mp5gosu

U.C.S.V. Unmanned Cargo & Support Vehicle (1.5) Support this MANW entry: click me Description: The ultimate lightweight transport solution. The U.C.S.V. (Unmanned Cargo and Support Vehicle). The purpose of this unity is simple: Transporting. It is designed as a very flexible, lightweight and fast aerial unit to provide strong and efficient logistics support. This is my very first addon for ARMA ever. So if there are any bugs, let me know. Any feedback and critics are welcome and appreciated. With v1.5, the lifting module became obsolete and should not be used anymore. However, it is still possible to use it - in case BIS plans to add the ability to disable Sling Loading on particular vehicles. If you use both Lifting functions, they may behave wrong and/or funny. Yes, you can use them at the same time. However, this is not recommended. Module support will be completely dropped in the future, if Sling Loading will not be disableable. Features (updated): UAV Unit, controllable via Terminal (FACTION >> Autonomous >> UCSV) Usable with BluFor, OpFor and Independent Units Thermal Image Texture included 4 Resolution LODs Lashing models Easy-to-configure Lifting module (Mission Editor >> Modules >> Misc >> U.C.S.V. Lifting module) (OBSOLETE) Paradrop Customizable Textures Signature Key included Server Key included Low Polycount Tilt-Rotor Changes 1.50: added A3 Sling Load compatibility (Lifting module is now obsolete) adjusted fuel consumption rate added winch hitpoint Changelog: Known issues: Lights do not work for UAVs due to a bug in A3 Clanlogos not working TODO: More script optimization various improvements add POD support Download: Unmanned Cargo & Support Vehicle U.C.S.V. v1.42 Alternative: j4p_ucsv_v150.zip (~19MB) And the included readme.txt (latest) Steam: Go to Steam Workshop Activate Lifting: Place module in the editor. Mission Editor >> Modules >> Misc >> U.C.S.V. Lifting module Classnames: Bonus: ucsv_texture_kit.rar (~30MB). And this is what you will find inside:

Hi, I'm afraid the mod is now deprecated due to lack of usefulness and feedback. This project will not be developed any further.

From what I can tell, drones lack the interest of the most of the community. Therefore, somehow the development doesn't show much progress. From my POV, an overhaul for autonomous vehicles and especially their practical usage would be necessary. They must be made more attractive and useful to everyone.

Hi. Thanks for the idea. There are already similar drones within the game (Greyhawk, UGV), you might want to try these first. But in general, yes, I'm not averse to making such a copter for aerial unmanned combat. :)

Not all weapon boxes seem to be supported. Later today, I'll keep an eye on that. The Manpod has been planned from the beginning and I'm still motivated to add such thing. In the meanwhile, you should check http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=27518

No. It works the same way. I don't know, how BIS is making distinctions between objects, but you should be able to lift at least anything withing allowed weight that belongs to your faction. I'll double-check the issue though. There might have been problems with the Steam Publisher, that doesn't let me update properly.

It can lift anything with a weight less than 500kg. This behaviour is one of the drawbacks that come with vanilla Sling Load support. However, it might be possible to define additional objects via an object's init.

1.50 arrived. 1st post updated. :)

Not yet, sorry. I'll do within the next few weeks. Update should arrive around new year. :)

Sounds like a fun idea. I'll have a look into it. :)

Hey, this should actually be possible. However, I did a compromise when developing this addon. In the upcoming update, I will add the possibility via a simple scripting command. :)

Glad to hear. When Sling loading hits main branch, this addon will also be useable with it. :)

I guess, it is VSYNC related. For example, if you have stable 60+ FPS, it will get capped at 60.(relates to value of 2). If you have 30+ FPS but less than 60,it will get capped at 30 (value of 1). Not sure what these values are in particular. Maybe that 60 refers to 1 and so on. Gesendet von meinem Nexus 7 mit Tapatalk

Either use material selections or BlendMaterial.

Update arrived, first post updated.

Exactly. ;) Gesendet von meinem Nexus 7 mit Tapatalk

Hi and thanks for the reply - I actually made a mistake with the last update so the module didn't become available in Zeus, etc. This is fixed in the next version. (will be released with the next A3 update) ;)

This effect can be seen in several situations. Scalability. We do have even more and more detailed content now. Imagine how it would be if you put ALL assets into one spot of the map. Memory consumption, CPU stress, Calculating additional LODs are less efficient as creating an adaptive, dynamic shadow map. They could even implement shadow map instancing. But as RV4 builds up on previous versions, this would require a massive rewrite of some portions of the engine. However, the technology to create better shadows exists. There are tons of R&D documents on the web too. :) I usually don't do either unless I know what I am talking about. I'm quite into technical progress and have seen some neat algorithms the past 10 years. Some of them have been implemented in severeal engines (id Tech 4, UE3, UE4, Source, etc.).

