Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

ShotgunSheamuS

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    62

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by ShotgunSheamuS

  1. Posted

    Right. quickly tried opening the model in text editor, and voila... Your a boss lol,

    I'll look up this insignia thing, I'm curious about it. Not so sure about the flagpatch on the soldier since it's in the texture, but ill go mess with it just to see the results. maybe you are right. =P

    Okay well I'll keep my pbo name the same as mod folder name for future purposes, and I'll also try follow your naming convention suggested to avoid clashes with other probable mods.

    Thanks again for your help! cheers

  2. Posted · Edited by ShotgunSheamuS
    update

    Well you see, the config that does work, is placed 3 levels down in hierarchy as well, just like my latest. Only difference is in previous build, I had uniforms, backpacks, headgear and vests catagorized in on folder titled Gear, now all I did was moved them all up into root of pbo, and did some renaming of the folders, and then updated config with new paths, and strangely that doesn't work now, even though I too can't see why it should not work at all. But I figured there was some rule of thumb I wasn't adhering to which you could have pointed out. But if you agree it should work, then I guess i'll call it a bug lol.

    Anyhow, I'll try moving it to my units folder, and further up till I get to root, if it doesn't work, I'll just revert back to previous build, and make necessary changes there. not a big deal. If that breaks, then hell, it probably could be your suggested changes thats breaking it since thats all changes I'll make. (could possibly explain why modders copy the models into their mods perhaps?) I'll keep updated.

    Thanks

    ---------- Post added at 19:10 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------

    Okay so, I got it working... Kinda

    So i figured out why mod wouldnt load, not sure where the problem lies completely yet, but gonna look further into it, and I can already say it has nothing to do where the config lies, because I tried that, and still didnt do anything, so I remembered I changed the root name of folder from za_core to just core in the new build, and that seems to be the problem, so if I change back to za_core then it works. And this without the need to update my paths in configs, and I think thats why my soldier now has an invisiable uniform, the textures are working, but path is incorrect.

    The reason I posted this quickly, the belt buckle that is visible in the pic, would you guess that is what the insignia is referring too perhaps?

    UPDATE

    So anyhow, quickly updated the paths in my config script, and moved config back to original place, and tested with much SUCCESS

    I am so very happy right now I could cry, finally i can go back to sleeping properly.. you have been such a big help, I cannot thank you enough.

    So lastly, I have some last questions. (hope you dont mind answering if you can)

    1. How did you identify that the ia_officer had more than one camo property and their names camo1, camo2 and insignia (not camo3)? If I am going to continue with my units uniform mod, I am going to experiment with a few different uniforms, and other future mods (maybe) so without having to poke you for answers, how would I tell which models require multiple textures and how would I tell which textures exactly? With this uniform I noted the ia_officer_co, but would never have guessed the ia_soldier_01_clothing_co was required, even if I knew I needed a secondary texture.

    2. Would like if you could elaborate on that insignia, I am guessing it may be that belt buckle?

    3. If my mods name is @test_mod, should the pbo name of the mod also be test_mod and not just mod? It is the only thing I can think of, however I am going to stick to that as a rule of thumb anyways.

    4. How can I thank you? LOL I'm sure I had another 1 or 2 important questions, but i'll poke you instead when they come up. I'll follow those guides you posted incase it gets covered there.

    Thank you sooo much for your guidance and time. It is really appreciated and since above "soldier" is just a quick test to get everything working, you assisted me to get him looking "right" so I'll keep him and just rename to Surpher as base example in your honor =P

  3. Posted

    Now thats an answer I can work with!!! Makes quite a bit of sense now, thank you for the in depth answer.

    I will quickly try and patch up my uniform config and draft a quick sample retexture and test, if all goes well, I'll post my success within next 24hours! if not, I will provide you with my config and layout.

    Thank you again :)

    ---------- Post added at 23:11 ---------- Previous post was at 21:43 ----------

    Ugh, so now I am lost again -sigh- and this I don't understand why.

    I have made the changes as suggested, and referenced the A3 models directly, but unfortunately now, for some reason, in the editor I can no longer select faction or units. like my mod no longer is active? All I did was suggested changes, changed directory of models, and organized my layout as follows

    \core (pbo)
 - Headgear (disabled config)
 - Models (empty = now irrelevent if I can use vanilla models)
 - Units
   - Icon (icon for faction logo/flag)
   - Soldier
     - 2014_standard (where my main config for soldier and custom textures are)
       - ui (icon for uniform)
 - Vests (disabled config)

    And here is my config. Appologies for all the comments, being new, I try fill these in for myself as I figure them out, and for future reference to my realism unit who will have to manage it if i ever go MIA one day. 

