bad benson

did everything work fine for everyone? would love some brief feedback. you never know what a mess i created in a rush, had a few guys test it but i also have the usual super vague "doesn't work" comment on the workshop. so would be appreciated. i will remove the landing anims in the next update, if there are no objections. over time with arma updates the transitions got so bad that i think it's time to drop this feature. it might resume in a better fashion. i hope the module will make it into the next version too. migh be easy to do since i'm making one for the raptors too. monologue done.

nice model. smoothing groups are WIP i assume. great to hear that the functionality is already there too. promising!

there are many things over the years. but the most recent thing is the sounds on Tanoa. arma always had superb environmental sounds that never felt artificial and really made the, imho, biggest strength of the game shine even more. that feeling of actually being in a real place. like, i have memories tied to locations on chernarus. not only from playing early dayZ but in general. simply doesn't happen in most games. anyways back to my intial point: stand inside the jungle on Tanoa and suddenly switch to night time (skiptime 10). first time i did that it actually was kind of scary. the fact the environmental sounds are locational now helps that A LOT.

quick small update: this mostly includes the exploit fixes i added based on nickorr's detailed feedback (thx again) and includes an Exile compatibility pbo. only use this pbo, if and when you are actually playing Exile. i will have this pbo seperate on the workshop but in the mix but deactivated on the armaholic version. that means in a fodler inside the addons folder from where it will have to be moved inside the addon folder to make it active. the module for settings will have to come in a later update. i want to focus on the raptors for a bit since i've been letting people wait for that for a while. problem was i was really far ahead already but when i ran the code again after a month or so after lettign it rest for a bit it suddenly had horrible fps. so i rewrote pretty much the same thing now and it runs great again. no idea what happened there. anyways. here it goes: download---> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5Y0VNgK9JXiNDF1U2FoN2FaNnM/view?usp=sharing STEAM (EM main)---> http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=333310405 STEAM (EM - Exile compatibility pbo)---> http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=762046686 DISCLAIMER: bewarned that the key is a totally new one. so make sure to update all files. i removed the "EM" from it so i can use it for other releases too. the real reason was a windows reinstall though to enable me to create keys and signatures at all (thx to Lordprimate again for temporarily creating key sand sigs for me). let me know if anythign went wrong. didn't have time to fully test this.

i wasn't expecting SP capability, i also wasn't hoping for A2 style stuff (i thought most of it was awful very buggy and not interesting story wise, although i personally focus more on game mechanics than story anyways). i was just hoping for simple COOP along the lines of L4D and similar just in terms of respawn and progression mechanics. instead it was a total mess at the core. for me personally the problem isn't accessibility. i don't feel it's even close to any accessible COOP game i've played. on the contrary, using a lazy generic respawn system and not having a fail state is simply, excuse the french, shitty and lazy not fitting the small coop set up. i just feel like by saying the problem is focus on a certain audience is giving BIS a pass on some straight out design flaws and we're not doing the design work that goes into some arcadey games justice. to each their own. but bad design is universal. i kind of thought that there is not much you can do wrong here because other games showcase how simple and proven certain mechanics are to keep things challening but not frustrating. hence my initial optimism. but nope. this feels like someone's homework assignment. like some superficial excercise without showing any insight on what makes playing together in a small team actually fun. it's sad because the production stuff is great. just doesn't fit the actual substance (or lack of). i'm just making this post because, while i can understand the main complaints about SP and stuff, i personally feel this could've been great as just an MP focussed thing. and i honestly hope there will be another attempt at this in the future. i've been making my own experiments inspired by what i experienced trying this out. and the conclusion is: it is very possible to make arma into a smooth guided experience focused on small coop. i'm actually having the most fun i had in a while with this game. so i really hope to see more stuff like this in the future. i kind of feel like this could be the thing for official content next to SP scenarios. i see much more potential there instead of large coop which is mostly covered with great variety by the community.

@kremator: that seems like over kill. even more immersion breaking. i'm wondering now, since they use streetlamps pretty well, what LOD is considered. since it seems too accurate to be just using the bounding box (just a guess and interpretation of what i see) it might be the GEO lod or even the FIRE lod. last one kind of makes sense in terms of being safe® from bullets but VIEW lod would make most sense because it covers concealment too and should be logical in most cases. or can someone come up with a scenario/object type where VIEW lod doesn't make sense? would be great to get some dev feedback on this to at least understand the issue better. what source is that statement based on?

so i set my terrain detail to ultra the other day because i thought that might increase clutter pop distance. no luck. can anyone confirm that that has no effect? curious if it's maybe still auto scaled according to my system. maybe that could be a good tool to control clutter popping? tying it to terrain settings. i dunno. i just feel that i need more control. we already have a lot but this one is too in your face to not be able to do anything about it.

it would be great if the along with the door stuff the large tree roots that are way too short resulting in a lot of them floating in the air could be taken care of too. it's, as far as i can tell, one single model and a really simple change. it looks really unfinished and sloppy and it's totally unnecessary. please!

