stilton

Wow thanks.. i had considered considering using setDir but didn't know of a good way i could force the unit forward, thanks for telling me about... playActionNow "WalkF" and since all my coding is 'hacky', this should fit right in :D

Ok i'm not sure if this is a silly question.. ..But here goes. You can use exitWith{} to exit the scope of loops, which i understand... You can use terminate to forcibly terminate a 'child script' before it completes, using its' handle as an argument... But am i correct in thinking though that when a script successfully runs to its end, its done, and the _handle would return true at this point... and it'll have minimal impact on performance simply having the _handle variable floating about in memory... Still, if the _handle returns true... that means it's still sort of 'held in memory' somewhere... So i'm a little concerned after the 500th bad guy has been eliminated i have all these 'handles' floating about in the ether. i was simply going to put if (true) exitWith{}; at the end of my script but the biki sort-of warns against doing that non-specifically.

ah cheers for your help mate, although you really shouldn't have gone to any trouble :D part of me is too lazy to go about 'redesigning' simply because it works now.. its not flawless but it works.. and part of me is scared to start 'redesigning' and breaking it all to shit :D Although, clearly i see what you're saying about putting the group-consolidation into a single script that checks all groups... The reasoning i have a this script running on every unit is because originally it was just a small script that added an addaction to the corpse, allowing you to : 'checkForIntel.sqf' which adds markers to the map depicting where 'possible cache locations' are... depending on, if he is carrying intel (just a random number check) and then it does another random to see the 'strength' of the intel... and then the script is done... But as you can see, slowly but surely ive 'tacked on' this group consolidation idea and yeah, its grown into the monster it is... ...Silly way to implement it, thanks for the suggestion/advice its a much better idea to do it once on a 'global' script checking all east groups! :D Actually... re-reading, thanks for the advice and the 99% of a script that actually does it too ;)

