Macser_old

I understood what you were saying.I was also referring to editing an existing file.Rather than generating a new one. :) I don't know to be honest.But I imagine the resulting file would look very similar to a BVH(BioVisionHierarchy). A file type commonly used for motion capture.Not something I'd like to edit manually past the actual joint hierarchy in the header section.Here's an example: The numbers listed under the MOTION keyword are the motion data. And what I pasted is only a fraction of that data. Assuming it was possible to edit,without introducing errors,it would be a horrible process. I'm open to correction on anything I just posted.But I don't think I'm very far off track.

I don't like to be the bearer of bad tidings but......... Even if you could.What would you do?You'd still be looking at a sea of text. None of which is likely to make any sense to the majority of the people here. Probably lots of references to selections and rotational data. Trying to edit it to achieve anything would likely be a nightmare.Unfortunately no-one has the time or interest to write something more "interactive" than OFPanim. Preferably,for something like Blender.So we're stuck with what we have . :(

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?72100-CWC-Red-Hammer-amp-Resistance-Coop If you're referring to these,the mediafire links still seem to be active.

We'll have to disagree on one point at least.I don't think most people know a lot about online security policy.Their interest may be roused were it something more obvious.Such as the weapon scenario you mention.Or the shutting down of a site like Facebook.Actually,I think shutting down Facebook would probably be the internet equivalent of a cataclysm. :D Barring that,I think most people simply aren't interested.And the ones who are,find the entire subject confusing.Not surprising,considering the conflicting information flying around.Of course that's just my take on it.I can't claim to have studied it to any great degree.

That could be more to do with apathy and compliance.Lack of resistance to certain legislation,isn't necessarily an indicator of informed choice.

That's some quality work Sapper. :) I'm sure it looks even better in motion.

Thanks Sanc.Much appreciated.For the kind words and extra link.Although mediafire works fine for me too. Could be a matter of location I suppose. :)

As far as I know,weapons can't be animated or have hidden selections. But vehicles should be just fine.Although I haven't tried them out with this process yet.

Hey ST, It is.And if it was more universally stable,it could be very beneficial.Having said that,I don't know how common the bug actually is.Whether it's Win7 related Or something in the video card drivers that's causing it. As an example,here's a small test with Sanc's WW4 models.The swapped areas in this case were just the uniforms.That's just one model.I've tried with ten images so far.

Although this is an old thread.I just wanted to confirm that Vektor's method does work with multiple images. To test,I created a model with hiddenselections that define the area to be "texture swapped".And a set of images to be used. It also needs a dialog defined in a Resource.cpp.Which shouldn't be as off-putting as it sounds.Mod folders are a good idea anyway.In my opinion.But it could be put into an existing Resource.cpp,as it's adding rather than changing. Within this dialog the images are defined,in the "ControlsBackground" entry. Resource.Cpp: This dialog is then called via script ApplyTex.sqs(Or whatever you want to call it): To get this going in the editor I created a logic to run the script. This was added to the Config.cpp of the unit/model that was being tested. It's part of the CfgVehicles class. Logic: An Init Eventhandler was added to the test unit's config entry. Test unit config entry: So.With that done you go into the editor and put down the texture swapping logic,then start placing your units.If all goes well,there's a tiny pause,and your units are placed with the appropriate textures. And of course the textures are as sharp and clear as they should be.The main point of all that waffle, is a smaller download in model terms.As the process uses only one model.Instead of the usual method of one model per texture. There is a problem however(Always a downside,I know).5 or 6 people have had a try of this,without issue.But two have reported the exact same graphical bug.After loading completes,only some of the models are textured,but blurry.On some occasions the textures will be clear,but as soon as the player looks away and back the textures become blurred.They have no hardware commonality.Both are running Win7. The above is simply my approach.Perhaps it can be refined.Maybe someone out there has seen the bug before and could offer solutions.Anyway.I just thought I'd post my findings. :)

