Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

bumgie

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    297

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Posts posted by bumgie

  1. Posted

    29 minutes ago, anfo said:

     

    Because I don't understand code, I'm not sure if you're helping or being sarcastic. I'll work it out, thanks.

    He is being sarcastic and mocking you. That is the way he tries to help people. What he is trying to say is that you should read the link he provided:
    https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Functions_Library#File_Path
    And pay special attention to the color coding used on that page. That tells you how the function will be named. Currently you are trying to call a non existing function. That is why it says: "Error undefined variable in expression: tft_fnc_dismount"

    • Thanks 1

  2. Posted

    On 4/30/2019 at 10:25 AM, DnA said:

    It's true that we simply have fewer full-time devs and other staff on Arma 3 development than some years ago. But we do still read the forums, Feedback Tracker, and other channels. And we try to address as much as we can, even when there are fewer replies or ticket updates. Various devs who are meanwhile working on other projects, still regularly take the time to help Arma 3 out. Thanks for keeping us aware of any issues! Oh, and there will still be some good fun coming your way on Dev-Branch in vanilla later this year 😎

     

    Presumably the latest DevBranch release has broken suppression values for AI. I quote:

     

    Quote

    I think the recent update has dramatically reduced the suppression mechanic in the game. I am seeing values 1/20th of what they were before, it is exceptionally difficult to ever get the AI unit above 0.01 now. I have been looking into our game balance and have determined the suppression module is no where near as effective as it was with the prior release. I am working on a fix for it and I do now have the new boost module in a good state, but I wanted people to know the the value for suppression range has completely changed for some unknown reason.

     

    • Thanks 1
    • Sad 3

  9. Posted · Edited by bumgie
    Missquote

     

    On 7/16/2018 at 1:36 AM, Beagle said:

    I wan't to point at a big problem that came with the revisited "fuel" consumption of all vehicles with 1.82

     

    The SDV became barely usable with that change, it's range is only 3km at 14km/h even less at 18km/h. thats means it only features a battery capacity for 10 minutes...that make it a one way only, disposable unit.

     

    This will break exsisting missions.

  11. Posted

    Hey!

     

    Would you consider adding an option to restricting the ability to set splints in following ways:

    1. It can only be set by Ace medic or doctor: 

    
//doctor
this setVariable ["ace_medical_medicClass",2,true];

//medic
this setVariable ["ace_medical_medicClass",1,true];

    2. The item weighs more than 0.15kg. Maybe add a heavier/older variant.

    3. It only helps with limping, not aim issues etc. Maybe the older variant would only help with this?

     

    These would allow for better distinctness of the medic role.

  13. Posted · Edited by bumgie

    This has not been a very constructive discussion.

     

    Some data:

     

    Editor skill slider goes from 0.2 to 1.00

    Game options skill and precision slider under each AI level change the overall range that the editor skill slider can change the final AI skill. These ranges are:

     

    Game options skill sliders for precision and skill at 0:

    Editor unit skill slider at 0.2(minimum)-> Unit final skill is 0.30...

    Editor unit skill slider at 0.5(default)-> Unit final skill is 0.31...

    Editor unit skill slider at 1(maximum)-> Unit final skill is 0.8

     

     

    Game options skill sliders for precision and skill at 1:

    Editor unit skill slider at 0.2(minimum)-> Unit final skill is 0.6

    Editor unit skill slider at 0.5(default)-> Unit final skill is 0.75...

    Editor unit skill slider at 1(maximum)-> Unit final skill is 1

     

    So the default final skill value delta is 0.34 when changing game options precision from 0  to 1. And according to GOM that delta does not lead to meaningful enough changes in the AI shooting behavior.

    What is problematic is that the skill slider is caped to 0.2 at the minimum, so the AI final skill is always above the 0.3 mark. And it appears that this is not a suitable level for all players and some want to go lower. Easy "fix" would be to allow the editor skill slider go lower than 0.2, that way skills could be made approach zero if the mission maker so chose. This would of course risk the AI looking dumb as it could  break the AIs other functions by lowering all skills to very small levels. This would then have to be fixed by interpolating those important skills which leads to more confusion and brings us closer to the situation before the refactoring. Another would be to add a editor precision skill slider that could go to zero, but that leads to more complexity and is against the refactored design. So its tricky anyway you look at it.

     

    With the system being the way it is now, I suggest to the interested scenario designers who want to create a good experience the following procedure:

    Set the game options difficulty to expert.

    Use https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/setSkill to set each subskill individually. This does not have the 0.2 minimal limit so you can set any skill to even 0 if you want.

    See what the actual values are in a mission and how the AI behaves:  https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/skillFinal

    Write down some good values for irregular troops/regular troops/veteran troops/Vehicle operators

    Use those in each of your missions to represent different skilled troops

     

    EXTRA:

    There is an interpolation at work for aimingspeed. It is always interpolated to 0.5 -1.0 range:

     

     2018-03-09_00-27-49.png

     

    So it behaves differently from the others by always being higher than other final skill values.