Ok thanks for the information, i appreciate i'm drifting into asking kind of 'theory' questions opposed to actual specific examples here... Mainly because whilst i've been scripting using the init boxes since.. a while (ofp / years probably lol), it's only the last few days/week i've gone ahead and installed the dedi server and really tried to script some pretty complicated stuff (for me personally, at least) and started tackling things like locality issues, last time i got this far into making a mission, i switched from the editor to dedi.. everything was fine, then when i got a few people in to help me test it, it all went to shit because of the locality issues... :D I'm reluctant to put up the code because it's probably quite amateur-hour looking to some of the more experienced scripters ... but in short i was trying my hand at remaking a sort of tailored version of the insurgency/coop mission from arma, so i had this script running on pretty much every enemy spawned... _unit = _this select 0; _isGuard = _this select 1; _debug = cacheDebug; _leader = leader _unit; _thisGrp = group _unit; //_unitName = str _unit; _unitName = name _unit; _grpDebugMarker = []; sleep 2; if (_debug) then { //setPlayable _unit; //addSwitchableUnit _unit; //_knownTargetCount = _unit //_unitName = str _unit; _grpDebugMarker = createMarker [_unitName, (position _unit)]; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerShape "ICON"; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerType "mil_dot"; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerColor "ColorPink"; //_grpDebugMarker setMarkerText _unitName; if ((_leader) == (leader _thisGrp)) then { _grpDebugMarker setMarkerType "hd_warning"; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerText _unitName; }else{ _grpDebugMarker setMarkerType "hd_dot"; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerText "";}; }; // This is a spawned enemy. westPlayers is a global array with all playable West group in it. if (isServer) then { //_FriendlyTargets = {side _x == west} count allUnits; while {alive _unit} do { // whilst this dude is alive _ready = unitReady _unit; _grpSize = count units _thisGrp; _leader = leader _unit ; _thisGrp = group _unit; _thisPos = position _unit; _searchRad = 2500; _distToFriendly = 3000; _joiningDistance = 225; _randomTarget = []; _randomTarget = westPlayers call BIS_fnc_selectRandom; if ((_leader) == (leader _thisGrp)) then { _thisGrp setCombatMode "RED"; if (!_isGuard) then { _unit setBehaviour "AWARE"; _unit setSpeedMode "FULL"; }; if (count units _thisGrp < 4) then { _nearestunits = nearestObjects [_thisPos,["Man"],_searchRad]; // find nearest friendlies _nearestfriendlies = []; // put into this array below if (east countSide _nearestunits > 0) then{ { _nearUnit = _x; if(side _nearUnit == east && ((group _nearUnit) != _thisGrp)) then {_nearestfriendlies = _nearestfriendlies + [_nearUnit]}; } forEach _nearestunits; }; if (count _nearestfriendlies > 0) then { _closestfriendly = (_nearestfriendlies select 0); _distToFriendly = (position _closestfriendly) distance _thisPos; if (_distToFriendly < _joiningDistance) then { _oldGroup = (group _unit); { [_x] joinSilent (group _closestfriendly) } forEach units _oldGroup; _leader = leader _unit; _thisGrp = group _unit; }; }; }; sleep 5; if (_ready) then { _wp0 = _thisGrp addWaypoint [ position _randomTarget, 200 ]; if (_isGuard) then { _wp0 setWaypointSpeed "LIMITED"; }else{ _wp0 setWaypointSpeed "FULL"; }; if (_isGuard) then { _wp0 setWaypointFormation "COLUMN"; }else{ _wp0 setWaypointFormation "LINE"; }; //_wp0 setWaypointCombatMode "RED"; }; }; // Incase the leader joined this person, they might not be the leader anymore, or in the same group, etc. _leader = leader _unit; _thisGrp = group _unit; // _unit globalChat "Off to get some guys"; if (_debug) then { _grpDebugMarker setMarkerPos _thisPos; if ((_leader == leader _thisGrp)) then { _grpDebugMarker setMarkerType "hd_warning"; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerText _unitName; }else{ _grpDebugMarker setMarkerType "hd_dot"; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerText "";}; }; // Update debug marker after all is said and done [b]if ((_leader) == (leader _thisGrp)) then { _grpDebugMarker setMarkerType "hd_warning"; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerText _unitName; }else{ _grpDebugMarker setMarkerType "hd_dot"; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerText "";}; [/b] sleep 5; }; }; // This should be applied on all clients waitUntil{!alive _unit}; if (_debug) then { _grpDebugMarker setMarkerType "loc_Cross"; }; checked = false; //hint "He died!"; _checkForIntelAction = _unit addAction ["Check for Intel", "checkForIntel.sqf",[westPlayers],8,true,true,"","true" ]; // allow time to check for intel then delete sleep 240; if (_debug) then { deleteMarker _grpDebugMarker }; deleteVehicle _unit; //if (true) exitWith{}; One thing i'm a bit miffed about is The debug markers apply to the all enemies as 'squad leaders' with the 'warning' marker as opposed to the 'dots' -- it must be a logic error on my side, but i cant work out where ive gone wrong there... since i assumed the check you can see ive put in multiple places, if group leader == leader should, as far as i was reading it.. mean its only true if the unit is the group leader... But they all have the 'squad leader' marker. I know that code is a clusterfuck so i've bolded the bit i'm talking about, not sure if it will work inside code tags, so just incase... if ((_leader) == (leader _thisGrp)) then { _grpDebugMarker setMarkerType "hd_warning"; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerText _unitName; }else{ _grpDebugMarker setMarkerType "hd_dot"; _grpDebugMarker setMarkerText "";}; What i can't work out is why this isn't really taking effect... The part where it changes the marker to a cross when they die works perfectly, but i'm missing something... :D Thanks for your information/help thus far anyway!

