LoTekK

kallex: Wrong thread. http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=47526

Eh, memory's not what it used to be. ^_^ You're probably right, though I distinctly recall both playing the demo missions as well as getting Resistance on release day. Oh wait, the demo missions weren't in the retail release, right? I think I may have heard that, and then downloaded the demo. Or something. I dunno.

Couple of things. Your video card will not consume system RAM. The game is what does that. That and any other programs. I had a 9800 Pro, also a 128MB model, and I don't recall having any significant issues with the game, and this was over a year ago (it's possible reverting to an older driver might help). Especially with the settings you've listed, the 9800 Pro should typically have no problem handling the game. Heck, even on my integrated Intel 915 I can run those settings without any problems. The question is, though, with regards to performance improvement over your old 9000, what settings were you running at on that card? About RAMBooster (and this is actually what my gut is telling me is the cause of your performance issues). I've never used it myself, so I don't know exactly how it works, but I would get rid of it when you play the game. 11% of 512 free is absolutely fine. If RAMbooster doesn't play nice with the game, and decides it's eating too much RAM (therefore swapping it out to pagefile) you'll more than likely see much more swappage than you should. This is all conjecture, but it's fairly educated guessing.

Crimson Tide! Thank you! Can't wait for the next vids.

Yup, Sanc's right. Badass basically means awesome, very cool. In particular, I'm a real sucker for big Hollywoodish camera moves (one shot in particular that sticks out in my head was the slow mo shot panning shot of the black op running to his objective after getting dropped off). They may be considered cheesy, but I love 'em. Choice of music helped immensely, too. So what was the music in the '05 trailer?

I did this recently in a quick test of some modified machine gunners. I made myself invincible while driving a humvee directly at a group of machinegunners, and I remained very much alive until the constant fire finally destroyed the humvee. At which point the deathcam kicked in. The "hit" eventhandler should work just fine as long as the vehicle hasn't been destroyed. You'll want to add the eventhandler to the player, though, and not the vehicle.

I was thinking The Rock initially while watching the FFUR2005 video, but there were bits that had me wondering if it was from another Zimmer or Greggson-Williams scores. As for the second vid, I was referring to XHan2000's second trailer, not Pierre's F14 vid. Since that one was obviously from the Top Gun score.

Pierre, the FFUR2005 vid was badass. Xhan, I'm loving your second trailer. Question though, because I've been racking my head for the past couple days. I recognize the music in both the above vids, but I can't place it. Where are they from? I'm thinking they both sound very Zimmer or Greggson-Williams, but I'd love to find out for sure where they're taken from. I'm practically losing sleep over this. Kenwort: OMG that snowboard video is hilarious.

Basic thing, but easy to forget: conditionals use two equals signs, not one. So if you wanted to fire the trigger when _NUnits was 9, then: _NUnits == 9 and not _NUnits = 9

Sorry to necropost, but I haven't really found anything much else of use on recoils. So I'm rather new to config editing, and I wasn't able to garner much from BIS's commented config regarding recoils, other than the meaning of the value triplets. The thing I'm trying to figure out, is how the additional multipliers in some recoil configs are applied: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">sniperSingle[]={0.05,"0.02*0.72","0.05*0.72",0.35,0,-0.006,0.07,0,-0.006,0.13,0,0}; I initially couldn't figure out why they didn't just stick in the result of the multipliers (ie, 0.0144 instead of 0.02*0.72), but I gradually realized that the multipliers seem to be somehow dynamically applied based on stance. Can anyone further expand on how exactly the multipliers are applied?

While we're at it, let's require the player to ensure his men are digging proper field latrines or there'll be a chance of dysentery. I mean really, weapon cleaning is one of those things that simply is unnecessary even in a simulator of this (hopeful) level of detail. It's something that should be done regularly and can therefore be automated. I mean, unless you can think of a good reason for the player not to perform such routine tasks (I don't suppose you actually expect a player to sit through an animation watching his/her avatar clean his weapon?), it becomes a completely moot point. Leave the routine and relatively menial (in the bigger picture) tasks to automation. Let the player worry about important things. Like KP duty.