    #define ReadAndWrite		0
#define ReadAndCreate		1
#define ReadOnly		2
#define ReadOnlyVerified		3

#define true	1
#define false	0

#define VSoft		0
#define VArmor		1
#define VAir		2

#define TEast		0
#define TWest		1
#define TGuerrila		2
#define TCivilian		3
#define TSideUnknown		4
#define TEnemy		5
#define TFriendly		6
#define TLogic		7

#define private		0
#define protected		1
#define public		2 

class CfgPatches
{
class ZA_CORE_2014_Soldier		//create your own class
{
	units[] = {};
	weapons[] = {};
	requiredVersion = 0.1;
	requiredAddons[] = {"A3_Data_F","A3_Weapons_F","A3_Characters_F","A3_Characters_F_Beta","A3_Characters_F_BLUFOR"};
};
};

class CfgFactionClasses
{
class ZULU_ALPHA // create a faction.
{
	displayName = "ZA";		// name of faction. (preferebly use abbreviation)
	priority = 100;		// where in drop down list of editor you want them. (lower number moves up and vice verse)
	side = 1;		// 1 is for blu_for side. 2 = opfor, 3 = Indep, 4 = civi
	icon = "\core\Units\Icon\Icon.paa"; //directory of your faction logo/flag.
};
};

class CfgVehicleClasses
{
class ZA_2014_Soldier_Standard		//create a soldier class to be defined below.
{
	displayName = "ZA Soldier";		//name of class in editor/game. (medic, Patrol leader, Second in command, Lead sclout)
};
};

class CfgVehicles
{

class B_Soldier_base_F; 						// Because soldier will be blu_for, use blufor base.
class ZA_2014_Soldier_Brown: B_Soldier_base_F 	// create a custom soldier base to define soldier base from above, kinda like renaming the base soldier to your own.
{
	scope = 2;		// use 0 to use for base only, or 2 for public. 1 is for protected, not sure what that does.
	displayName = "Standard (Brown)";		// Name shown in editor? or Inventory?
	uniformClass = "ZA_2014_Browns";		// below uniform class defined in cfgWeapons.
	nakedUniform = "U_BasicBody";		// naked body model. (this is default)
	model = "\A3\characters_f_beta\indep\ia_officer.p3d";		// link to custom (or vanilla) uniform model.

	faction = "ZULU_ALPHA";		// specified in CfgFactionClasses.
	vehicleClass = "ZA_2014_Soldier_Standard";		// specified in CfgVehicleClasses you created.
	canCarryBackPack=1;		//pretty obvious. (1=yes/0=no)
	canDeactivateMines=1;		//pretty obvious. (1=yes/0=no)
	engineer=1;		//pretty obvious. (1=yes/0=no)
	attendant = "true";		//pretty obvious.
	uniformAccessories[] = {}; //eyeprotection, goggles etc?
	Items[] = {};		//items???
	weapons[] = {"Throw","Put"};		// (throw) to throw grenades and (put) to place mines. also add primary and secondary weapons here.
	magazines[] = {};		// if weapon provided, add magazines here, copy and paste as many magazines as you want.
	linkedItems[] = {"ItemWatch","ItemRadio","ItemGPS"};		// specify the vest and helmet here as well.
	respawnLinkedItems[] = {"ItemMap","ItemCompass","ItemWatch","ItemRadio","ItemGPS"};		// same as above, for if you want to respawn with this after death.

	hiddenSelectionsTextures[] = {"\core\Units\Soldier\2014_standard\u_za_browns_uniform1_co","\core\Units\Soldier\2014_standard\u_za_browns_uniform2_co"};		// link to custom (or vanilla) uniform texture. (May include more than one!)
	hiddenSelections[] = {"camo1","camo2"};		// "insignia"		//this depends on uniform model, some only require one camo, others more.

	class Wounds
	{
		tex[] = {};
		mat[] = {};
	};
};
};

class cfgWeapons
{
class Uniform_Base;
class UniformItem;
//	class InventoryItem_Base_F;
//	class ItemCore;
//	class HeadGearItem;
//	class V_PlateCarrier1_rgr;
//	class VestItem;

class ZA_2014_Browns: Uniform_Base		//special properties for uniform when taken off. inventory item
{
	scope = 2;		// pretty obvious.
	model = "\A3\characters_f\Common\Suitpacks\suitpack_universal_F";		// model used for when item is on the ground and not worn.
	displayName = "ZA Browns (Field Uniform)";		// display name in inventory.
	picture = "\core\Units\Soldier\2014_standard\ui\icon_u_za_brownsuniform_ca.jpg";		// directory to uniform icon for inventory.

	class ItemInfo: UniformItem
	{
		uniformModel = "-";		//not sure why this is left blank???
		uniformClass = "ZA_2014_Soldier_Brown";		// this uniform class is your custom soldier base.
		containerClass="Supply60";		// how much you can carry, i assume number is weight of gear packed inside?
		mass=80;		// how much this item weighs without contents from above.
	};
};
};

    As I said, I had it working before, just couldnt get uniform to work, but yeah I guess all my tinkering messed it up. But here is a script from previous build, before I changed things up. And I tested now, works 100% except for that damn uniform texture.