Well, to be honest, I agree with things the others said in this thread. However, my own personal opinion differs a bit: Shadow LODs were neccessary for creating good looking shadows back in the old days. That was because of the massive content, provided in an open World Sandbox. Nowadays, this should not be neccessary anymore: Algorithms + Hardware today are more advanced and optimized thus they allow a proper and fast generation of shadow maps. Special Case A3: With Stencil Shadows, you are visually limited in detail and correct display of shadows cannot be guaranteed. (Static shadows on dynamic geometry for example - shadow isn't displayed) Another aspect is the fact that shadow visibility is limited to a certain degree which is controlled via options (max. 200m distance). However, this shadow is often hardly noticeable. With Shadow maps, the detail can be made adaptive - depending on settings and hardware. Plus, every shadow LOD increases content size, therefore loading times and so on. If A3 would use shadow maps only, this time could be converted for shadow maps generation. Last but not least: Shadow Maps are soft. ;) Conclusion: Personally I think that stencils are still ingame as a relict from A, A2 because of proven usability. If I had the choice, I would completeley disregard shadow LODs as they also produce more effort managing and optimizing models.

Finally, steam workshop verification has been fixed. :) http://makearmanotwar.com/entry/xYch1ReZJM#.U9aZ4fl_t8E

As the title says. I created a bistudio account some months ago. I was using this account for the MANW Contest. Now, that uploading and publishing is enabled, I created an entry via Publisher. So far so good. Next, when it comes to the Steam Workshop ID Verification process, I'm stuck. I'm entering the correct ID (the workshop file is set to "public"), then -after clicking verifiy it want to connect to my Steam account. (via simple login). This all works so far. When successfully logged in, it hops back to the addon page with the message "It appears that you are not the owner of the Steam Workshop item with id: <ID>." <ID> is my actual id. ;) However, I cannot login via steam profile directly as it is asking me for an email-adress, which has been - of course - already taken. Is there something I'm dong wrong? Or is this a not intended behaviour? edit: Wrong category. Please move it to Q&A.

Sure, here: _vehiclesDefault = [ ["Quadbike_01_base_F",[0,-0.35,-1]], ["Offroad_01_base_F",[0,0.2,-1.3]], ["Hatchback_01_base_F",[0,0,-1.7]], ["SUV_01_base_F",[0,0.2,-1.9]], ["UGV_01_base_F",[-0.47,-0.2,-0.8]], ["Van_01_base_F",[0,0,-1.5]], ["SDV_01_base_F",[0,0.79,-2.07]], ["Rubber_duck_base_F",[0,0,-0.7]], ["Boat_Civil_01_base_F",[0,-0.6,-1.2]], ["ReammoBox_F",[0,0,-0.9]], ["B_supplyCrate_F",[0,-0.4,9.2]], ["C_supplyCrate_F",[0,-0.4,9.2]], ["O_supplyCrate_F",[0,-0.4,9.2]], ["I_supplyCrate_F",[0,-0.4,9.2]], ["IG_supplyCrate_F",[0,-0.4,9.2]], ["C_Kart_01_F_Base",[-0.05,-0.4,-0.65]] ]; _vehiclesSpecial = [ ["Box_IND_Ammo_F",[0,-0.52,-1.6]], ["Box_EAST_Ammo_F",[0,-0.52,-1.6]], ["Box_NATO_Ammo_F",[0,-0.52,-1.6]], ["Box_IND_Wps_F",[0,-0.4,-1.6]], ["Box_EAST_Wps_F",[0,-0.4,-1.6]], ["Box_NATO_Wps_F",[0,-0.4,-1.6]], ["Box_IND_AmmoOrd_F",[0,-0.5,-1.7]], ["Box_EAST_AmmoOrd_F",[0,-0.5,-1.7]], ["Box_NATO_AmmoOrd_F",[0,-0.5,-1.7]], ["Box_IND_Grenades_F",[0,-0.45,-1.7]], ["Box_EAST_Grenades_F",[0,-0.45,-1.7]], ["Box_NATO_Grenades_F",[0,-0.45,-1.7]], ["Box_IND_WpsLaunch_F",[0,-0.45,-1.5]], ["Box_EAST_WpsLaunch_F",[0,-0.45,-1.5]], ["Box_NATO_WpsLaunch_F",[0,-0.45,-1.5]], ["Box_IND_Support_F",[0,-0.5,-1.7]], ["Box_EAST_Support_F",[0,-0.5,-1.7]], ["Box_NATO_Support_F",[0,-0.5,-1.7]], ["Box_IND_AmmoVeh_F",[0,-0.5,-2.3]], ["Box_EAST_AmmoVeh_F",[0,-0.5,-2.3]], ["Box_NATO_AmmoVeh_F",[0,-0.5,-2.3]], ["Box_IND_WpsSpecial_F",[0,-0.45,-1.6]], ["Box_EAST_WpsSpecial_F",[0,-0.45,-1.6]], ["Box_NATO_WpsSpecial_F",[0,-0.45,-1.6]], ["C_Van_01_box_F",[0,0.5,-3]] ];

All your examples miss the closing bracket. :) And by the way, you might want to have a look at the included manual. edit: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?162621-U-C-S-V-Cargo-amp-Support-Drone&p=2731973&viewfull=1#post2731973

Hello, I crunched down the area to avoid interfering with other objects nearby and to make it a bit more challenging. Therefore, I will not increase the range that objects can be lifted within.

A small update arrived, see 1st post. :)