galzohar

Are you verifying signatures on the server and running any mods on the client? If yes, then the appropriate keys need to be in the server's "keys" folder before you start the server.

An even more simple idea that was already suggested is to allow a server to have an "info page URL" that will link to the website page associated with the server containing instructions on what is actually needed. Basically, there is a wide range of ideas going from "just let the server tell the player what he needs to do" all the way to "give the player everything he needs automatically", and anything on that scale, even at the very bottom, would go a long way to help multiplayer work compared to what we have today where a player tries to join and warps right back to the server browser.

How about we start with an automatic system where the server would give you a list of links read from the configs of the mod? That would allow the community to make these things work. Isn't nearly as good as automatic, but much better than what we have now, where you might not even see the correct error message, nor would any new player actually understand what it's trying to tell him.

He said "automatic mod download when you join a server". Why do you assume he thinks it's a viable solution to have the server send you the mod files or be forced to restart the game? It is not. The solution is not simple, but if there was a working solution then this game would "gain quite a few levels". Heck, just look at TacBF. Their instructions tell you to use the in-game mod launcher, which results in 1/2 the people not being able to get in without direct 1-on-1 personal support. The player count would probably be at the very least double on this mod's servers if mods would have been downloaded automatically.

If you are not running a dedicated server, you can simply go to game options -> difficulty and change everything there. Once you save it, any multiplayer game you host on that difficulty will have those settings. Also, your ****.arma3profile will be updated with the correct values next time you properly exit the game, so you can copy its contents to your dedicated server's ****.arma3profile file if needed. Since you can do this while playing a single player mission, you can immediately test the effects without having to restart the game/server/mission to see what each option actually does.

Yes, it is playable, but the dependency on mission is too great and this really limits what we can do with the game. Things like dead body optimizations and similar issues (basically, anything that accumulates over time in a long mission) is something that can go a long way. If you're looking at dead body optimization, please consider related issues such as dropped weapons/equipment optimizations as well as anything else that might accumulate during a mission and destroy performance on either clients or servers (usually both).

Yeah, if you have a good list of excessively durable objects a ticket would be useful.

Yes, you must write joinUnassigned = 0; in the mission file to activate it. It was off by default. It doesn't prevent people from switching teams later, but it will initially place them in the right team for team balance purposes.

Kicks mean you either: - Have extra pbos not approved by the server (meaning do not belong to TacBF or CBA_A3), either running as extra mods activated by command line or in-game mod launcher, or in your arma 3\addons folder (and obviously they shouldn't be there as you should only have official BIS files in there). - Are missing a required pbo. While a message is supposed to show stating exactly one of those ("you cannot play/edit this mission ... downloadable content that has been deleted: <mod list>" for missing mods and "... not signed by a key accepted by the server: <mod list>" for not allowed mods), often people just don't get this message. If you can reliably reproduce this you should probably open a bug on the feedback tracker, or find it if it's already open, and call for everyone to yell at BIS to fix it. Few possible reasons for having the wrong mods: - In-game mod launcher. Don't use it. Use Play withSIX or a shortcut (create shortcut to arma3.exe and add to the "Target:" line: "...arma3.exe" "-mod=@CBA_A3;@TacBF" - You used Play WithSIX to directly join a server running VTS wind and it got automatically installed and run along with TacBF, while the server might not be allowing it for clients. To solve this just create a preset with @TacBF (CBA will be added automatically as it is required for TacBF), and launch without selecting a server. - You have modified game files or additional unapproved files inside your ArmA 3\addons folder. Delete any unofficial files and verify cache integrity on Steam to just in case you deleted/modified any required official game files. Deleting the whole folder is a sure way to get this aspect solved, but it will require re-downloading most of the game, so it's best to try figure out what you did wrong there and only delete the entire folder as a last resort.

Most likely you're playing a mission that has lots of stuff going on and that loads up your CPU. Nothing to do with SLI support. Remember, if the CPU is still busy calculating where objects should be in the next frame, it can't let the GPU render the next frame (well, it could, but the image would be the same as the previous frame so it would be rather pointless). Try an SP mission without many units in a graphically intense area such as Kavala and see if you get better results. If yes, then it's the mission and/or your CPU - Your SLI/GPUs are working just fine! There are benchmarks showing huge improvement for SLI over single card, so the graphical part is probably working just great.