    #define ReadAndWrite		0
#define ReadAndCreate		1
#define ReadOnly		2
#define ReadOnlyVerified		3

#define true	1
#define false	0

#define VSoft		0
#define VArmor		1
#define VAir		2

#define TEast		0
#define TWest		1
#define TGuerrila		2
#define TCivilian		3
#define TSideUnknown		4
#define TEnemy		5
#define TFriendly		6
#define TLogic		7

#define private		0
#define protected		1
#define public		2 

class CfgPatches
{
class ZA_CORE_2014_Soldier //create a class
{
	units[] = {};
	weapons[] = {};
	requiredVersion = 0.1;
	requiredAddons[] = {"A3_Data_F","A3_Weapons_F","A3_Characters_F","A3_Characters_F_BLUFOR"};
   };
};


class CfgFactionClasses
{
class ZA_CORE //create a faction
{
	displayName = "ZA"; // name of faction (preferebly use abbreviation)
	priority = 100; // where in drop down list you want them (lower number moves up and vice verse)
	side = 1; // 1 is for blu_for side
       icon = "\ZA_CORE\Addons\Unit\ZuluAlpha\Icon\Icon.jpg";
   };
};


class CfgVehicleClasses
{
class ZA_Soldier_2014_Standard //create a soldier to be defined below
{
	displayName = "ZA Soldier"; //name (medic, Patrol leader, Second in command, Lead sclout)
   };
};

class CfgVehicles
{

   class B_Soldier_base_F; // Because soldier will be blu_for
   class B_Carryall_oucamo;

   class ZA_2014_Soldier_FieldUniform_Brown: B_Soldier_base_F //create a uniform base to define soldier from above
{
	scope = 2;
	displayName = "Standard (Brown)"; //Name shown in editor? or Inventory?
       faction = "ZA_CORE"; //specified in CfgFactionClasses
	vehicleClass = "ZA_Soldier_2014_Standard"; //specified in CfgVehicleClasses you created
       canCarryBackPack=1;
	canDeactivateMines=1;
	engineer=1; 
       attendant = "true";
	uniformAccessories[] = {};
       uniformClass = "ZA_2014_Soldier_FieldUniform_Brown"; //above mentioned class
	nakedUniform = "U_BasicBody"; //naked body model (use default)
	model = "\ZA_CORE\Addons\Models\za_uniform.p3d"; //link to custom (or vanilla) uniform model
	Items[] = {}; //items???
	weapons[] = {"Throw","Put"}; //in order to equip grenades and mines. also add primary and secondary weapons here
       magazines[] = {}; //if weapon provided, add magazines here, copy and paste as many magazines as you want
       linkedItems[] = {"ZA_Chestrig_Olive","ZA_Beret_Oxx","ItemWatch","ItemRadio","ItemGPS"}; //specify the vest and helmet here as well
	respawnLinkedItems[] = {"ZA_Chestrig_Olive","ZA_Beret_Oxx","ItemMap","ItemCompass","ItemWatch","ItemRadio","ItemGPS"}; //same as above, for if you want to respawn with this after death
       hiddenSelectionsTextures[] = {"\ZA_CORE\Addons\Gear\Uniform\Soldier\u_za_browns_uniform_co.paa"}; //link to custom (or vanilla) uniform texture
       hiddenSelections[] = {"Camo"};
       class Wounds
	{
		tex[] = {};
		mat[] = {"A3\Characters_F_Beta\INDEP\Data\ia_soldier_01_clothing.rvmat","A3\Characters_F_Beta\INDEP\Data\ia_soldier_01_clothing_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F_Beta\INDEP\Data\ia_soldier_01_clothing_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_white_bald_muscular.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_white_bald_muscular_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_white_bald_muscular_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_black_bald_muscular.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_black_bald_muscular_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_black_bald_muscular_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_white_hairy_muscular.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_white_hairy_muscular_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_white_hairy_muscular_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_white_old.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_white_old_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_white_old_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_asian_bald_muscular.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_asian_bald_muscular_injury.rvmat","A3\Characters_F\Heads\Data\hl_asian_bald_muscular_injury.rvmat"};
	};
};
};