Yeah, the last thing I wanted was ultra-accurate MGs, so I toyed around with the recoil values some and ended up with a somewhat workable solution: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">mgunBurst5[]={0.05,0.02,0.04, 0.05,0,-0.01}; That's what I've currently got. Basically muzzle rise is about standard, but it quickly dips to below horizontal. Well, at least that's how I understand it. I'm still not completely clear on the various values, some weapons seem to have more value sets than others. The AI seem to be dealing with this okay, in that they're not incredibly accurate, but at least the rounds are flying in a general cone around the target, as opposed to most of the rounds flying sky-high. This, in conjunction with a generous X dispersion, seems to be working rather nicely. I set up a little test, with a Ural driving towards two machine gunners (I added a "hit" eventhandler to ensure the driver survived the trip ) from about 400m away. It was kinda nifty to listen to the steadily increasing volume of fire as the Ural approached, culminating in a positively divine hail of lead flying at the truck. There was definitely a lot of wasted ammo, but it seemed to do the trick. Still needs more testing, though. Fun stuff.

Oops. Silly error while subclassing the tracers, so the burst ammo was inheriting all the engagement range values from Bullet7_6. So it works now, and sounds awesome, but I'll have to putz around with the recoil settings, because as is, the AI sends at least 4 of the 5 rounds per burst well high of their targets. Then again, this could work really nicely from an elevated position. The real problem now is how to make the burst mode only appear for AI units and not the player. Well okay, it's not a problem per se, but it would be nice if doable. Any ideas?

Wouldn't the useAction var be what you're looking for? <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE"> class TimeBomb : Default { scopeWeapon=0; scopeMagazine=0; magazineType="2 * 256"; ammo="TimeBomb"; displayName="$STR_DN_TIME_BOMB"; displayNameMagazine="$STR_MN_TIME_BOMB"; shortNameMagazine="$STR_SN_TIME_BOMB"; enableAttack=1; valueMagazine=5; count=1; initSpeed=0; maxLeadSpeed=0; useAction=1; useActionTitle="$STR_ACTION_PUTBOMB"; PLACE_CHARGE_SOUND }; Now granted, I don't have the first clue how exactly to get the action in there (I checked through stringtable.csv but couldn't find that particular action), but I reckon it's a starting point.

Well this is just feckin' nifty. The improvements are really great, and I absolutely love the bike dropoff stuff.

