KaRRiLLioN
Member-
Content Count
1198 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Everything posted by KaRRiLLioN
-
One thing that might work is what I'm already doing with the SU34--which is to add mavericks to its loadout or something. I dunno, it's kind of a workaround, but I'll have to see. I would hate for armor to become totally useless. It's already difficult enough with attack choppers.
-
Now that 1.08 is out, I'd like to know how things are working for people, i.e. any crashes, etc. I'm looking at adding the A10, but I'm not sure how to balance things out for OPFOR. There's no real good way to make the A10 buildable by both sides without some sort of addon, and I don't want to use addons just for that.
-
Well, looks like 1.08 should be out sometime soon. Hopefully that'll fix a lot of stuff and make AAA more effective, etc. I think that will add some much-needed effective defenses for teams, so you can actually use AI to effectively guard a taken territory. I just wish they'd give East something to counter the A10 with and the cobra so things would be a bit more even after 1.08. Guess I'll have to figure a way around that. And I'm still reviewing suggested territory placements. If you have any suggestions, put 'em here, and pics are always good so I can see what you're talking about.
-
True. I've gotten some suggestions from people for placement, so I'll take a look at it again. I haven't been playing ArmA much lately since I'm waiting on 1.07 to unify the editions.
-
The best way to counter that is to airdrop an ammo truck in one of their southern towns and create a forward base there.
-
After thinking about it, I'll probably wait until 1.07 is released before deciding if I can go to v1.0. I just want to be sure that 1.07 doesn't break anything. I've also received some offers via PM from people willing to look at the territory balance. I'd really like to get that sorted for the 1.0 release since the south island is definitely harder to defend.
-
I like coops, but TBH, the main time I play them is when there aren't many people on my server and I'm waiting for more people to join. Â I look at the AI as a good "warmup" for facing humans. When I designed RTS-IV, I knew that players like to be at the front lines, or doing something interesting instead of just sitting around guarding, so that's why I put in customizable squads, etc. so humans could create squads and have them do the boring work for them. In a way, that's the kind of gamestyle I like the best. Â You never know if the enemy who just took the territory you're about to go into was an AI or a player. Â Or you never know if the tank rolling down the road has AI or a player, unless you have a weapon that locks on, of course. Â So you have to be ready for anything, be it the robotic AI, or a wiley human. We've had several games of RTS-IV with 20 players per team plus hundreds of AI, making each army close to 200 units in size. Â Now those were some battles. So while the AI in a usual coop will do exactly what their waypoints will do, the AI in a mission like this with players controlling them can be a lot harder to predict. Â I'm hoping with the 1.07 final patch the AI will be even more formidable. So anyway, coop is fine, but missions where you can mix AI plus players are a lot more challenging, IMHO.
-
Well I may add more to it, but I'm just not sure what. Â A lot has changed since the last "public" release version, so it'd probably warrant a change to v1.0. I may implement a coop/SP aspect to it, but I have some AI issues to work out, primarily making them destroy enemy installations. Â I think I have some ideas that will work without resorting to addons...at least I hope so anyway. I also wanted to release a full island version. Â Someone was going to mark the territories for me in a well-thought-out manner, i.e. so refineries, etc. would work well, but I never heard back from them. Also, I get a lot of msg's that refer to Evolution...but that mission is completely different than RTS-IV so I'm not sure I see the connection.
