Snake Man

There is no such thing. You can do a sign model, then use set object texture thingy... but then each and every model is effected in the whole terrain, not really what you want to do here. So no, there is no other way than to make 60 signs with the name (enter town) and the "overruled" name (exit town).

What are you babbling about?

Thanks for posting the config, looks good.

[/url]PMC Editing Wiki: Binarize tutorial will help you on the config.cpp error from binarize, how to find out what the error is. Never stop using binarize (tick on BinPBO) if that causes errors, you should rather stop making the addon if there is error and you think not binarizing is the solution.

Aussie, could you please show us the config.cpp on the airport parts and give us a rough overview what is required for create 2 or more airports? Would be great :)

Yes you are correct, if the model's first LOD is 100 or less points with one section. I don't know. I don't know. Most of the BIS material is with incremental numbering, so that's what I'm using. In the hundreds of models BIS has made, only few are the exceptions which have irregular numbers, for example their BMP has them. Well my friend... if you place 30,000 point object in rahmadi on mission editor, it runs smooth, no problems. But place few of them, place 10 of them, place other units, place 500 units on the background, place whole complete terrain with 1 million objects, scripts, stuff, AI, uuh aah... and guess what, yes a stutter, a lag, a FPS drop.That's what you're getting if you're cutting corners. I know many "respected" addon groups do it, but there is no reason for your to sink to their level. Just do the low res LOD's and you can rest assured that your model/addon performs properly and doesn't cause any slowdowns, also you can feel good about yourself that you've done the addon "right" instead cutting corners. Oh btw, I just realized I haven't done complete "how to make low res LODs" tutorial, damn, sorry about that, I'll put that on my TODO list now.

Previous post to this topic was on June 30th 2008, so we'll see if moderator chops our heads off :) Yes, Vietnam: The Experience is most definitely being worked on. If you see my name popping up in these forum posts/user lists, you can rest assured that PMC projects are being worked on.

Generally BIS models start from 1.0 and continue incrementally 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 etc you get the picture. Some models have those weird jumps on the numbers. You're doing good if you use the standard 1.0, 2.0 etc method Because it would be wrong in so many ways.For starters: Your addon would cause framerate loss (assuming its normal/high res model), it wouldn't be standard addon, it would only be good for compat whore photography topic, you would be lame as mod maker. They gradually reduce the points/faces used in the model. 1.0 lod uses the most resources from your computer, the last lod uses the less resources. Engine swaps these LODs according how much under stress it is.LODs are the reason ArmA runs smooth. If there would be no LODs in any models, your ArmA would be a slideshow, most likely just CTD'in all the time. Well I think you need to visit PMC Editing Wiki: Section fixing and if you have further questions, feel free to ask. While you're at it, register to PMC Tactical forums and I'll answer ALL your questions there with more thorough than in there (I shy!).

Yeah this is O2 modeling question, so wrong area. Name your resolution LODs in order, like 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 etc. Drop each lower res LOD 50% points like Sgt.Ace/Ace said. Do not forget to set last LOD with less than 100 points and with only 1 section.

Yeah my bad, sorry. Was thinking about the "addon" itself, not namespace, sigh.

Synide's guide doesn't instruct anything like this, why would you need to make ca\ dir into your namespace?

Well I'm absolutely just guessing here, I have no hard knowledge so please take it as an just an idea :) The model.cfg class cfgModels should start like this: class CfgModels { class Default { sections[] = {""}; sectionsInherit = ""; }; I'm guessing this is missing from some of the new model.cfg files you created?

Just a stab in the dark, but missing class default in the model.cfg cfgmodels part? Could you show us the model.cfg (if you know which one is causing it)?

I would be interested of trying your sound mod, but before I start to download, I'd like to know what is the .EXE file on the link. Self extracting rar or executable installer?

Okay but the config worked OK, no errors when loading it up? (never mind the crash). If so, don't you find the new config much more nicer? there was a lot of stuff which was not necessary.

Just for the heck of it, try this config.cpp: #define ReadAndWrite 0 #define ReadAndCreate 1 #define ReadOnly 2 #define ReadOnlyVerified 3 class CfgPatches { class manan { units[] = {}; worlds[] = { "manan" }; requiredVersion = 1.14; }; }; class CfgWorldList { class manan {}; }; class DefaultLighting; class DefaultLighting_CA : DefaultLighting {}; class CfgWorlds { class Sara; class manan : Sara { description = "manan"; worldName = "\manan\manan.wrp"; }; }; Let me know how it works?

Thank you Planck :)

So its 5.1km x 5.1km terrain then. Got it. Perhaps you should update first post to let users know what size of terrain it is (99% of people don't understand grid/cell sizes).

Never ever use CA namespace, its BIS namespace so leave it be. Use your own.

You "cant" port soldier models. Well I guess you can do anything you set your mind to it, but while some people bash OFP ports (vehicles, terrains, objects, weapons), the soldiers would be indeed absolutely waste of time for anyone to port (and who in their right mind would do it, all the weights for the new animations etc). No. Its better to take BIS sample model, modify the model and retexture it. That way you can make nice Delta operatives in no time and no effort really (compared to OFP port).

OFP or ArmA wont support anything else than power of two sizes, so you cant have 5x4km terrain. What grid and cell size do you use?

I wish you good luck in your endeavors if you think using executable installer for OFP/ArmA addon is more streamlined way than unpacking a RAR. No. I use NSIS installers for all PMC Theaters on Falcon 4 for example. F4 theaters are completely different thing than OFP/ArmA addons, lets not get sidetracked here, we are talking about NSIS + pbo's. Well so far all VTE downloads which exceed one thousand (if we combine every release from OFP and ArmA, I might be even bold as to say tens of thousands) and I haven't had much problems yet. Yes we did the install help page when few people asked instructions, but considering the amount of downloads, we have had "no" questions how to unpack & install the mod. I have no idea what you're talking about. Okay... now you're just being childish. That is again... completely and utterly different thing.Sigh.

AGS industrial addon had "hangar.p3d" file in it, it caused errors because ArmA found same filename in some other dir of the BIS default addons. I had to rename it to "AGS_hangar.p3d" to fix it. Guys guys... you need to start use addon tags, call it whatever you want, but something that is absolutely unique to your addon. You cannot have stuff like "flower.p3d" or "rock.p3d" in your addon dirs.

Well they aren't so professional if they use EXE installer, very simple. Anyone with half a brain knows that you don't use those, I mean look what happened to the ASE initiative by BIS (maybe many of you don't even know what that is).

OFP and ArmA (and ArmA 2 soon) addons/mods are NOT supposed to be installed with executable installers. Period.