No 'stats' collected about memory consumed or anything, truthfully it was more of a (terrible) guesstimation :) that came with having spawned 100 or so AI with the attached script and then having the game feel more 'sluggish' ... Which is probably more to do with the 100 AI being ordered around in another script than the one simple script im fussing over now. :) @kk: that's another misunderstanding i've made lol, oops.. :) [ guess i didnt read the waitUntil scriptDone biki page carefully enough and took some stuff for granted there, ive hardly use 1% of all BI's functions :) ] Still, since i'm still wondering... Maybe i wasn't clear enough? Once a script attached to a unit, in it's init has run through to 'completion', and the unit is killed.. and the unit is deleted (deleteVehicle) do i need to do anything to 'clean' the script up? I don't think so, as i understand it, once the script has finished running through, it's done and i dont need to worry about it; but im asking for the sake of my own sanity/knowledge :) To ask a further possibly crazy question... and this has no actual benefit to me, other than 'knowledge' If i have a script started from an unit's initialization line... and the unit is deleted, by that very script itself... Well this is where i start to go a bit cross-eyed, obviously the script isn't a 'child' of that object in terms of the game engine.. because otherwise deleting the unit / its own parent would delete the script (scriptception?) So i'm left wondering is that what the 'handle' is actually for, and again, do i need to worry about deleting the 'handles' independantly of the units? Or am i worrying about nothing and is that what you were trying to illustrate by asking me to see how many weeks it would take to crash my pc by spawning infinite handles? :)

Just wondering if the pip [and sling loading i guess] is still broken with SLI enabled [like it has been for over a year now] thereby rendering the Heli's DLC not really worth it... ..Considering the heli's seem broken from a passenger standpoint, but that's free.... [- whats with the horrible avalanche sound when you ride in back of the black huron? ] ..Not going to buy it though if the features are unusable and the piloting interior is broken... I'll assume yes though, unless someone tells otherwise. :) Why would you implement it broken when you can clearly make it work BIS :(

really? And you haven't noticed any flickering with any of the mirrors ingame? Specifically for example, any armed variants of the Hunter / Strider / etc... ...And you're quite certain you actually have crossfire enabled and it's working? As in, you notice a performance increase when you enable it ingame and it's definately using both cards? -- Because it's a bit of a stretch to imagine the 150 people on this issue tracker have SLI issues and you're the first person in a year to mention it 'working fine' [people claiming to have it 'working fine' so far suggested are usually Single-frame-rendering enabled, thus effectively using only one card. [not enabled properly] ] http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=436

... still an issue.

Thanks for failing to read. This is not an nvidia specific problem. Oh no, i'm on his ignore list. [the guy who cant read anyway] Thanks for the bump.

More love to this issue please before whoring out more pip-featuring DLC would be awesome... ...What really worries is there is a suggestion to use the PIP feature for rendering zoomed-in scopes. I just hope this never gets considered, as currently the pip feature is not working for SLI users and the level of 'support' is a joke. Come on guys, its obviously not an impossible issue to fix... Some of them work. Jesus just hotfix / patch the rest of the mirrors to use the same technique as the hunter unarmed please. Yes, it will take you time... But its broken and it needs fixed.

I have one, and i get 'nice' performance on say.. King of the hill. But then i don't really have any overlays running to tell me my 'exact' fps.. My current bottleneck is my graphics cards, also -- i haven't played in a few weeks. It runs nice but its a broken game and i'd rather not play a 3rd person shooter.

It's specific to certain vehicles in the game... You should stop messing with your PC, its the game / BIS, not your PC. ..Check out the hummingbird's mirrors or the unarmed hunter, those work fine (without flickering) Because of this, we can say see evidence that they are working ingame currently, it's just 99% of the vehicles mirrors have been implemented differently, resulting in the seizure inducing effect... ..Personally i get it on the editor screen too, there's a small strip on which the new/load/save/preview button is located, flickers too... Don't expect a fix anytime soon, they confirmed recently they were looking into it and fixing it... But i'll believe that when i see it. It's been reported since back in alpha i think [over a year now] -- but i guess none of the PCs at Bohemia's studio have SLI, so it's just been ignored. http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=436 Every few months i come back to check to see if the medley of problems that make this game laughably frustrating are fixed, every few -- nothing... Guess the time that could've been spent remodelling/texturing the mirrors was better spent making the highly-requested and ever-useful tactical go-kart.

That's not a solution... That thread should be removed. It's 'solution' is telling people to disable one of their SLI graphics cards (reducing your fps by half) or disabling the 2nd GPU on their Multi-Gpu cards... (reducing your fps by half) It's like saying, oh you have a sound bug? Just disable the sound.