-
In RTS-2, I tried a minelayer, and it was a disaster. Â Someone would go lay a lot of mines and not mark it, and then their own team would lose entire armor columns. I'd prefer to keep the mine-laying as it is. Â I've also thought of AP mines, but I'm concerned about mine spamming. Â It'd have to be limited somehow to keep someone from making it their sole purpose to encase the entire base in mines. I still haven't gotten word if Mando missiles are finished for MP yet, so I haven't added those to RTS-IV. I hope to go ahead and promote Beta 2R to version 1.0 sometime soon, but I've been busy with other things so I haven't had a chance. Â I hope that version 1.07 proper comes out soon as well so all of ArmA-dom can be united under one patch. BTW, Breeze, I still don't know why you're having crashing issues with 1.06 and RTS-IV. Â Are there any other 1.06 servers running RTS-IV with crashing issues? Â I've seen a few 1.07 servers running RTS-IV. Â How's it running under that? I'm still running 1.05 on my server and may not attempt to run the beta patch. Oh, and Breeze, to address an earlier question about modability of RTS-IV: Â I've made it pretty much plug-n-play, so I'll write up a small text help file that people can use to modify some aspects of RTS-IV. Â Keep in mind that some things are easier to change than others. Anyway, thanks for all the input!
-
I keep getting asked for a downloadable mission pack, so I got off my duff and finally zipped up the latest files and put them on my FTP. I still consider these missions BETA, but they all work fine. Â This includes my C&H's, CTF's and Coops. C&H's come in two different flavors -- Sector control, and old-style C&H for points. Â For all my C&H missions, I strived for a 3-D battlefield approach, i.e. something that uses all vehicles. C&H Sector Control requires that you cap all territories in specific order. Â You win by either having more territories than the other team when time runs out, or by dominating and holding all territories for a certain time. C&H Assault is points-based, no order to capping, but you can still win by holding all territories. CTF is the same as always. Â I included my 3-way CTF. The different mission types all use a core set of scripts which I update frequently since I get anal about everything working well. Â All work fine with JIP aside from one minor marker thing I haven't fixed in CTF. If you want to tear apart a mission and use it as a template, go ahead. Â If you have any questions about how to use a certain template, just ask me. Other junk: -All PvP missions have squad marker scripts with names -All PvP have safezone protection, including a couple of experimental ones I'm fooling around with to further punish griefers. Â Still not perfect though. -My coops all have respawn because I'm not as hardcore about those as others, not to mention insane amounts of enemies. -Most C&H's support 64 players, a couple of CTF's do. Â I'm working on converting them all to support more--if it makes sense of course. -Most C&H's have Blackhawk/Mi17 towing abilities, i.e. ability to hitch a light vehicle and airlift it into the field for support. Hmm..can't think of anything else... Here's the link: Â Karrillion's MP Mission Pack
-
Definitely some interesting ideas, although I'm not sure they'd fit well for RTS-IV. I have a question: Have any of you played RTS-IV in ArmA 1.06 and 1.07? I haven't had a chance to play it with either version since I have the Euro 1.05 version. Does everything still function fine in those versions?
-
Alright, finally got the chance to check out 1.07 on my primary PC. CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo X6800 Extreme RAM: 2GB DDR2 800 Video: eVGA 8800GTX x2 (But not in SLI since it doesn't work well with ArmA) No custom addons. Resolution: Â 2560x1600x32 Aspect Ratio: 4:3 Terrain Detail, Objects Detail, Texture Detail, Shading Detail are all set to Normal. Postprocessing, Shadow Detail, Anisotropic Filtering, Â Antialiasing set to Low Blood set to High Nvidia Driver 158.22 Issues: Resolution LOD's are often staying at their lowest-poly LOD, and as a result, the lowest texture detail as well. I assume this still has to do with the 8800 problems in general. In beta 1.05+, I also had occasional LOD issues. Â In both 1.05+ and 1.07, I have also had issues with certain options on my Action menu turning invisible when I select them. Â For example, Get in vehicle as driver might vanish when I selected it. Â I assume this might have to do with the picture icon that is displayed, but I'm not sure. Otherwise, 1.07 looks fine so far and the performance seems very smooth. Â Then again, I guess it would be with so much in the lowest resolution LOD. When I did I fly-over of the island, it finally began to switch objects to their proper LOD's although the land textures still looked very low in certain areas. Â I'll do more testing. Test 2: This time I changed Terrain Detail, Objects Detail, Texture Detail, Shading Detail all to Very High. All resolution LOD's seemed to operate properly with these settings unless my FPS fell beneath 15 FPS or so, which it did frequently in some areas, especially with my viewdistance set to 5,000. I changed the same settings to "High" and the LOD's operated properly, but the terrain would ocassionally go blocky. Â If I changed Shading to LOW, for example, then I would start to see more low LOD's. So apparently, the game is adjusting the LOD's incorrectly depending upon which settings you have for your level of detail, instead of balancing it with FPS, etc.