class cfgWeapons
{
class Uniform_Base;
class UniformItem;
class InventoryItem_Base_F;
class ItemCore;
class HeadGearItem;
class V_PlateCarrier1_rgr;
class VestItem;

class ZA_2014_Soldier_FieldUniform_Brown: Uniform_Base //special properties for uniform when taken off. inventory item
{
	scope = public;
       model = "\ZA_CORE\Addons\Models\suitpack_universal_F";
	displayName = "ZA Browns (Field Uniform)";
	picture = "\ZA_CORE\Addons\Gear\Uniform\Soldier\ui\icon_u_za_brownsuniform_ca.jpg";

	class ItemInfo: UniformItem
	{
		uniformModel = "-";
		uniformClass = "ZA_2014_Soldier_FieldUniform_Brown";
		containerClass="Supply60";
		mass=80;
	};
};
};

    I'm probably going to have to sort of go back to previous build layout and try your suggestions. But first have a look and see, maybe you can point something out and I can learn something here. :)

  4. Posted

    Thanks for the response, really appreciate it. However, without trying to be rude, I would like to ask if you can be less vague? I am a total noob at modding and arma. This little custom uniform mod is my first attempt at anything like this, so I have no background.

    So anyways, I have questions about your reply.

    Firstly, the hidden selections, camo1, 2 and insignia. are you suggesting I use that line of code exactly as is? Because I don't quite remember having to define camo and never seen it anywhere in order to define it, perhaps you have a sample if that is the case?. Also you point out two texture for officer? Not sure where soldier_01_clothing fits in, but I am guessing it is camo2 right? and insignia, that is faction related, so needs to point to faction icon?

    secondly you mentioned using the hiddenselectionsmaterials for rvmat, which i did do, (and had no effect) but why would I lose wound texture? Don't you point it towards the _injury rvmat file for that?

    I have no intention redistributing the A3 models, not my intention, I just want my textures to show on the model then I will gladly reference the vanilla models. However this mod will only be internal for my unit, whom all own A3 so I can point to vanilla models if that is possible.

    This changing texture paths based with hex editor, how does that work, is there a how to guide? And yes I googled, and this is really the best I could come up with. With the lack of response to that post, I can see this is touching boundries now trying to just change the texture of a model, and I dont see why it should be such a pain? Surely it is most common and popular for people to make custom camo pattern uniforms representing their country or realism unit? Is that why they include the models in mods?

  5. Posted · Edited by ShotgunSheamuS
    forgot to subscribe to my own thread -blush-

    Hi there guys.

    My appologies if this has been asked before, or if this topic is in the wrong thread. Struggeling to find an answer, and not sure where this belongs.

    So I have been holding out from asking assistance with this project of mine, to see how far I can get. So far propper detailed guides have been next to impossible to find, the most I find, are scattered all in pieces here and there, and also most seem to assume you already familiar with editing in ArmA, which I am not (and this is my first ever mod, in any game so far). So, not noob friendly, and for the past week, the total noob I am, I have been trying to figure this out, and slowly, day by day I want to tear my hair out, slap someone really hard, and go cry in a corner, but at the same time I discover something new and figure something out, and I make progress, and it is good. It has been a wild rollercoaster this past... Now I think I am at the last step of getting it to function 100%, or so I would assume (correct me if I am wrong), and I cant figure out how to do it. And here I am asking some assistance.

    Basically I am trying to make new custom uniforms and gear for my realism unit in the form of a mod. However it's really a matter of editing the existing A3 content, just retexture of uniform and gear to be quite forward. (camo patterns)

    So, I have mastered the config.cpp files, in which I have defined everything from faction right down to the different gear to wear etc. I have edited the _co textures as desired and I have managed to do the rvmat a few hours ago. So when I test, I have my faction and I can choose my custom made soldier from custom made faction, place him on the map in editor, and there he will be, wearing the uniform and gear I configured and no errors at all. However, the edited texture i made wont apply itself, it displays the A3 default indep camo texture (I'm using the ia_officer uniform).

    Now from my understanding, (and this is just by looking at other peoples mods explained further in this paragraph), I link the _ti_ca , _smdi, and _nohq textures to rvmat, and the _co texture for my uniform was specified in the config.cpp i made for the uniform by hiddenselectiontextures. Now I am guessing i need to link the rvmat I made to the ia_officer model somehow. I have depbo'd some mods that are made to be custom uniforms, and i see they have models in the mod, not referencing the original a3 models from a3 dir (ofcourse not since it doesnt allow to save), But they are vanilla a3 models, but even those models wont allow me to save. I quickly drafted a test mod, by replacing "xyz" mod's textures with my own, along with the configs etc, and it works great, however I am stuck with using the same layout that person worked with (and i dont always agree with other peoples layouts), and if I dont stick to it, I get error that it cant find texture or model. Now, dont get me wrong, I dont want to depend on other peoples mods, I don't want to be restricted to that layout, the naming convention, or the models they provide, because I may want more and different uniform models and other vanilla stuff etc. But mostly, I got this far on my own, I would like to complete this last piece on my own, I just need to be pointed in the right direction.