I see... Apologies. Learn something everyday. [cheers for that :D ]

Enemy - Man - 100m - to the - Right But is he really though? You mean hes on the right of relative direction the squad has been traveling in, correct? So he's might not be on my right if say, im looking off to the flank of the formation... Also, Where on the right exactly... ? Probably the last thing BIS want is the suggestion of overhauling something as integral as the radio considering it seems tied into targetting... But this is purely about the voice-chat coming back from the AI. Is there any chance BIS will refine the radio chatter so when AI call targets they give more useful information? All it's really missing currently is a compass bearing... I think But also, since i'm on the subject -- Why do troops call out friendlies, on first meeting them, as 'enemy contact' ? I'm pretty sure it's because its night/foggy and on first meeting them they're 'unidentified' to the current group.. But still, it doesnt seem right that they should be called out as 'enemy' contacts? I'm not in the military... So i'm just sayin :)

The issue is clearly caused by specific mirrors... ..Mirrors / Pip TV's works on certain vehicles 100% fine... [unarmed jeeps like the hunter, the hummingbird's mirrors, and the blackfoot from pilot seat looking at the gun-cam] Apparently the issue has been identified or you're talking to nvidia or something? -- Even though, as already established by the fact it works fine on some vehicles, its clearly not something that all vehicles have problems with so its not a driver issue... Its a game issue. I'm practically begging you to take the existing rendering technique / shader / whatever and apply that correctly to the rest of the mirrors? There is no noticable side-effects from the way the other mirrors are implemented so i don't know why this has taken over a year to fix? [ http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=436 - Submitted 2013-03-05 ] Apparently we're not crying loud enough to get noticed... ...This forces me to play in 3rd person whenever i'm in a vehicle. I don't want to.. I have to, because if i don't the flickering starts to make me feel sick. [ I dare imagine what someone who has epilepsy would get from it, because it is basically a strobing effect, every other frame being rendered black... Might not be so bad on night missions but you are gonna seizure good on a daytime mission :) ] As someone who goes apeshit about the whole '3rd person breaking immersion / realism...' - It's sad, it means i never drive in first person.. Which should be easily possible with the HMG/GMG hunters... But isnt.. Because of the 5 flickering mirrors and one flickering TV taking up about as much screen as the front windows. Please fix this before Arma 4 / 2015. [ If any mod could please change 'an' to 'a' in the title i would appreciate it :D , its minor but the grammatical error is already driving me insane ]**done**

Oh whats this 2 strangers finding a reasonable compromise on the internet. *world explodes* Also vegeta... I'd say i'm not really qualified to 'argue' with you about how virtual 3d surround works. I just tried it and decided almost immediately it wasn't 'as good' as 'the real thing' Everything i've said is really 'how i've personally (my brain) has interpreted virtual 5.1, when i experienced it years ago' I'm not a neuroscientist.. Or an ear-doctor :D My brain and memories are slowly dying through neglect and so it could've been hawesome and i'm just mis-remembering... ...Also, the technology could've advanced incredibly over the last.. 15 years? But my opinion comes from: *In my personal experience, My brain is able to differentiate between multiple positional sound sources per ear... (i.e the different speakers, per ear.) Whereas... with 'virtual' surround sound.. You have one, per ear. Even with software 'trickery' you're still compressing down all the sources into one per ear, you can add auditorial 'cues' maybe? to signify to the listening that its coming from behind (the only thing i can think of that would make any sense is lowered volume, but again, i'm just 'a guy' i'm not a sound engineer or educated to the level one would hope someone developing this technology would be ). I'm not saying it doesn't work, and if i did say that... I'm not trying to say it's not 'better than stereo' ...It could be. But i still don't see how its doing anything other than 'faking' it. I know that has a negative connotation, but it's not implied here, it's just the most suitable description. You're also 'bottlenecking' it here, at the source where people end up spending the money... Again, you could say 'but you only have 2 ears' -- and i'd reply with... Yes but i'm not a neroscientist or an ear doctor.. and see * And we're going around :D Also to the OP :D I apologise for totally derailing your thread

