bad benson

sounds like reasonable priorities. although i hope underwater isn't something you guys have given up on entirely. just some more rocks and it would already make for a much better battlefield. without cover objects it's just an open plane. EDIT: removed most stuff. thought i was in the "general discussion" thread.

as mentioned: detecting fences directly for enhanced movement. i already made a workaround but it's expensive, hacky and retarded do all that stuff just because BIS refuse to give us a simple collision detection ray cast. you can do all kinds of stuff in arma in the most backwards ways but sometimes it needs to be fast and simple. i mean just add an optional LOD selection to all intersect commands or something. i've been out of the loop for a while so maybe i'm missing something. can the awesome guys at BIS, who are adding all those new commands lately, please atleast make the "intersect" command return stuff from the geo lod even if it's procedurally named (aka "component01" etc)? that would be really nice. thx.

been a while that i used this but should still work the same. https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/167580-animation-explanation-of-the-magic-behind/?p=2631814 depending on situation this is not the ideal solution though since it can not coexist with other addons doing the same if i remember correctly. for climbing for example i ended up using sounds from vanilla anims. so if you just need a generic cloth/movement sound you can always pick one of the used ones in the anim config. really depends on your goals though

god damnit...and thank you for the info. much appreciated. back to workarounds....

so...is this lineIntersectsSurfaces ( https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/lineIntersectsSurfaces) really what i think it is or is it just yet another variation of the old stuff with more sorting? since i can't test myself still i would appreciate, if someone who tsted it could tell me if this still only checks intersection with the ViewGeo lod or if this finally allows clean and simple detection of collision geometry only (Geo lod). in short, could someone test this on fences or any other thing that is see through for AI and player but has collision on it? i need to know, if i'm supposed to be excited or not ;)

this sums up my thoughts exactly. well said! i wouldn't focus too much on the PR side of things though. not saying there's a huge discrepancy between real reasons and what is being said but as many have pointed out the whole "no furniture possible = less enterable buildings" - logic doesn't really work that well. that statement might aswell be some passive agressive "this is what you get for whining about furniture" when the real reasons are probably mostly performance, exposure of bad indoor AI and clunky player character collision. not saying it makes any sense to regress though. imho the way to go would be more generic cover objects (walls and stuff) and less but still detailed/enterable buildings. Kavala for example, to me personally, is just a giant useless thing. all it does is give you a big maze of the same buildings over and over while killing your performance. i personally wouldn't even want sims like fully furnished houses. but some random painting on the wall, a pair of shoes at the door, a lone little dresser. some dirt and dust. like...something, instead of perfectly clean and empty houses. but i guess there is no inbetween solutions these days. cutting stuff for the fact you can't go full on seems to be the new way. i just hope that inaccessibility will make some sense from the art side and it's not going to be just a giant amount of closed doors and windows. and most important: BIS make sure to give us a lot of roof access. that can make a non enterable structure still more useful than just being a solid giant obstacle. also tunnels. like that one house in Cherno and the shop one on Takistan. those short tunnels that go through a house. having the roof and maybe one floor of a larger building be enterable sounds good to me.

there are several things that people tried that may or may not still work. just reciting from my clouded memory here and only script stuff but maybe it helps. first of all there is a command to get the unit you have currently selected in your squad command menu. i can't remember it right now though. maybe someone can help out. i'll update this post if i remember/find it. EDIT: https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/groupSelectedUnits there it is. shout out to DasAttorney for being a walking encyclopedia ;) https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/disableAI https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/enableAI in addition... https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/joinSilent https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/createGroup the general idea would be logging a unit out of your group and then issueing the move command using... https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/doMove or similar (always scroll down to the "see also" section on those wiki pages to get additional similar commands). and then logging the unit back into your group. grouplink had such a feature. it was called "force move". i think the last grouplink was ported to arma 3. no idea if that specific feature survived the port though. but certainly worth a try if you are looking for a plug and play option. a concept i personally had on my mind for a long time but never got to actually testing was, just for your own squad and just when you command it, to have each squad member in its own group and basically create your own virtual group system (an array with info that you work with) so you could use the above script stuff to take care of movement and cover stuff yourself with your own functions. that would be a bigger effort though since you'd probably need to do some UI stuff too. at least the way i imagine it ;) anyways..blablabla..hopefully something useful for you. good luck.

yes they seem to break more and more with each game update. the behavior you describe is what we had fixed with a crazy hack right before last release. speed won't fix that. it's a very weird complex issue related to the animation tree. no idea why it appears now again. yet another reason to stop working on something like this. after spending the most time tricking the engine into doing something that should be simple instead of working on more features, because arma, you end up playing catch up because BI are unable to release a finished game and thus several years after release keep changing the architecutre and data structure. and in all fairness. the engine is not made for this. it isn't made for many things. i honestly have better things to do, especially considering the weather lately ;) i appreciate the passion for this addon though. i get it. dinos are popular. but it's retarded effort just to get something half decent that will then randomly break after a month. maybe the other dino mod is still rocking it? something like this requires a lot of maintenance as described above. so you are better off focusing on the people that actually still work on their stuff. or forget about hte dinos and focus on star wars. that's what ruppert works on now ;)

don't waste your time. there will be no support for bugs related to other mods for obvious reasons. this mod is for arma. ace =/= arma. i appreciate the report anyways though. any active attempt at trying to make this better is appreciated. as mentioned in the recent posts, there will only be a final pass on this addon in the near future. there's no long term progress ahead. sorry.