Argh. I can't get AI units to use the burst mode right now. I've got a working 5-round burst (minus a burst sound), subclassed the ammo types and tracer defs, and added a "modes" section to the M60 class. I reworked the engagement range values of Bullet7_6 to have a much shorter range (max 100m) than the added Bullet7_6Burst, and also gave the latter a lower cost (2 vs 4 for the former). And now my machine gunners refuse to engage at ranges greater than 100m. Giving an "Engage" order simply sees them running to within 100m of their target and spraying. Is there a trick for adding firing modes or ammo? I mean, it seems evident from the engagement ranges that the ammo definition seems to have issues, but it's pretty much copied ad verbatim from BulletBurst, with value changes only. In fact, I've managed to change the BulletSingle and BulletBurst engagement range values so that my guys no longer fire ammo-wasting bursts from their M-16s at 200m. So I'm at a bit of a loss. Oh, on a semi-related note, what the heck are the various "ff" values (ffcount=1, etc)? Here are the ammo values I used: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">  class Bullet7_6 : BulletSingle  {    airLock=1;    hit=8;    indirectHit=2;    indirectHitRange=0.100000; minRange=1; minRangeProbab=0.900000;    midRange=70;    midRangeProbab=0.500000;    maxRange=100;    maxRangeProbab=0.050000;    cost=4;    cartridge="FxCartridgeHeavy";  }; //LTK Addition: Bullet7_6Burst - engagement range > 200?  class Bullet7_6Burst : Bullet7_6  { minRange=70; minRangeProbab=0.25; midRange=150; midRangeProbab=0.5; maxRange=400; maxRangeProbab=0.08; visibleFire=25; audibleFire=25; visibleFireTime=5; cost=2;  }; //LTK End Addition And the modes section I added to class M60: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">//LTK Addition    modes[] = {Auto, Burst};    class Auto    { displayName="M-240G Auto";    ammo="Bullet7_6W"; multiplier=1; burst=1; ffCount=6; aiRateOfFire=0.1; aiRateOfFireDistance=1000; reloadTime=0.08; sound[]={"\AKD_Weapons\sound\M240_Fire.wss",1.000000,1}; soundContinuous=false; recoil="mgunburst3"; autoFire=true; dispersion=0.0007; useAction = false; useActionTitle = ""; }; class Burst { displayName="M-240G Burst"; ammo="Bullet7_6BurstW"; multiplier=1; burst=5; ffCount=6; sound[]={"\LTK_Sounds\M240_Burst.wss",1.000000,1}; soundContinuous=false; reloadTime=0.1; aiRateOfFire=5; aiRateOfFireDistance=1000; recoil="mgunburst3"; autoFire=false; dispersion=0.0007; useAction = false; useActionTitle = ""; }; //LTK End Addition If there's a glaring mistake I've made in there, please let me know. edit: 5-round burst now has associated burstfire sound (5-minute jobbie repeating the M240 fire sound)

Okay, so I've been putzing around with the config, and made some odd discoveries (apologies to all if this is old hat, but I'm rather new to the config side of things). First, the really odd values for the two base bullet classes (none were changed from the default BIS values): <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">This is for bulletsingle minRange=10;minRangeProbab=0.10; midRange=50;midRangeProbab=0.38; maxRange=200;maxRangeProbab=0.04; And this is bulletburst minRange=0.5;minRangeProbab=0.25; midRange=70;midRangeProbab=0.50; maxRange=250;maxRangeProbab=0.08; Now I dunno about you, but that doesn't make much sense. I think I see the rationale behind it, but it's kinda going about it the wrong way. I can understand the range probability for bursts being higher at min and med ranges, but at max range? Also the range values themselves are completely off, especially when you consider that the max ranges are higher than for single shot. I foresee a whole lot of tweaking in my immediate future, instead of real work. For MG fire, what would you think about a "burst" mode, so to speak. Maybe a 5-7 round burst, with airateoffire reduced, so they treat the MG like they should. Have the burst engagement range longer than single, so that when their targets close, they switch to full on rock and roll. I dunno, some random musings that I reckon warrant further testing. Off to play with the config some more.

As a result of your little heads up, I decided to play around a little with the aiDispersionCoef values in both MachineGun7_6 and MachineGun7_6Manual. Okay, so maybe "a bit" is a bit of an understatement. I bumped up the X value from 6.5 to 50, while dropping the airateoffire back down to 0.1. Now I've got me some machine gunners. They do tend to chew through ammo at an alarming rate, since they don't prescribe to the "die motherfucker die, die motherfucker die" burst control methodology, but it certainly does make the battlefield come alive. At 200m from an elevated firing position, two M240's can decimate an infantry squad's flank, but they're not so accurate that they'll do the same from a level position, or firing at a squad's front. Now if only proper suppression was built in. My testing did uncover one oddity, though, with riflemen, though I'm not sure if this is due to changes you made, or are part of ECP. At the moment, from the elevated position, the riflemen that I positioned there are firing bursts, instead of single shots. Where would this behavior be defined? edit: Ah, found it. Crud, I'll have to redefine every single weapon's airateoffiredistance. edit2: Well that didn't work worth a damn. Changed the airateoffiredistance to 75 from 250, and the riflemen were still firing bursts at 200m. :???: Oh, and I'm finding it absolutely hilarious to watch two machine gunners pour a hail of lead around a lone soldier at 200m. They chew through that ammo right quick, though. Might consider upping the rof to 0.2 or 0.25. Oh, and akd, do let me know if you consider all this hijacking your thread. I was figuring it may be of interest, but it may also be approaching the realm of thread jacking.