Tiresome indeed, but I'm opinionated - it's from experience, I'm not here to hurt anyones feelings or spread misinformation. :) I'm actually slightly worried Vegeta that you think i work for Roccat or (that i) don't understand virtual surround lol. I have used it.. it worked fine... I have sincerely have nothing against it... 'shite' is just a bit of fun, if you will. [To anyone else reading] If you're more into music than games... and 'quality of sound' is more important to you, perhaps you should listen to what everyone else is saying, perhaps this guy (me) is a fucking idiot... I've been called it before. But I'd still argue, in a nutshell that 'real' 5.1 is more accurate. Perhaps i should stop using the word: 'shite' i don't mean it in a mean way :D Really all i should have said was: If you're spending more than £80 on a 'Virtual 5.1 surround setup.. And your goal is to get the 'Best' implementation of 5.1 for Gaming. You're doing it wrong. It's like FreeTrack over TrackIR... They both do the same thing, one is arguably 'better' than the other... But one [tir] costs more and doesn't leave you with a DIY electrical kit on your head. It doesn't mean the other [ft] doesn't work... It doesn't mean in specific instances... Freetrack might actually even be better for you individually or in specific circumstances... But i'd _still_ argue that 'physical' 5.1 is more accurate, with there being multiple sources for each ear. From personal experience. -- I could be talking balls.. Perhaps i'm one of the very people i'm talking about... experiencing a placebo from the 'marketing' of 'extra sound sources per ear'. But I'm pretty sure i could hear a difference first-hand. Furthermore, I'm not just judging this from my own experience. People often ask: "How did you know/hear that? ", in competitive games, etc. Another friend of mine who also has the Roccat Kaves is always 'spotting' guys (with sound) for the guys with 'virtual 5.1' on our team... When you spectate them it's always clear they're unaware of the guy literally running around behind them... ...Personally i put this down to an inherent problem with the virtual 5.1 technology: People /sounds behind you are indeed at a diminished volume, Therefore harder to hear. With physical 5.1, they're not at a diminished volume, they just come from a source behind your ears... ? As they should. That seems like a more 'realistic' implementation to me. Finally the pride comment - lol. It's kind of a recurring theme in my posts if you didn't pick up on it... I guess i just don't presume I'm perfect and understand that people will defend something they've bought or others have bought for them. It's more a poke of fun at everyone, including myself. Sorry if you found it 'incredibly insulting' :) Although i'm starting to wonder what this entire exchange has been about... Perhaps i should've just said 'virtual 5.1 is not as accurate as physical 5.1' -- wouldn't want to say 'real 5.1' shite that might offend someone. :D

No. I tried to ignore it. Your talking about ears.. The receiver.. I'm talking about the source... The speakers. I understand how the concept of 'hearing' works thanks and I never said virtual 5.1 doesn't work for me, i said it does but it's shite... That means: ' not-as-good ' (from first hand experience) as actual 5.1 surround sound.. Which you agreed with apparently, from your talk of 'real 5.1 speaker setup being the pinnacle' . Lastly i can 'claim' what i want on the basis of first hand experience... You're welcome to dispute that... that's the nature of discussion. Though i don't understand why you think on one hand you can claim: 'i have experienced working virtual 5.1 therefore that invalidates any criticism you have of the technology' whilst at the sametime claiming that a 'real' 5.1 speakers setup is objectively indeed better. That's flawed logic right there, and since you say you are actively using the technology, i'll choose to assume you're just one of those people i previously mentioned who has bought into something, and now defends it for whatever reason.... Pride? I'd love to hear from someone who's bought actual 5.1 headphones, put them on and then thought " Wow - no difference over those 'virtual 5.1 headphones' i'm going to refund these ..." ... But i've yet to meet any convert who has said that :) Perhaps there's something to that...