     

     

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2
    • Confused 1

  14. Posted

    Could Strike_Nor or someone else with better tools and knowhow test what is wrong with the damage modelling on the AFV-4 Gorgon (I_APC_Wheeled_03_cannon_F).

     

    When I fire 30 mm autocannons at it it doesn't appear to take any damage. The only thing I am able to archive is disabling the turret and occasionally injure/kill some crewmembers. Engine for example never receives any damage.

    I fired at it with the FV-720 Mora from about 50m.

    • Like 1

  15. Posted

    44 minutes ago, -ben- said:

    Looking good so far!

     

    Personally i would add a bit more clutter to most surfaces and increase the density of trees in a lot of the forests which could be done fairly quickly with terrain processor. I think it would give the forests a slightly more secluded feel to them, which would go really well with the noise you have added to the heightfield now. Would help contrast against the nice open fields too.

     

    Love a lot of the detail in the small dotted villages around too. Keep up the good work. :)

    If I remember correctly, the forests are lighter on purpose. They provide a slightly different feeling compared to vt5 which has more dense forests.

     

    EDIT: This thread should be btw moved to complete section, since it has a released version out.

  17. Posted

    Some quick feedback:

     

    I like most of the villages you have composed in the area. They will provide interesting places in where to fight.

    The biggest issue are the terrain textures. They are awfully distracting. Especially in the mountains. Problems: repetitive textures, bad resolutions.

    Another big issue is the lack of micro terrain. You need ditches etc, to give the terrain some life and provide usefull cover for infantry.

    The vegetation seems very similar throughout the terrain. You should increase the variation and use different compositions. In the mountains, the vegetation looks weird with the terrain textures. They look very artificial.

    I like the river valley theme of the terrain!

     

  18. Posted

    On 3/27/2018 at 12:07 PM, kennyleif said:

    I heard rumors that the Task Force Radio team has pretty much stopped working on a full version (heard from danish Arma community)
    Are these rumors true? I'm not asking for a full version date, but only; Are the mod authors still working on TFAR?

    Regards 

    The development appears to be happening in TFAR discord.

    https://github.com/michail-nikolaev/task-force-arma-3-radio/issues/1116 Link here.

    There is currently a major bug with radio sounds popping and people sometimes not hearing eachother. Those are being worked on. The cause is not yet clear.

    I understand it would be perfect if people were more informed of these developments since this type of information is vital for long term mod decisions at communities. Changing between different radio mods is a huge hassle when missions wont work and people need to be thought to use new systems. But for now, keep an eye out on that discord.

  23. Posted · Edited by bumgie
    brevity

    Thanks for the mod! Could you add the following functionality to the mod: 

    _selectedUnits = get3DENSelected "object"; // Select units that the operation should be run on
{
    _roleDescription = (configFile >> "CfgVehicles" >> typeOf _x >> "displayName") call BIS_fnc_getCfgData;//Get units role description or "displayname"
    _roleDescription =  [_roleDescription,"@",group _x get3DENAttribute "groupID" select 0] joinString ""; // Join together the units display name, @ cba separator and the units callsign.
    _x set3DENAttribute ["description", _roleDescription]; //Set it to the unit
} forEach _selectedUnits;

    This would remove a lot of tedious work of naming the units descriptions and enabling the CBA lobby group naming to work easily. Maybe create a tool for it in the UI?

    There is still a problem with the callsign not working on dedi server properly. According to the link it is however defined at the server so it should be fixed if this sort of code would be ran at some point of the mission init: 

    if (isDedicated) then
{
    {
        _x setGroupIdGlobal [groupid _x];
    } forEach allGroups;
};

    This code is not tested on dedi however, and I dont know if you are willing to implement something like this, since it would need to be saved in the mission file somewhere.

     

    Also, do you think you could enable batch changing of AI sub-skills and the object:states skill slider?

     

  24. Posted

    The modules can already be restricted using this:

      

        [_zeusCuratorModule, [
    "ace_zeus_moduleSuppressiveFire",0,
    "ace_zeus_moduleDefendArea",0,
    "ace_zeus_modulePatrolArea",0,
    "ace_zeus_moduleSearchArea",0,
    "ace_zeus_moduleSearchNearby",0,
    "ace_zeus_moduleToggleFlashlight",0,
    "ace_zeus_moduleGarrison",0,
    "ace_zeus_moduleUnGarrison",0,
    "ModuleRemoteControl_F",0]] call BIS_fnc_curatorObjectRegisteredTable; //define what modules zeus can use.

    Though I have not tried to add any of ares or achiles modules in this way yet.

  25. Posted

    3 hours ago, oOKexOo said:

    @bumgie

    I don't see how these buttons are bothering anyone.

    They provide integral features of Achilles.

     

    Like I said earlier, it would help to customize zeus usage better. I could better limit what different zeus could do etc. But If it is too much to ask then never mind I will just run a script and remove them each time the interface is opened.

×