-
karl76, where did you get the 165 beta drivers? I clicked "Beta Drivers" on nVidia.com, but it didn't list them.
-
I'm trying to run a 1.07 dedicated server, but I get this error on startup: I copied over all the folders from my installed version of Arma with the 1.07 beta folder and tried to run using this line: Am I doing something wrong?
-
I've looked at adding RACS to the mission, but it isn't really lag so much that I'm worried about, but the fact that the mission will go a LOT slower. In RWS, there are enemies pre-placed in the towns, and it usually takes 30-40 mins before both teams have cleared the towns and even meet each other in battle. IMHO, that's almost like playing a coop before the PvP part starts. Having said that, I may make either another version, or create some options so that the mission can be customized at the start. I may also add some coop elements so an AI controlled team would actually go out and cap, etc. The only issue with that is getting the AI to actually do those things with their questionable pathfinding. I still think PvP is the most fun way to play, but everyone has different tastes. Perhaps the 1.07 patch will give the AI slightly larger brains.
-
Yep, latest version is Beta 2R. Speaking of which, I'm thinking of upgrading RTS-IV to either Beta 3 status or version 1.0, since the core seems to be pretty solid at this point, and JIP doesn't have any major flaws. I haven't had much free time to add anything else lately, so the next download I put up will probably be Beta 2R renamed to Beta 3 or version 1.0. So let me know if there's anything fatal in version R.
-
I hope he gets it back up and running. I'm looking forward to testing his scripts in RTS.
-
Yeah, the AAA and AA suckage do hurt. The good thing is that in version 2R, you need a lot of oil and ore to build GBU planes, plus the time has increased a lot. Last night, we had an air offensive against a southern forward base, and our GBU's got their asses kicked. Why? Because one guy sat next to an ammo crate and used the ammo menu to keep himself and his AI armed with plenty of AA rockets. The new ammo menu allows a player to rearm all of his units at once, or one at a time. You can also save up to 4 customs loadouts. So anyway, this guy and his group held off our offensive until his team destroyed one of our oil refineries to prevent us from launching more bombers. From what I know, Mandobile is working on a fully MP compatible version of his scripts for Mando Missiles. I want to add in an AI version of them to see how powerful they are. I still want air to be viable, of course. Another thing might work as well. Because I'm thinking of using rank points as upgrade points, perhaps players would have to use them to gain pilot status or something at some point. That would limit the number of people who could actually fly. The other thing I've been thinking really hard about is whether to change one fundamental of the game and instead of having the ability to make unlimited units, to instead make it so you actually "earn" ore and oil, while energy is a static resource. So your resources would earn you more oil/ore as they upgraded. That would mean players would have a limited amount of resources to "buy" vehicles. But it would also mean anyone who JIP'd would be screwed for a while, until they could afford something. I dunno if I'll do it or not, but it's a serious consideration. Thoughts on it are welcome.