I also only have two eyes... ..But simply by the act of turning my head... I'm able to observe so much more... And depth perception.. Whats up with that? Simply, i disagree... You can choose to be a proponent of the technology but I'll choose to keep my opinion until i try some 'virtual surround sound' first hand that isn't shite. I know there's a difference... Because i've used stereo speakers... Ive used virtual 5.1.. and i've used real 5.1 headphones... Yes, a 'real 5.1 speaker setup' is better still... But not when you have to turn it down low or when you're using a microphone lol. ...The difference when you place actual 5.1 headphones with the extra physical speakers... Or 'drivers' as you call them is quite clear first-hand.. Note that i'm not saying 'virtual 5.1 doesnt work' -- Because if you think about it... You'd have to be a complete moron to be unable to implement 'any form of working surround sound' through 2 speakers... ...I mean you could simply mash all the sound together... seperate it by stereo and lower the volume on the front and back channels by 80%. Viola, 'virtual' surround sound... But it's still shite... ?

Insanity. Why do people spend crazy amounts on headphones that contain 2 speakers... Also -- 'virtual' surround sound is bollocks. If it has 1 jack, You are not getting 5.1 and i don't care how much their marketing sells it as so... I'd love to get non-biased feedback from people who use all differently types of 'virtual 5.1' but everyone seems to get really defensive once they've spent money on something and instantly claim it's actually really good... ...Yet when they're required to say... Identify what's happening from sound alone, their claims are evidently lacking. First up, i don't work for, and i dont get anything by saying what i'm about to say. This is of no benefit to me... But it may up your game: Roccat Kaves are real 5.1 headphones... Each earphone contains front/centre/back speakers and a sub... They now also do 7.1 headphones but it's 'virtual' i believe. [and i said, previously, above, 'virtual' surround sound is balls ] These headphones are unarguably better (for gaming) than any headphones that contain just 2 speakers -- Simply on the grounds the extra precision granted by the seperation of the sound sources. I'm sure you will have people argue 'it doesn't make a difference' ... Probably the same people who would say 'you cant see above 24 fps ' ... Again, it's crap.. You know its crap when you're spectating people and you're predicting where they're about to die from as they're clearly unaware. [Counterstrike - but i'm hopeful with armas reload sound fix it might improve koth too] Finally, the clincher for me is, these headphones are less expensive than most other 'quality' or 'gaming' brands.... I can't vouch for the build quality because I've been through about 4 pairs but then i abuse them.

*cough* It is even understood that this is not an issue with all vehicles, right? Lots of people o nthe bug tracker saying this, but the title still reads 'All vehicles' As in, it is working fine on certain vehicles.. Which makes the comment 'We are investigating this with hardware partners' worrying -- Because it looks like you are trying to say its a problem inherent with multiple-GPU's... If that were the case though, why would it be working with some of the vehicles... It's not like ' it's impossible ' -- Some vehicles currently in the same game... clearly work. See: - Hummingbird mirrors.. - Unarmed variants of the hunter, strider and Ifrit. [mirrors / monitors ] I do mean to go on. If you want someone to investigate exactly which vehicles exhibit this.. I am happy to help -- I would welcome any indication that this issue hasn't been forgotton or pushed to the wayside... Because there seems to be very little feedback regarding whether the issue is even understood, let alone if its ever going to get looked at, or fixed.. I haven't tried the bootcamp update yet, i'm just assuming it's not fixed.

Yup, it's a bit much... Almost no blood and the extreme and fast-snapping-back 'flinch' that looks silly. Not that i have a lot of experience getting shot.

You can fix the waterline bug on cl-Afghan by deleting a .Pbo file in the cl-Afghan folder... ..It's something like pond_column.pbo i cant remember exactly, and Ive deleted it - so i cant look for the exact name.. But searching for 'pond' in your clAfghan/addons folder should locate it. Deleting that file fixed that bug [that's only appears (for me) when you're in the south by the towns] it also didn't show up any errors about missing files, i think it also completely removes the offending pond, wherever it is though... So if you're relying on that in the mission, that would be a problem

I imagine everyone else who has SLI and this issue has already gouged out their eyeballs... ...Hopefully i wont get whipped for re-bumping this back to page1... But i'd love to hear some information about the status of this fix, opposed to waiting another year. :)