If anyone's interested, I made a very minor change to my own copy of this config, halving the airateoffire value of class Machine_Gun7_6 from 0.5 to 0.25, since I was a little annoyed at the machine gunners using their weapons like rifles, even at <100m. Now instead of "pop.. pop.. pop" I get "poppoppoppoppop." I initially tried 0.1, but they burned through ammo entirely too quickly (with 0.1 it really did sound like machine gun fire at ~100m: "ppppppppop"). edit: Whoa. Unwanted side effect. I hadn't realized how accurate the AI are with machine guns. A couple of machine guns can positively rape an entire squad of assault rifles. I think I'll be setting the airateoffire back to its original value.

@Baz: If you can name one game (other than the original Hidden and Dangerous) that has perfectly lined up fixed crosshairs in a third person view, let alone one with dynamic, non-centered crosshairs (that are part of the GUI overlay, as opposed to being a physical object), I'll eat my shorts and send you a video of the act. Fact is, crosshairs in a third person view are never going to be 100% accurate simply because of the distance and angle between eyepoint and muzzle. The only way to have a 100% accurate crosshair is to go the way of the original Hidden and Dangerous and have a physical crosshair that positions itself in the world based on a raycast from the muzzle. Which has its own set of problems in and of itself. Besides. Think of the crosshair as an overly-accurate approximation of aiming over the sights (as opposed to through them). Yes, I said overly-accurate.

Depends on the situation. On foot I typically use 1PV, but I switch to 3PV every so often for fun, but primarily during downtime (I altered the position of the camera to be somewhat over-the-shoulder, for aesthetics). Ground vehicles, it'll typically depend on the vehicle. Some vehicles are almost impossible to see out of reliably (windows not transparent enough, poor field of view) so I'll use 3PV for those, though I prefer 1PV for immersion. Flying, again depends. Sightseeing I like 3PV, and I also use it for aircraft with crap visibility (the BIS V-80 comes to mind). Otherwise, 1PV, again for immersion.

Does slaving over every bit of news prior to release count as playing? Played the demo to death from the day it was released, then picked the full game up on release day, played the Resistance demo to death on release, and then picked up Resistance on release day. Had a hiatus from the game of over a year, then recently (in the last month or so) reinstalled it. And am still loving it. To this day, over 4 years after initial release, it still rocks my world. I still find the terrain almost unmatched by any other game out there (Far Cry would probably be the one to beat it, at least graphically, but even that game doesn't allow a 5km view distance ). I remember when I first got Resistance and was introduced to the marvels of open terrain that actually provided enough dips and rises to at least partially hide the movement foot soldiers when I literally ran into a squad of patrolling Russians as they strolled out of a small depression in the terrain. Even the much ballyhooed Soldner and Joint Ops couldn't hold a candle to the then 3 year old game. BIS just rocks big time.

Am I the only person who actually likes the yellowish, sun-baked look of the grass in the original Malden? That said, this pack looks fantastic. Ace transitions, too. I'll be sticking around for the 1024 version, though. At least until I get some money and can afford to stick an extra gig of RAM in my machine.

Agreed. On a recent run-through of "Ammo Low" in the Resistance campaign, I personally took out the BMP in the initial convoy, along with most of the escorting troops, and then personally took out the armor enroute to respond. Made off with all possible weapons and ammo. Zero friendly casualties. My resultant score? -1000. And two red X's. o_O So yeah, don't worry too much about the campaign score.

Yay! Based on your descriptions in the DMA thread, this looks to be a nifty set of improvements.