:D Sounds interesting. Although it would certainly be useful for sci-fi applications,it'd be nice to have the mass affect anything the geometry contacts.Regardless of type. Even a large animal,once it's based on the man class,can be pushed around with ease.I know the engine wasn't created specifically for simulating animals, but you shouldn't really be able to push a human character about like that either.It's not a "feature",it's something fundamental.Perhaps an unreported bug? Anyway,even a workaround would be useful at this point.Or some ideas. :)

Ok.This is an unusual one,in that no-one seems to have brought the subject up before.Not that I can find at least. Some of you may have noticed that a man class model(any soldier)can push another model of the same type around like a cardboard box.A bug perhaps? It's bothered me over the years,but I never got around to studying it. Increasing the mass(30,000)has a definite effect,in relation to vehicles.By that I mean you can increase the model's mass to a point where it will stop an Abrams. Or cripple a jeep on impact.But shuffle up to the unit with a model of the same type (any soldier),and you can still push it around like a cardboard box. Anybody out there ever found a workaround for this illogical behaviour?Is there a magical mystery setting,to enable mass when in contact with another man class model? :)

No,it's definitely not empty Bielow. Sanc mentioned something about this to me recently.Imageshack may be the source of the problem.Apparently the images don't show for some people,depending on location. Lovely work btw Prof.Something very different.I wish you luck with the scripting too. I know how tricky it is to do anything out of the ordinary. :)

Hello, ETPC,you didn't mention the dirt road.Are you taking the road to the right when you're ordered to?I think if you ignore it and continue on,you'll be blasted before you get near Morton. If you take the dirt road,you'll be heading up a small incline to an old farmhouse,with a heavy forest to your left.After a few seconds you'll hear your convoy coming under fire. When you get the opportunity,take this road.If only to provide an alternative approach. I won't say anymore,as I don't want to spoil it. :)

The script is being called by something.In order to eliminate the mission folder and it's contents,it might need a fresh pair of eyes.If you want,I'll take a look at it.It can't hurt.Even a look at the sqm might be enough.

Move the scripts out of the effects folder,you don't need it.Just leave them in the mission folder. Edit the Mission.sqm and find/replace any occurrence of "effects/scriptname.sqs".So that they read as "scriptname.sqs".You'll need to change the path in "destroyed.sqs" as "Bsmoke.sqs" is referred to in there.PBO and run in game. Give it a try. :)

The simplest way,I suppose,would be to name your "replacement" files the same as the originals.Making sure to backup,or rename the originals first of course. Although you'll still need to do some conversions from pac and paa to/from your preferred format.There's various tools for that available on ofpr.info. A uv template will help to make sure your editing stays tidy.Fab's P3dUnwrap is a quick way to get a per texture uv template. Simply open the P3d in question and Export the map that relates to whatever texture you're editing. Edit: You'll need to do some packing/unpacking too. :)

I think at this stage,what you see is what you get.Unless the project in question is ongoing. But I doubt there's anything to stop you modifying entries in the config. And substituting addons/values for something more to your liking. :)

Clean,efficient and good looking work STGN. ;) Anything constructive to say?

I'm using 1.99 with my small selection of mods,and I've had no problems so far.FFur SLX 2007,Wh40k mod,WW4 to name a few. :)

Cute.But I don't understand why that would make you feel old. :) It's simply a child assuming it can interact with any image based on playing with an Ipad. Part of an empirical learning process.

If you've got Sanc's WW4 mod,there's some hesco bastion objects available in the editor.Might make a good basis for an outpost.

Hello Nahkuri, I don't see anything there,I would consider unusual or different to 1.96. For the mission based around Regina you are expected to retreat to your starting position. And the Montignac mission does occasionally take a different turn.

DKM rah66 v1.12

I don't know much about the setup,but I assume it's to do with the bug potential. While it may have dealt with some issues,it seems to have introduced some of it's own. So if you're running a 1.96 server,and everybody's happy,then why risk ruining it?If there was some new content,or "must have"(fully functioning)commands, then it might be worth it.