^fully agree. making a totally dynamic mission myself. i tried filtering roads out that have too many trees around them (to have at least usable starting positions for vehicles) but the problem is that AI, as you said, choose to use those tight roads to ge to places on their own. so it's not even a mission maker issue but a general one.

is rain mapping the effect that is shown on the train that is sticking out the tunnel? like only making surfaces look wet that are exposed to the sky?

you should've posted in this section: https://forums.bistudio.com/forum/154-arma-3-mission-editing-scripting/ about your question though. they definately have a class. it's more likely that the way cursorTarget works is the problem here. what exactly are you trying to achieve. more details are always very helpful to find the most efficient way. definately make sure this gets moved by a moderator though. you will get the right people seeing this an get a lot of useful input. the section i linked above is usually very active and full of great people.

but what is the gameplay value of this? i'm not opposed to any new tech being implemented as long as it doesn't kill FPS (more). i'm just wondering what this would bring to the game aside from that one situation where that large ship drove by and your boat started shaking. but since we're talking about waves. i don't liek how uniform the waves look in arma. i mean the 3d ones when you crank up the values. i wonder if the algorithm could be altered a little to add more randomness to it. also some more elaborate foam shader for wave peaks would be cool instead of just increasing normal map depth. but maybe my view is outdated. honestly haven't looked at the water in detail for a while.

wow that is really cool to see. i noticed the other day myself how AI gravitated towards cover a lot especially when on the way to somewhere. reminded me a lot of gl4 in arma 2. turns out it's good to test before making statements :lol: considering hte "issue" with poles i wonder, if they just consider the height but not the width of objects or if it's just a problem with them considering every cover point they find a corner.

might be that sandbags aren't considered cover because they are not very high. and since the AI doesn't have a duck-shoot-duck routine, they would either go prone and be blind or be exposed. but i'm just talking out my ass. no idea what happens on the engine level and how stuff is evaluated. i found attorney's post pretty interesting though. i wonder if that still applies.

too bad this can't be done via shaders to be applied to everything. that being said. respect for still going through with it. looks really good on those night screens. very close to the rain drops on weapons in battlefield 1 ;)

getting lots of crashes lately too. around the same time others have posted about it. same for a friend of mine.

so why show it here then? and why in the mods complete section of all places? you just looking for praise or something? don't get me wrong, i like new toys but this doesn't make much sense.

such a beautiful model! if you need any help with the AI send me a PM.

i was wondering. coudl you consider getting rid of the auto cut rope once you hit the ground? two reasons. 1. it's not needed since you can do it manually 2. it caused me to slip, fall and die when rappelling from one ledge down to the next (very narrow) when climbing down rocks. hard to explain but in general it happens a lot when i don't want it to especialyl on complex objects like rocks.

Nogova and Everon. nothing against Malden but i never liked the climate specific attributes (like foliage) compared to the other two.

didn't know where else to post this. so here it goes: i've been trying to make the refract shader work and had problems with it on characters. once the character stops moving it turns white-ish. once you start moving again it looks as intended again. now i was wondering, if it was my material since i had seen Kiory show some experiments with it in alpha. but then i checked the boot camp character pbo after noticing that none of the vr soldiers have that refract effect anymore and it seems like while there is a back up of an rvmat that actually uses the refract shader the actual models use a new one that doesn't use that shader, which explains what i saw ingame. and that backed up material that uses the refract shader has the same behaviour like all of my own set ups. which is turning milky once the character stops. so my theory was that the visual update (or an earlier one) broke the shader partly and thus materials using it where set to not use it anymore. basically what i'm asking for is a confirmation before i waste any more time trying settings. i know it's a total niche feature but i just need to know if it still works or not. thx in advance.

no problem. i think i never really documented it anywhere except for adding it to the first post later.

try like this: [unit1, {_gridPos = mapGridPosition getPos _this; Hint composeText [parsetext format ["<t size='1.2' align='center' color='#113DDD'>Respawn moved to grid %1", _gridPos]]}] remoteExec ["call", 0];

i'm not sure if the trigger would fire again if there is already a player in its activation zone. haven't used triggers in ages but i remember that being a thing. so what might work is setting the trigger to always true (replace "this" in the condition field with "true") and then in the on activation field you would check who's in it and setcaptive them all. slightly talking out of my ass here though. haven't had any coffee yet :lol:

@quickdagger: these are already 2d scopes.