    So now I ask, how do I go about doing that for myself? Somehow get those models and save them linked to the rvmat I made? I have tried searching about p3d models and rvmat and the relation between them, all i get is porting custom made models to O2 or basic text based rvmat config and save from cpp to rvmat. nothing explaining the relationship between the two. So either I am completely on the wrong trail and completely missunderstand, like the week old noob I am, or maybe I am searching for the wrong description for a how to... orrr it is a very touchy and avoided subject, since BI dont allow unbinarizing their content and this may involve that. But then I would just like to know how other modders are able to make these custom textured uniforms and gear using the copied versions of existing models vanilla A3 models working with their custom made rvmat and textures. I cannot just stop here.

    regards

    Sheamus

  6. Posted

    Hi guys, I'm pretty new at all this, so be nice please?

    I'm having issues running this ResLODRemover program, it keeps bombing out and stops responding, any idea as to why? I am running Win7 64bit, and have tried various compatability modes as well as the various available BIS.dll available, with no success, I do have the relevent .net framework installed as well, and no matter what, It keeps on doing the same thing.

    Also I have two questions: 1: Will it be compatable with A3??? Our group (clan/unit/whatever you want to call it) have a few guys running A3 on laptops or somewhat dated hardware, and since ArmA prefers to use the highest LOD anyways regardless of low or Ultra settings, this in turn creates a very disturbing and distracting popping effect thats way more noticable than the higher settings, and of course, for low end settings, it will aid them much in terms of not having to display the full high detail models that hog the much needed screenspace for a more consistent look, which is no use currently running in anything lower than high setting since everything at a distance is a mess... Ofcourse, I would have wished for BIS to actually make this a vanilla thing, but for some reason low end machines just have to suffer and "deal" with it. So will this tool work for A3 models as well?

    Lastly, Theres Parralax mapping effect on the ground, looks horrible with the warping effect and bet that eats unnecessary performance too, once again, would wish BIS to make an option in video options to disable this layer on the texture, unfortunately not. So there must be some hight map that can be removed yeah? I assume mipmapremover can do that, am I right to assume that?

  7. Posted

    After watching how far Outerra Engine is progressing, I rate Bohemia should for the most part consider scrapping most of the old outdated engine, and port over some of their simulations, AI and other IP and content to Outerra, since it is open source, they can even toy with it right now. But I would think given the amazing talent and mathematical geniuses working on Outerra would be worth employing, perhaps Bohemia should just invest and aquire the company and guys working on the project. It would be a win/win for Bohemia, probably the Outerra team and us consumers.

    I would love to see ARMA 4 run on this Outerra engine in its final form, but I would also like to see other titles made with this engine. This could be big for Bohemia and other future games.

  8. Posted

    figured I'll post my neg. feedback here as well:

    - attacking an AAF VIP in the middle of the day?

    - naive soldiers, doesn't present questions to Miller or anyone else high in command in this dire situation

    - Maxwell full of lights in the dark? next time don't be surprised why arty hits you hard later. (why not use metal military barracks for cover?)

    - AAF miraculously incapable of locating a group of survivors... on an abandoned MILITARY COMPOUND (lol) (even survivors doesn't put any effort into covering up their traces before danger closes...)

    - advancing through a valley? squad's leader should have his head chopped off.

    - Wet Work: terrible insertion with no recon info or any smart preparations. like, "let's gamble our lives guys!"

    - didn't notice any actual active patrols around Maxwell or going further to ensure safety of others. everybody relaxed.

    - AAF air harmless? jets flying over and disappearing, attack helis ignoring obvious threats... epic win.

    - no vehicles utilization while so many of them on the battlefield.

    - terrible waypoint placements in terms of tactics/safety/etc. by game designers. both sides take the most stupid approaches possible.

    - Tipping Point: remnants of survivors attack the main city (logically, it should be most defended!) of Stratis... then their evac boats ignore everything around (no covering fire, etc.).

    - with so many AAF helis/jets occupying the sphere, Miller decides to leave for Altis right now in boats, through plain sea (genius). equals to death sentence. nobody, perhaps aware of themselves, opposes dumb Miller's decisions.

    * no cutscenes

    * storyline hooks on a massive cliffhanger

    * huge lack of any tactics/decisions that would represent military-like thinking

    Maybe BIS needs a consultant or a more experienced, self-critical designer which may drive a campaign to perfection almost?

