Guess Who

Hi Norrin, this fantastic script does not work with the OA 1.60RC version as expected. The issue is, that the chopper only moves at a very low speed once in the air. It might have to do with the doMove command not working as expected. The last working version was OA 1.60 beta build 86873, tested version is 0.61. Thanx for looking into it. EDIT: Fixed by Suma http://dev-heaven.net/issues/26814#change-119086

First: Thanx BIS for the providing the continued hard work and the best support ever. Second: Not to forget the countless community members contributing to it by testing all those betas as well as providing the tools like CIT/DevHeaven. They should not go unnoticed. Thanx guys. Third: The solution to copy the DLL-directory from the beta-folder to the ArmA root folder works. Fouth: The RC broke Norrin's Aerial Taxi script. It does work in principle, but the helo only moves at very slow speed, like 20 or 30 km/h. Seems like a regression from the last beta. I'll report this issue over at norrin's thread in the scripting forum as well. Might have to do with the doMove command not working as expected.

I think it's time for some map tools, like for triangulation and such. That would be cool!

Same here. No destination action if you hop into the chopper at mission start. The code you quoted actually doesn't enable this function. Instead it enables you to call the chopper for extraction at the start of the mission from the outside without ever having been in the chopper.

It seems that ArmA is benefitting from the TBB4 the most under conditions, where lots of memory is required. My experience with TBB4 in Chernarus Warfare is similar. Difference between TBB3 and TBB4 is around 50 plus percent with the latter. Similar scenarios in Takistan don't benefit that much. Memory usage in Takistan is usally at 1.2G while in Chernarus it goes usually up to 1.5G very fast and further up to 1.8G. So performance gain seems correlated to memory requirement; which is not that surprising cause we are talking Memory Allocator here. Also stability is pretty good, no crashes here for a while. Thumbs up! System is i7 920 | X58 Chipset | 6G 1600Mhz RAM | Samsung SSD | AMD 5870 GPU

Thanks for confirmation, Dwarden, that's what I did after I found out. Yeah, performance on Chernarus gains the most. TBB4 seems as stable as TBB3.

Regarding allocator tests see here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=2047289&postcount=29

Tried to test it today. It seems the command "-malloc=..." doesn't work. Excerpt from my RPT: ===================================================================== == C:\Games\ArmA2\Expansion\beta\arma2oa.exe == "C:\Games\ArmA2\Expansion\beta\arma2oa.exe" -mod=Expansion\beta;Expansion\beta\Expansion;@CBA;@CBA_dependent;@Islands;@Units;@Weapons;@Tweaks -exThreads=7 -nosplash [b][color=blue]-malloc=tbb4malloc_bi[/color][/b] ===================================================================== Exe timestamp: 2011/10/30 09:03:46 Current time: 2011/10/30 14:26:17 Version 1.59.85876 [color=blue][b]Allocator: C:\Games\ArmA2\Expansion\beta\dll\tbb3malloc_bi.dll[/b][/color] Item str_disp_server_control listed twice [149,22.569,0.047,"XEH: PostInit Started"] [149,22.634,0.047,"CBA_VERSIONING: cba=0.8.2.169, "] [149,22.666,0.047,"XEH: PostInit Finished. State: _isClient=true, _isJip=false, _isDedClient=false, _isServer=true, _isDedServer=false, _playerCheckDone=true, _sp=true, _startInitDone=true, _postInitDone=true, _mpRespawn=false, _machineType=1, _sessionId=1"] Global "scripts" folder no longer supported, 'initJIPcompatible.sqf' ignored Am I doing something wrong here? "tbb4malloc_bi.dll" get's loaded though if you delete or rename "tbb3malloc_bi.dll".

Both confirmed. RPT has a lot of similar looking errors regarding "global scripts folder". Affects OnPlayerKilled.sqs, OnLoadPause.sqs, etc. I can also confirm perfomance breakdowns in BIS Warfare missions. FPS goes down momentarily from 35 to 40 frames to 12 to 15 for a short period. Updated CIT. Reproducable in Warfare, less complex missions seem unharmed. I'm back to 85680 Cheers.

