after making a backup of course). Once I compile them with PBO-X uncompressed and load up ofp, the vehicles are invisible in-game. It's been a long while since I've binarized, but I don't remember having this issue. Am I missing something? I've been scouring these forums for answers, but with OFPEC down I've found nothing useful.

Looking good. Did you get my PM about overcoming the need for triggers with the Vtol scripts? There should be enough key mappings possible in that to allow for nozzle shifting anims by holding the key for a certain time, and all sorts of stuff. I released the vtol stuff a long time ago hoping a harrier project would be able to use it. I hope this one comes to fruition. While I do hope that VTOL is hardcoded in Arma, it'll be nice to have a proper Harrier out for OFP. Let me know if you need any more help on the vtol stuff.

The Nimitz is techincally classified as a building which is a static object in OFP and thus cannot move like a vehicle. The Nimitz consists of about 4 building objects, so even if it could move, all those 'building blocks' would have to be synchronized. This new carrier is the same, because if all the pieces were classified as ship or something, they'd all drift apart. It'd be nice if ArmA removes some of these limitations, but carriers of this size shall, alas, have to remain static objects. I don't think adding the Nimitz to a CTI will lag it; just place it well offshore. I've gotten a version of RTS with the Nimitz in it, and once this one is done, I'll add it and make them both capture points where the team that 'owns' them can build aircraft from it so long as their air factory is up and running. I've been wanting to play it, but have held off on it until this carrier is finished. Since RTS now has a naval factory complete with battleships and such, this carrier would really complete things.

I'm pretty certain when I was combing threads about aircraft carriers someone mentioned a version that ags_smith had worked on, and the one I was patching up had an entry or two in the config that said "per ags_smith" though it could have been something someone did per his instructions. Anyway, doesn't matter. I patched up the remaining holes in the Nimitz deck and it seems to be much better atm. I'm thinking about carving up the hull of the Kuz since I can fly aircraft right through it even though I've redone its Geo LOD's several times and made sure it has all the components. Some areas seem solid while others don't, and I can only guess it's because of the sheer size. Does this air carrier have catapults, or do the Russians use something else, like giant rubber bands?

Yes, I've been realizing that. The LOD's don't even correspond with each other on the hull.p3d, unless I'm completely ignorant of resolution LOD's. I also found that I was using the previous version of the ship and once I got the latest release, I noticed the textures all seemed to be there. I created 4 custom roadway LOD's, 3 for the front curve of the ship, and the last is a square which I used to cover the deck and prevent falling through, but for some reason that curve in the front is a bugger to have work right. When I hit a certain point in it, the ship appears to vanish and I'm not sure if it's because of the roadway lod's that are set there or not. Anyway, the init in the ship's EH builds it and places the LOD's so it works fine except for the few visual issues, and the FPS drop seems to be gone so it'll work for now, but I'm really looking forward to a more functional beta. I re-wrote some scripts for the Nimitz and used ags_smith's fixed version so now its entire deck is walkable without any holes. I intend to implement both it and this Russian one in RTS-3. Since there's now a fully functional navy in RTS, I think aircraft carriers are the next step.

I've been looking at this addon and noticed that a lot of textures which are referenced in the p3d's are either missing or are from directories that don't exist, like some were looking for \kuznecov3\ and some for \Cy-27\ or something like that. I downloaded an older version of this but couldn't find those textures. Does anyone have an idea where they are? So far I've scripted this thing to build itself like the Nimitz, but Gnat's version is looking good so I'm just doing this to tide me over til his is done. One other thing--I've noticed when I look at this ship from certain angles I'll get a major drop in FPS. Is there some sort of geometry error somewhere on it? I did find out that if you don't set the main hull to destructtype of DestructNo then the game can crash when it crumples since it's so massive, lol.

Looking schweet! For the alliance pack are you making all new models? I stopped working on my B-wing for a while to finish up some other stuff and also since I never could get the animations to work the way they should with a rotating cockpit and folding wings. Problem is the driver proxy didn't rotate. Can't wait to play this campaign!

Cam, I understand what you're saying about one chopper taking out a squad, that's why some addon makers made it so there's a five second reload time between missiles on some aircraft to combat that. Air superiority has been an issue since I made RTS-1 back in late 2001/early 2002 and I've made adjustments in all versions such as making air more expensive and taking longer to build, taking longer to research, etc. but even RTS-2 had similar issues, but that's because in mid-2002 I wasn't editing addons at all. After I made RTS-3 I began to get into editing addons myself and trying to find ways to balance them without ruining them. Having some sort of multi-second delay on missile reloads helps a lot. Since RWS is mostly non-addons, obviously the same old issues exist. The ADATS and Tunguskas obviously help since they are very effective at taking down Aircraft, but that's in RTS-3, not RWS. Well, I'm hoping that ArmA will support more than 12 units in a group, because I'm looking forward to adding that into gameplay in RTS-4 (or whatever I name it), and I'm hoping that naval units will work better and AI will be better able to control aircraft, i.e. find and engage targets without having their hands held. If VTOL is supported and the Roadway LOD limitation is fixed, then I will definitely bring Aircraft carriers into the mix and they will operate as a sort of offshore MCU (mobile construction unit). I think that adding a *workable* navy to this will bring a great new facet to gameplay. I'd like to have the Aircraftcarriers make a large naval construction yard in the ocean. Insofar as persistent games, I suppose that might be cool, assuming there are enough people to keep the battle somewhat even on a consistent basis.