    I agree with what you say, and it is for the most part valid. But I have to honestly say that it doesnt seem to kill the experience as much, and remember, to the newbish people joining ARMA now, this isnt even a concern to them and lets face it, BI are trying to open up to a wider audience. Now I do understand that this could make the hardcore fans feel neglected, but it does make it easier to get into for them. However, the flawed logic that you point out could likely be addressed and corrected and tweaked in a future update to the campaign, however for the most part, I think it could be taken into serious consideration for the upcoming episodes, to which I agree with totally. It would be nice for ARMA to stick to simulation, even though they are trying to go for raw adventure and action.

    That said, I still think it was pretty damn good, rough around the edges, but still damn good. The cutscenes comment, really not a deal breaker, half life never had cutscenes and it turned out fine. As for the cliffhanger, it was perfect... Really makes me eager for next episode, so I think mission accomplished =)

  10. Posted

    Btw the "Tipping Point" mission is awful. I have like four people alive when we start to retreat. Well guess what happens? Those goddamn mortars kill everyone else except me, every single time. It turns the game into a dying simulator. It isn't fun.

    Mainly came to put my input for exactly this. That was the part that got me, I literally had to redo that part like 16 times before I actually made it through. And it isn't that much of a case of, "Oh I am approaching this wrong, I should do it another way", because fairly simply put, you get nailed following your squad regardless, and thats where the problem lies... I found it more likely that the mortars were really going for ME and not my squad. I had to break away and go far right away from them to realize this (thinking I wouldnt get nailed), and only then, still die, however! Not as easily, I had a much better chance of survival because of the uneven ground, and then I figured how to traverse that uneven terrain to safety. So yes this part will be majorly frustrating to other players (and this is to an extent where newcomers, your future bread and butter will give up), and the whole "keep moving so they dont get a bead on you" advice doesnt help much for the newcomer or the average player because they will be following the squad to their death beds. I would suggest that during that section, the path gets redirected and leans more right towards the ditch and uneven terrain on the right where mortars are less effective than the flat even terrain the squad is going towards. Just my 2cents on that one.

    Other than that, This is definately a good experience so far, and I just love that it doesnt feel like a copy paste of A2 at all, I think thats what I respect most. It does feel like something new, and fresh and you guys are stretching your creativity (the future theme makes this doubly as cool). The action is pretty decent, gun play is fun, dialogue feels solid, and well done, story I cant comment yet as this felt much more like a teaser or demo to be honest, AI arent too bad, although I will admit, as far as squad mates go, after your squad leader hits that mine at the beginning, the rest of guys I end up joining, I dont feel them at all, feels very disjointed, and clunky, and they are pretty damn useless to be honest. But maybe that works partly because you are joining up with strangers that you arent suppose to feel connected with yet as a team, it is not expected that they would jam well with the player... However this may become a greater problem in the future as the player will be getting to know the new outfit and yet it would still feel very disjointed. But to top it off, this is really great, I'm enjoying it, and I love the new rain and sunshafts that just add a whole new level of beauty to ARMA. I really do hope to see more performance tweaks, more natural beauty added to the world of ARMA and the rest of the campaign =P

    Lastly, as the credits rolled over (and yes I watched it, feel it was deserving) I was surprised to see my profile name in the credits at the end before the long list of other players. Very nice touch that, I didnt expect it, and yet it struck a cord =)

    PS: on the subject of my preference whether I prefer the episodic content or the full content release... I am liking the episodic. It gives me a gap when I need it, like when I want to play mp, or other games, I dont have to be held up to finish arma first. and also, this right here, feedback, which could probably promote improvemnts on future episodes, also a great thing. Personally I prefer this! I would just like to suggest one thing though. When starting the next campaign, could you guys kick it off with a "previously on ARMA" take? The release of the episodes are fairly far apart, and alot of this information about the events and story will probably be lost on me by the time I start the second episode, so just brief intro to highlight the events of the first episode just to refresh my memory before I kickoff episode 2 would be awesome =)

  11. Posted

    We need real world weapons, that are realistic in game.

    It is hard to believe in the near future, that all current weapons in service would cease to exist... Personally I love the future setting, and the new weapons and stuff, but I agree, it doesnt feel all to real missing a large portion of todays assets. I sure hope the devs do a forward port patch to bring over A2 weapons and gear and vehicles etc.

  12. Posted

    Dance Animations!

    it is the core soul of ArmA!

    More animations yeah, surrender, pushups, crunches, marching, and all other military related anims, and hey dancing, boxing and other animations could be great for other entertaining activities, maybe even mini games, the whole rolling sideways while pointing directly upwards, or scootching your arse over the ground like a dog with worms is getting old now lol.