that's great to hear. sounds also like some general net code stuff is being fixed in the process (atleast to my ears lol). on the topic of expanding VON. i really think key is to do very little but effective stuff. if people want more they can always use the awesome scripting stuff that allows you to make new channels etc inside the missions to avoid mod requirements. or maybe someone wants to fill that gap. now there are two mods that do the same. how about a mission based framework with similar goals that doesn't require addon files? (after VON works again ofc ;))

i wonder though. did he only increase the res of single tiles and left the others alone in his tests? that would not be representive of how it would be with each tile having 4 times the res. i'd rather like to see terrain shaders being updaed overall to support a wet look for when in rains and maybe even some fake cloud shadows or something (i saw a great example of that for unity some years ago). i feel like arma already suffers from too much data being handled so i don't know about just upping stuff as a workaround for something htat should be handled more in a procedural way.

that's sounds right to me. i guess the increased grip is the factor that makes it look weird then. although i saw some drifting video with a modded car which looked different. they probably changed something in another place to compensate for increased grip though. i don't quite get this part though. could you explain a little more? wouldn't it be possible to help th AI with some stuff instead of increasing grip unrealistically globally? kind of sad to have to compromise like that just for the AI especially since most people probably avoid letting AI do complicated driving tasks.

can you explain how overall slower recovery would improve the sytem or overall gameplay? please no. blinking eyes? passing out? again. what does that do for gameplay? if you want to limit loadouts so badly do it by mission design or modding load capacities. not with backwards weird exaggerated penalties. or at least keep that stuff for "hyper realism" mods. arma should be arma and ace should be ace. as it has always been. two different things.

this makes a lot of sense. this would also explain why the "functional" handbrake is only that, functional. since i can't test myself i was looking for videos and it looks nothing like anything i would call physics based. too much grip would explain what i saw (can't find teh video right now) although it also looked nothing like it would with blocked rear wheels. i wish i could test it more thoroughly myself. maybe someone could do me the favour of doing some tests and record it. are the wheels even blocking? in the video it looked very strange in terms of the angles.

lol what? ----------------- i first thought it was weird that battllefield had no VON but then i read the chat and realised it was better that way. ;) in arma on the other hand i think it's a crucial thing. it starts at new guys being willing to cooperate but being left unguided by arma's super bare bones and dusty dry mission making traditions (main game UI doesn't help), and it goes on to the more important tactical coordination, which makes the game interesting and is simply required on the large open terrains to get any fun out of it. to me arma is one of the worst games to lone wolf (unless you like walking sims a la DayZ). easy examples: transport, revive, overwatch, CAS. i think something like ACRE in vanilla would be overkill (too much micro management for a broad solution) but i'd like to see the default radio channels properly explained for newbs in a showcase or something. and the UI could be more hands on too to make it more obvious. simplest solution would be incoorperating the channels into the radio (3d map object) so that isn't useless and to make it clear non verbally what the channels are, basically radio frequencies. would be cool to have the radio show up briefly when you change channels with a little UI animation and maybe a short static sound cue. first of all VON working properly at all would be a good step though. obviously.

i mean i get that some people celebrate the whole talking a lot over ACRE not doing much playstyle and i kind of get it, each to their own. but wha..what? arma has modern ground vehicles (as in fast), helos and even jets. i could stop there but even just having to turn your gun quickly in CQB, hell doing anything with urgency, since this is a frikkin game about combat, will require high speed and precision. again, no hate towards logistics and recon fetishism, though. i literally stopped playing arma 3 MP (PvP) because of constant stutter epecially in CQB. there's always some shit that has to load, hell i got stutter from the other guy shooting at me in alpha from that retarded gun smoke bug... to me arma 3 is now a broken transition state to maybe the next arma (sounds familiar?). some day they will nail it, i swear. yes of course. it's a well known fact that FPS get lower and lower with each new game generation. the game of the future will be the mona lisa at 1 FPS at 1024000x680000 resolution. ;)

the reason i asked is that i never knew it would be used for communication. hence mods like grouplink and similar that would establish that missing connection. so i wonder if the description is just off or if it's just a fancy way of saying: "yes we're saving in here if anyone on this side knows about dude X", when the communication is never actually happening eventhoguh the data is there. so it would be more of a data pool you can use to make scripts that actually allow communication between groups drawing the data using knowsabout etc blabla. just trying to get the exact picture of it here so this is mostly still a question (for confirmation of my current view on it).