Fuel consumption is one area where Cam and I have disagreed in RWS. I wouldn't mind making it an option at the start and for Air only, but I built in other balancing factors to somewhat offset air superiority. Firstly, I agree that it is very annoying to build up a large fleet of tanks, get them all loaded on the cargo ship and transport them to the enemy island, unload them and then have them destroyed within 1 minute by an A10 or Cobra, etc. especially since there's a limit on the number of heavy and light tanks you can have. The AA boats can help a great deal with that by having them escort your ship and of course interspersing your heavies with shilkas or vulcans helps, but insofar as coding in a balance, I simply limited the number of combat aircraft to 3 and added in a bomber class which I limited to 3 and I think it works out fine. Usually one team or the other doesn't maintain discipline and gets all their combat air shot down within the first hour, and if you've played your cards right, you'll have the upper hand since you can use ground and air to beat the enemy back. Things like fuel consumption are fine, but I'd much rather have the balance decided on the battlefield rather than the supply depot. Maybe if ArmA allows more options in the description.ext then the game can be a lot more customizeable for the players on the server because everyone has a different level of comfort when it comes to game realism. You simply cannot please everyone all of the time. Speaking of the T80 vs M1A1 issue, I hear a lot of people bitch about how the T80 is no match for the M1 (the BIS versions), so Korax and MrZig came out with the CNC mod which essentially completely balances all units so the East tanks and West tanks, for example, have an equal chance of killing each other. Now we have a lot of people who bitch about how they're all the same and it's no fun having them balanced. You can't win on most of this stuff so it's best to strike a median or at least come up with options that will make it more enjoyable for those who like it differently.

Actually it's done and working and has been for a while. There are some other features that we were thinking of adding, but the core of the gameplay is all there and mostly bug free. I guess the only thing would be to make it so someone wouldn't have to dload the entire CNC pack for the naval units.

Cam51, regarding RWS, the only addons in it are the naval vehicles from Korax and MrZig's CNC mod. Â ATM they're all combined into the CNC.pbo which is pretty large, but it probably wouldn't be too hard to extract them from it. The cargo ship (used to transport up to 50 vehicles from one island to another), the battleship, AA ship, Assault ship and Fast Attack boat are the only ones, if I remember correctly. All other vehicles are default versions. The only problem with RWS is it takes so much teamwork that people don't like to play it as often, but I think it's fun when people actually act as a team. Also, I wouldn't term this as a version if CTI, rather it's a much stricter version of RTS-3. Â

I searched for a while on this and couldn't find any other threads mentioning it, probably since most players don't have dual core yet. Anyway, ever since upgrading my PC to these specs I've had a Multiplayer issue: AMD X2 4800+ 2GB RAM Geforce 7800GT Basically when I would play longer MP missions like RTS, or if I'd been playing MP straight for a while then I would suddenly have my ping drop to ~20, my bandwidth to around 7 and then I would get some amount of desynch, like 20 or so. All of these numbers varied somewhat, but essentially my connection would freeze up and become locked with a certain amount of desynch even though I could still play. The common factor in each game was that my bandwidth would drop into the low double-digits and then the rest of the MP session would be unplayable for me. To all other players I would show up as having huge desynch. Everyone else playing seemed to walk in place to me. To figure out what was going on, I replaced my router, my cable modem and put in a new network card one at a time to see if any of those made a difference. None did. Finally I set OFP to use only 1 CPU of the dual core to see what that did, and it solved the issue. So, the long-short of this is if you have a dual core CPU and you're having similar issues, then you need to do the following. Start OFP After OFP gets to the first menu, alt-tab out to desktop Open Task Manager (Right click on the task bar and select task manager) Click the Process tab Find the OFP process (the name of the .exe running in the list) Right-click the process and select Set Affinity Uncheck 1 of the CPU's. I normally uncheck CPU1 Close Task Manager and you're set. I looked for a way to incorporate setting the affinity in a shortcut so I wouldn't have to do this each time, but there doesn't seem to be a way to do that. Anyway, I hope this helps some people.

With createUnit you can't (for some reason) use it the same way as createVehicle and assign it a variable like so: _man = CreateUnit etc. Instead, you'll have to use the init line in the createUnit command and use a global var. _init = {man1 = this} the init is the ,"", in the code sample from Garcia, so insert the man1=this into those quotes in his sample and then instead of _man, you'll use man1 for the moveindriver, etc portions of the code.