I normally don't deal that much with aircraft in Warfare. Only in light vehicles and infantry. What I miss in Darren's blog is the factions statement in the unit definition. Look for "_f = " line in the definitions. That determines to what faction the unit is buyable/belongs. Unfortunately that feature is not fully implemented. For example infantry does not follow that logic. In Config_Barracks.sqf the factions are defined within that file not through the Config_Factions.sqf. Thats's part of the problem. So unfortunately the only way to make "foreign" infantry buyable is to make them the same faction; that's only possible by a replacement addon, which is how I do it as a workaround. Maybe you will come up with something better. I'll be interested in any new solution. Good Luck.

Sorry, that's the file I actually meant. One of the challenges in modifying Warfare lies within the factions. The feature of buying unit from all factions at the factories of another is not fully implemented. So you may be able to add a US vehicle to a US Light Factory and buy without a hazzle but won't be able to buy a BAF vehicle at the same factory. It's unfortunately a limitation of the implementation of factions in Warfare. There is another thread around in this forum that discusses the same thing. Edit: here is the link http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=119025

Look for Common_Config or CommonConfig in your Warfare directory. You have to add the Light_Factory config file to the custom load list in there. Most statements are self explanatory commented by BIS. I'm at work right now, so I can't post an example, sorry.

A new one: Config of BAF Jackals is broken since 85478. Don't have my RPT with me, sorry. Sorry, seems like a false positive; without any addons BAF works as it should. But somehow the inheritance from BAF_Jackal... seems broken with this beta. Are there any any changes in classes?

Will do, I'll keep you guys uptodate.

Hey Sickboy, just created an account at dev-heaven. I'll create a ticket as soon as the account is confirmed. Thanx. -------------------------- Ticket created: Bug #24904: SLX_XEH_INIT_MEN is not initialized with ASR_AI version 1.11

Hello Rob, I'm at work right now and I don't have an account at dev-heaven. Can you forward this to Sickboy and I'll try to provide the missing information later. Thanx.

Hey Rob, thanx for the update, working like a charm. Since switching to 1.11 and CBA 0.7.9 (which is required) I get a lot of the following errors in my RPT: Error in expression < if (_isMan) then { if !(_slx_xeh_unit in SLX_XEH_INIT_MEN) then { SLX_XEH_INIT> Error position: <in SLX_XEH_INIT_MEN) then { SLX_XEH_INIT> Error Generic error in expression File extended_eventhandlers\fnc_init.sqf, line 69 When I say a lot I mean my RPT gets flooded; like 17,000 lines of errors in a 4 hour Warfare scenario. Subtracting the usual amount of 2,000 or 3,000 the rest is your's :D. Well, I'm not really sure though if they are your's or more like Sickboy's. I noticed, that those errors don't occur at first, only after some time (like 1 or 2 hours) into the mission. Thanx for looking in to it. If you want me to, i'll post this also in the CBA thread. Arma version is beta build 84686.

Well, yes and no. You don't have to remove anything to play with default values. The slashes (//) are comment markers; remove them to activate that specific function.

Thanx for informing me, Alwarren. Didn't get to test/play any version after 84426 (was that just last saturday?). You guys at BI are fast ... Thanx to BI for continued bug fixing, much appreciated.

Here is another one: Communications from HQ broken in Warfare. No audio and no chat messages. Last good version was build 84426.

Take warfare for example, overclocking an i7 920 to 3.2 GHz without turbo gives me about 10 more frames. And, additionally the cpu load is spread more equally over all four cores. So, overclocking works, at least in AI heavy missions. But with an i7 920 you will eventually have to settle at 30 to 40 fps, unless overclocking much higher.

I don't know exactly, if this is the same sympton, but try the Benchmark02 mission on Chernarus. At very low fps situations, and that happens a lot in that mission, especially the fast air units (Harriers, SU 34s) "rubberband" like hell. In 1.59 they were only choppy/stuttering. It happens, when fps drop below 20 frames. I didn't try in this build thou, was more like 83780 or even earlier.

Nice to hear it seems to work for you. Well, I can play Warfare missions for 8 hours straight without crashes now, so I assume ...

Look in the beta forum, there is a sticky which explains the installation part. Important, follow it by the letter, otherwise it will not work. The betas work like a mod, but with a different executable. The malloc part has been sorted already. No start parameters needed anymore. Have fun ... :D

Use the latest Beta patch. Out of memory issues are completely gone for me since the malloc tests. (Win7 x64 | i7 920 | 6 GB)