  13. Posted

    Exactly, sounds like BIS is just trying to feel/look better in their own eyes by using word-play and don't really care what community thinks about it. Would be much more fair if they could admit that announced idea being scrapped is idea being cut-off. In that matter idea had to be a feature - and it was announced to be in ArmA 3, none speaked of possibility of not being in-game of that or this certain feature.

    And any other circumstances that apparently affected the game design, features etc. cannot be a bargaining chip in pushing and shoving between developers and community. It is not mature. Mature is statement - yes, there were announced features to be put in game - halfly working prototypes etc - but were scrapped/cut off. Sorry.

    I think from this, BI should maybe consider learning from this about what they say in future. Clearly there are loads of missunderstandings, and all because BI were discussing what they would like to bring to ARMA 3 even though it wasnt an official announcement. But see it this way, some people just hear this "blah blah blah F35 blah blah blah blah 3D editor blah blah blah blah blah...." Now that said, also bear in mind, you guys are devs, working on the game, anything you say does not get taken with a pinch of salt. It gets taken seriously, saying you would like to do this and this in arma, is like saying I want to do this in ARMA and I will do whatever it takes to impliment it because im a developer, and I will see it through... Some people are like that, so whatever you guys mention, can be considered as a "semi-official" announcemnt... Rather avoid it.

    I'm pretty much sitting on the fence here, both Petka and the community make arguments and both can be considered valid given the perspective, but BI should learn from this. In future, dont mention or even show things that arent guarenteed to be in game, instead, surprise us =) The new rain and rainbows were a big surprise, so keep going that route, makes people more excited seeing something awesome they never really knew about!

    Thats all I have to say on this.

  14. Posted

    What? I have never met an Arma player who cared about a kill death ratio. But then again I don't play wasteland very often.

    LOL yeah Wasteland being the main attraction, but seriously he has a point, because all these dayz and wasteland players are playing the domination and invade and annex servers too, and they are a huge mood killer! I guess A2 is becomming too "OLD" for their taste, and wasteland stratis is getting boring since wasteland ALTIS is just too boring and spread out lol. But yeah, nothing more annoying than gungho crazed players who are out to just kill shit... How many times have I been playing with guys, and on first sight of enemy they just open up, without informing the sqaud where the contact is, because the idiot just wanted the kill. And the virtual ammo box? OMG, the all in one sniper/AT/medic/pilot/demo/squad leaders also, just really... -sigh- I will end my rant here.

    CoFlash, your best bet is to just join a realism unit for a pure ARMA mp experience, thats what i ended up doing. Most realism units are pretty strict, and theres a fairly involved selection and training session that goes with it to weed out these junkies. I too am fairly new to the MP scene, playing arma online for about a year now, though been playing solo since OFP. and I still am primarily a solo player, so I'm with you on the campaign. Waiting patiently, and also playing user made missions, and fiddling with the editor myself.

  15. Posted

    It all sounds so easy.

    Except, of course, that every surface will need a variable specular wet-material applied to it. :)

    Instead of creating and applying a wet specular material to each asset, could you just create generic specular wet-material and apply it accross all assets? For example pourus surface like clothing would have a darkened wet soaked fileter, and light specular shine to it, whereas non-pourus surfaces like metal etc would have a heavier specular shine to it, with a droplet bump map like texture for the rain drops? Wouldnt it be easier then to just catagorize textures under a group of pourus and non-pourus and each group would have relevent materials applied to it? Just trying to think out of the box here.

  16. Posted

    Oh yeah, for sure. In ArmA2 I always scripted the fog to match the rain strength, using a monitoring script, and it looked excellent. I just think maybe it should be standard behavior :)

    This exactly!!! I play with the same settings for the same effect. Set fog up to 10 for heavy rain at 100, and it looks perfect. So I agree, it should be standard behaviour, not particularly as fog itself, but the illusion of heavy rain that limits your view.

  18. Posted

    please improve lods of hatchback, setting objects quality beyond ultra, causes ugly lods at short distances, when your turning around or runing nearby a hatchback. Typicaly at altis life scenarios, at big city Cavala, with lots of objects, the game engine starts to dumb some lod objects down, and especially at hatchback it looks ugly.

    It's much more than just the hatch back, alot of models need attention for the LOD, have you seen the parachute at a distance for example?

  19. Posted

    What 10T said =) Also I think theres a missunderstanding in concurrency on CPU load, just because the load on each core is full, does not mean the game is not ustilizing it to it's best. It just means it is utilizing what it requires. In fact the lower the load, the better right? This reminds me of a time when Vista just came out and some brat told me (with much pride too) that he's Vista Ultimate OS uses 7Gb of he's 8Gb of Ram, and that Vista was the best OS because it fully utilized all he's hardware. Now it's really the same principle here really... unless you dont see what I just did there.