i think it might be because vests are handled differently in the engine. like backpacks are more like actual vehicles. i think addbackpack works with vehicle classes too (gives you great "the thing" situations) but addvest might not. i think vests are more like weapons or rather helmets. the lines might be blurry in terms of how they are made visible on the character using proxies but i always felt that backpacks have a special way they work. more independently from the character entity itself. do you remember how they had to fix/workaround that to make weapons and helmets that use hiddenselectiontextures in the config show those textures also when you put them on the ground? not sure backpacks ever had that problem. could be wrong though. just going by what clues i remember.

when you say HQ are you talking about the center thingies you can create using createCenter? just curious.

yes that is what i meant before. not slowing down but being slower by default.

he's got a point though in that they, understandably, mostly or probably almost exclusively add what they need themselves. i'd love to see a more detailed command too. disabling fatigue entirely just disables too much of the whole game which turns it into something even less complex than arma 2. no aim shake at all, no sprint restriction at all.

i generally agree on that. it just doesn't work like that in 1st person and it also depends a lot on the target gameplay. arma is a shooter. yes there is optional 3rd person and all that but the focus is navigation with your weapon up in 1st person and i wish it was even closer to other shooters in terms of smoothness and responsiveness, getting there though. and i honestly think collision and its results are a far bigger problem in CQB for example. BUT. i think inertia and momentum can have their place in arma too. sprinting. i would totally be fine with having sprinting be a different deal than normal running. you can't shoot anyways and fatigue how it is now limits it severely anyways. so having physics based limits to it would be cool. i really hope BIS will consider loosening the tie between fatigue and load and instead introduce slower movement speed caused by load and overall focus fatigue more on sprinting and other heavy duty movements. it shouldn't be just about "carry x kg of gear and see how far you can sprint". at a certain load you shouldn't be sprinting at all. and not because one step pushed up your fatigue value super fast and now you also can't aim for shit. you should get an instant overall speed decrease. it's such a simple thing that many RPGs do and it makes a lot of sense imho.

that's great to hear! it might seem not important for a military game but i'm really glad there is a focus on these side things still. i was kind of afraid animals would be one of those things that get abandoned and eventually kind of disappear. i'm really curious about the species we get for Tanoa tbh. not expecting anything crazy like tigers or something but after the cows, sheep, goats, dogs in arma 2 i was kind underwhelmed to only see snakes in addition while overall species count decreased in arma 3. is there any chance we'll get four leg terrain IK or even just a engine side setvector solution for when bigger (..than rabbit basically) animals stand on steep slopes? would be great to see some minor state of the art tech additions. the engine is kind of behind there.

agreed. especially for heavy loads i personally would love to have 3 (or whatever) anims that get blended seamlessly so you'd slow down instead of getting exhausted and then having to stop constantly. in short. heavy load should mean slow movement and not fast exhaustion due to forced fast movement. sprinting however should exhaust you faster with heavier load obviously. that would be more realistic and feel less frustrating. win win. it seems a little backwards to me to either have to move super slow (basically fixed walk speed) or being forced to hit exhaustion theshholds and then having to recover all the time when you carry a heavy weapon. creates those silly cyclic play styles like "run...prone...run...prone". let's be honest, it's most effective. you get there fast and you restore steady aim fast. pacing is overall not detailed/dynamic enough as a mechanic imho. someone made a suggestion of an additional factor of how long you've been in "exhausted mode" to apply to recovery. that's the kind of things that could make it much more believeable and feel less like a simple ACE like punishment thing. talking about arma 2 ace passing out stuff. i think it's too easy to just resort to realistic/hardcore vs casual/arcade. if you really analyse how the game handles it you can find a lot of unrealistic things, which to me personally atleast are the most frustrating parts. immersion killers. tweaking it doesn't automatically mean making it less realistic. as for the indication "issue". i think the thought behind a HUD bar is managing the fatigue so you don't have to wait for the effects, which turn up when you are already negatively impacted by it. it's all about managing very precisely so then you could much like in real life, where you do this when jogging for example, keep a pace that keeps you exactly at a state that you can handle long term. if you play arma 3 longer you will automatically train yourself to memorize the time it takes in this particular game to get to that point. so you will train yourself something you should already know. that's the same as having an indication to start with except you are just compensating the lack of it and trading off info that would make total sense to have from several perspectives. it makes sense to be conscious about the exact state of your fatigue most of the time unless you are super exhausted. a fatigue bar is not something i'm passionate about but i felt this point was kind of overlooked. i'd personally love the thing to be integrated into the watch. not the most "realistic" solution but sure interesting. everyone loves gadgets and items that have a purpose in games, right? to me such things automatically increase immersion. i suggested that before but the fatigue bar crowd didn't like it that much ;)

do you mean literally walking underwater? if so, this might a ticket worthy issue worth addressing before the expansion. maybe something along the lines of "getout animations are missing transitions to swimming animations". but maybe i misunderstood. can't test myself atm.