No real time security applications here, yet same performance issues. It's very mission-specific (always happens in the same missions after the same amount of time played).

Well, that's pretty straight forward, but basically helmets 1 through 6 were renamed IDF_Helmet_CQB_1...5 with 6 being renamed Golani. The caps are pretty self-explanatory, and so is the helmet crate and uniform. Units were completely remade, as before there was only 1 medic class with various helmets/caps, which have been completely removed and instead actual classes were added. Just pick one soldier class from the editor and for starters just replace all old IDF soldier classes with it, then work from there.

Black Tavors: arifle_TRG21_black_F arifle_TRG20_black_F arifle_TRG21_black_GL_F arifle_TRG21_black_Holo_pointer_F arifle_TRG20_black_Holo_pointer_F arifle_TRG21_black_Holo_pointer_GL_F arifle_TRG21_black_Hamr_pointer_F Vest: IDF_Vest Uniform: IDF_Uniform Helmets: IDF_Helmet_CQB_1 IDF_Helmet_CQB_2 IDF_Helmet_CQB_3 IDF_Helmet_CQB_4 IDF_Helmet_CQB_5 IDF_Helmet_CQB_Golani IDF_Helmet_Mitsnefet_1 IDF_Helmet_Mitsnefet_2 IDF_Helmet_Mitsnefet_3 Caps: IDF_Cap_Instructor IDF_Cap_Paratroopers IDF_Cap_Israel IDF_Cap_Golani Crates: IDF_Box_Helmets IDF_Box_Caps IDF_Box_Weapons

Like I said, the best help would be executing the following steps: 1. Find RL data of wind offsets for a caliber that exists in-game. 2. Script or configure a weapon to fire that caliber at a velocity equal to that of the weapon the data from #1 is made for. 3. Set the wind in the editor to a fixed value (no gusts) in a direction perpendicular to your shooting direction. 4. Fire at the target and measure the offset. 5. Provide how "off" the offset was compared to what it should be IRL, as in "in-game offset is 70% smaller than the RL offset" or "in-game offset is 1.5 times bigger than the RL offset". With this kind of information I can then modify the coefficient for said ammo type to fix it. With enough people testing enough different ammo types, we might get some more realistic configuration here. But doing it all by myself will take a very long time, especially since I don't have that much free time for this mod to begin with.

A lot of things would be nice, but those things take time, effort and most importantly knowledge. Obviously I'm sure nobody would object having more stuff, but you'll have to either be patient or join in and give a helping hand :) For anything that requires modelling and/or importing, extra patience (or help) is required. I still plan on helping improve the configs even further with proper faction and groups, but for now at least you have proper classes in the editor with proper loadouts and matching ammoboxes. Note that this update is not backward compatible, as I re-named all the classes to be more inline with class names to be more intuitive and organized.

Like I said - Better calibration would take time. Any help would be much appreciated. Coming here and saying how easy it is will not help. I know exactly what needs to be done and what can be done, and I'm not denying there is a lot more work to make it better. If you want to make it better, your time is much better spent comparing in-game results to RL data and providing info about which values need to be tweaked. Otherwise you'll have to wait a very long time until I can do it myself, slowly, step by step. Again, it's not just about finding the charts, it's also about doing in-game testing to measure the exact difference between the chart and the in-game results to get the correct tweak required for the coefficient. If you want to post charts here for other people to test you're more than welcome to. Personally, I don't know when I'll have the time to do it - Again, I'll try doing it slowly step by step, but it will be much faster if more people contribute. If you want proper realism you will have to tweak the muzzle velocity of the in-game weapon to the RL velocity of the weapon from which you grabbed the data, or else it is pretty useless. Currently I have only tweaked 7.62x51 at 790ms to match wind offsets of M24, and all other calibers were assumed to have a matching coefficient based on the caliber difference. So, for example, the in-game EBR which fires a 7.62 caliber at a higher velocity will have smaller offsets than the M24 as it uses the same coefficient but spends less time in flight and thus has less time for the wind to affect it. Anything more accurate is pointless unless it is done with RL ballistic tables of real weapons using the same ammo. Bottom line is this mod is for you guys, and if you want to help make it better you are more than welcome to. If not - Enjoy it as is or wait patiently for me to make improvements and tweaks.