-
1) I thought of adding RACS to the towns, but TBH, it'd slow down the gameplay a lot. Â Even though one team may get an early jump on towns, I've played plenty of games where the team with fewer towns at first comes back strong. Â If you have team members who have strong logistics skills, you'll find yourself ahead. 2) The reason there is no queue is to prevent people from spamming a lot of vehicles. Â You can still make your own custom queue if you create a custom squad. Â In the latest versions, I've added armored units to the custom squads list. 3) In the latest versions, GBU planes and attack choppers are much more expensive and take longer to make. Â With the new ammo menu you can carry more AA rockets with you as well and load your AI with more. Â Now it's much harder to completely devastate a team with GBU's unless they really suck. Â I'm still looking into Mando missiles, though. 4 & 5) Â I'll be fixing the commander auto-reassign script at some point, and add in a way to change it. Â But once the base is built, the commander isn't that important. I'm inching closer to Beta3. Â I may add in one more thing for Beta 3--the ability to do player upgrades with your rank points. Â For example, the AI limit might start out as 10 units per player. Â For a certain number of rank points you could upgrade that to 15 and so forth. Â You could also purchase field repairs, etc. Â Rank points are earned by capturing territories, destroying enemy refineries/forward bases, and by killing enemies. Â I'll be figuring out some other ways to earn points as well, so team players will get the benefits. Now I just need time to work on it. Â
-
Actually, I like being able to win at some point. A persistent war would be fine if there were hundreds of players all at once...but I think that will have to come once they optimize ArmA more.
-
Well, I thought I had the core down pat, but since I'm modifying the custom squads to include mechanized units, I'll probably re-write a couple of scripts for the sake of optimization. I'm also pretty much done with the new Weapons Loadout Menu, but there are a couple of niggling bugs that I need to quash. Right now the Loadout Menu can be used to rearm any soldier in your group. There's a group list in the menu that shows all members, and you simply select the custom loadout and double-click on the unit you want to rearm, or click the "Ream All Units" button and it'll rearm everyone. Just a few minor details to take care of and I should have Beta 3 ready soon.
-
Well I'd just like somed AI AA that actually works!
-
Never seen that crash bug before, but I doubt it has anything to do with RTS, since it's obviously a random config issue. I've had times where for some reason I'd get an error when the SU GBU was built and then couldn't see the cockpit, even though I could see the cockpit of the other SU fine. BTW, quick and easy way to see who the commander is--just click -Status Menu- and the commander is listed for each team on the left along with the other stats. I will eventually fix the script which automatically re-assigns a new commander when one drops from the server, and also a way to choose another commander. But it really doesn't matter that much if the base is already built because the commander doesn't have a responsibility past that. And I'm still looking into Mandoble's Mando Missiles, but he told me they're not MP tested yet. I'm optimizing some scripts, and I've added in double-clicking for menu items, and the ammo script is mostly done, aside from a few bugs. Once I get that sorted, I'll release Beta 3.
-
I've looked into the Mando Missiles, and apparently, they're scripts, not addons. So if I do add them, it won't require people to download any addons. I just have to find instructions on how to add the script functionality. I wouldn't remove ammo crates, but I'll be looking at ways to keep crates off roads. Unfortunately, even 5 gigs of scripting couldn't account for every imbecile on the server. And all support trucks have ammo crates--ALL of them. But sometimes when a vehicle is created, due to lag or something beyond mortal control, the action doesn't get added to the truck. And yes, the AI aren't that great, ATM. I suspect it has something to do with netcode, although server-controlled AI seems to be smarter than player-controlled. Perhaps because the server is always tracking everything, its AI know where the enemy is faster. And setPos getPos does work fine in MP. I think you're thinking about the issue with static objects like buildings not being able to be moved in MP except by the client that created them. This is not a bug--it was done that way on purpose to optimize the netcode for Arma. Basically it keeps the server from having to broadcast the condition and position of any building. It was a PITA to script around, but it can be done. Perhaps they'll make an exception class to this so we can have specific buildings that we can use as they were in OFP. @shiner - I've thought of that, but really, it's up to the players to coordinate that kind of defense. Players have choppers and transport, not to mention the ability to create custom squads, so they just need to paradrop their troops where needed. At some point I might give commanders the ability to deploy certain "independent" squads which would be server controlled, but could be directed by the player. That would keep the group list from getting hopelessly cluttered as it does now.
-
There was a thread about this some time ago, but it never got an official response. I have two 8800GTX's but I can't use them for SLI because I get better performance with 1 card than with 2.