Unfortunately, if something "exists" in real life but is extremely rare, then getting proper data for it with any reliability is practically impossible. For example see this for 7.62x45: http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?271831-7-62-x45-ammo So good luck getting any reliable wind info on it. Also, finding the info is not the only problem. Figuring out from that info what the coefficient should be is a lot of work, and not something I have the time to do right now, especially not for every single round of ammo in the game. If anyone wishes to help, all you need to do is provide the factor by which I need to multiply the current coefficient after you have experimented with the mod and compared it to RL data. You will need to make sure though that you compare to RL data of the same bullet fired at the same velocity (most likely by modifying the in-game velocity to match before you run your tests). In the end all I need is "Bullet X under certain conditions was offset by Y, while it should have been offset by Z" and I can fix the coefficient value easily. But without collaborated effort to get those values tweaked, it will take me a very long time to find the time to do it across the board. In any case, it should still work much better than the original mod by L etranger as I've at least tried to add some config values that do make sense and are relatively consistent with physics and geometry. I can't say the config values are flat out "wrong", as I don't know what they are actually used for and what scale they use. For example, the "caliber" property and the actual "caliber" are rarely correlated and definitely not on the same scale, but god knows what this actually means as I don't know what the "caliber" property is actually used for in-game. For wind itself, none of the currently existing config values are of any use for getting anywhere near realistic results, which as far as I understand is why L etranger discontinued his wind mod.

Right now you can have automatic balance via description.ext but if the player wishes to unbalance the teams he can. Admin panel should have an option to choose between automatic team balance and moving players between teams manually, and mission should configure the default "force balance" settings in description.ext in case the admin doesn't change anything or in case there is no admin.

Yes, the module is working, but the variables that are supposed to check what it - Don't. Most of the time we are lucky and have the module script run after my loadout script so just running the loadout script from init works, but that can randomly not work just as well if the ALiVE script initializes first.

Oh, obviously I fixed the syntax errors and also tried other variations, but the first variable stays undefined indefinitely. If I wouldn't have fixed the syntax obviously I would have just gotten a syntax error rather than undefined variable error.

This just keeps infinite spamming of undefined variable error for alive_sys_player :( Tested on hosted server (both as a server and with a friend who tried to connect/disconnect/reconnect while the mission is running).

Not as far as I can tell. In fact, the 7.62X45mm fired out of an EBR actually flies ~5% faster than a 7.62X51mm NATO fired out of an M24. Of course, I haven't tested terminal speed (slow down due to air resistance), only muzzle velocity, so if air resistance is calculated wrong in-game then my wind coefficients will not be true-to-life either (and actually cannot be if that is the case). Basically it's all config values made up for the made up ammo in the futuristic ArmA world, but at least the ones I've looked at didn't seem to be extremely unrealistic. With slight modifications to the scripts you can add messages that will show you any information you want in the chat. I didn't want to have a variable to enable them to save on performance in run-time.

The problem is other than 12.7x99mm and 5.56x45, none of the rifle calibers exist in in real life. And even for those, the muzzle velocity of the in-game weapon will not match. Bottom line is it is a lot of work to create the real coefficient (you would first have to change a weapon config for the same velocity which was used to create the RL table or use a script to correctly modify the velocity as soon as the bullet is fired). Even then, all "made up" ammo will have to use approximated coefficients based on a simple physical/geometrical formula, basing it on the most similar ammunition type that has been tested and compared to real life. While I will try to slowly work on adjusting coefficients when I have the time to do it, it will be much faster if more people contribute some time to test and compare to RL values so that we can improve the realism level of this mod. In any case, at least it should be much more true-to-life than VTS wind mod, as while the values aren't accurate, they at least make sense in terms of consistency and basic physics, and of course the simulation itself (how the coefficient is applied in real time) should be greatly improved as well.

In my experience, usually almost any "objective" you create will end up in a "clear the area of enemies and then the objective is trivial".

Not just sniping - Mortars and artillery too :) Of course, more true-to-life coefficients will be appreciated.