    Based on CPU load, ARMA perform's better on my rig than say BF3, WHY??? Because ARMA 3 thrashes BF3 in terms of the sheer amount of onscreen detail, and the map size etc. Because it does way more than BF3 at a lower CPU load. Like maruk said, it is easy to create a little app that will max out your cpu, for all you know, these games that "fully" utilize your cpu and gpu, are probably very poorly optimized, and poor missunderstood Maruk and other guys have spent countless nights trying to please us with any little performance boost they manage to pull out of thin cyber air... Poor guys are probably coffee addicts! lol

    Now that said, I do agree ARMA still needs more performance gain in hardware. For one, ARMA is very CPU intensive, and actually fairly light on the GPU given it doesnt really utilize any heavy GPU hungry techniques, so I think the rendering that's occuring on the CPU is really just unnecessary, now I dont know anything about programming graphics, but I am sure it should be possible to offload all of that rendering to GPU, because afterall, isnt a GPU faster than a CPU?? so then perhaps view distance may be largely dependable on GPU rather than CPU as it is now. It is easier and cheaper to upgrade GPU, especially with the introduction of sli and crossfire, than it is to upgrade your CPU. I might be completely off track here with this idea, but it makes sense to me.

  20. Posted

    Do you want to look at how you can hear enemy crews talking outside their tank? So you can call it radio hack?

    Thats a risk yeah, but if the enemy is good enough to get that close to your tank and eve's drop on your discussion, then I say they damn well earned and deserve that information. =) I still see no problem with it.

  21. Posted

    You can hear the crews talking outside the tank. Why BIS can't resolve the issue?

    I sont quite see the problem? Directional chat seems to be present regardless of which channel you use, and I think it's brilliant and realistic. especially when in vehicles, if you are close enough you should be able to hear any chatter in the vehicle. Besides, the tanks engine was off, which is why it was so easy to hear, if the engine was on, you would barely be able to hear i'm sure. As for MP, I think that will depend on your VON audio i guess, if it is louder than the effects audio it would be much louder. I'm not sure honestly, I would guess directional chat is based on VON, but then again, I would think it actually works via the effects audio which is how they achieve the directional source of sound and distance... and that makes sense to me.

    Anyways, I like how it is. They could probably add a heavier audio filter to make the sound "weaker" coming from armored vehicles like tanks.

  22. Posted · Edited by ShotgunSheamuS

    3D hair not 2D hair

    yeah like in this screenshot! (screenshot proves it is possible lol) well hell refer to this ticket, so we can choose our haircuts and facial hair, as 3D attachments, much like how the eye protection is.

    I would like some propper damage when taking out aircraft, below are links to video examples from DCS, they were easier to get than the real life footage.

    http://youtu.be/1gIlq5eTOME

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y41mEtbcq_w

    Weather effects

    Rain:

    I know you guys are working on rain, but thought I would through this out there anyways. During rain, textures need reflect their condition for being wet. for example porous surfaces that absorb water like clothing, dirt, concrete etc should become darker with a slight tint of specular glint as seen on some of the leaves. and no absorbant surfaces such as metal, glass, and so forth should receive a water droplet like texture tiled accross it, with much heavier tint of specular glint. Now I dont know how easy this is, but I figure it can be done with 4 additional layers of texture, shaders I think it is called? seperate all textures in the two catagories, porous and non-porous, and create 2 shaders for each. porous receives a filter that darkens the texture, and a filter that gives it a slight shiney specular glint, and non porous recieves a texture like this, and it's own shiney specular glint. I hope it is that easy. For the ground however, to do puddles, maybe use a greyscale texture, where darker means more "wetness" and black makes a puddle.

    heat haze , I think thats what it's called, but here's a pic anyway =) Mediteranian areas are pretty hot when it's sunny, so I imagine this to be a good way of indicating how hot it is. This could be implimented using the same filter as the current rain technique is within a building, except it will start around midrange where the bad textures start... and so as a bonus this could maybe help with hiding those horrific midrange textures we all complain about -wink wink- ;)

    here's some more pics =)

    http://wwww.rayscam.com/4920004.JPG

    http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5125/5334347113_fc1457975c_z.jpg

    http://military-fitness.military.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/images-7-e1348073788228.jpeg

    http://i.imgur.com/8y519.jpg

    Oh those last two were covering sweat :rolleyes:, since we talking about hot Altis really is... Maybe some sweat spots on the soldiers, civilians etc, like armpits, back, etc... and wet sweaty face?

    Radio:

    (this may be a silly request but I think it could be a nice to have) MP3 player channel broadcasted only via the vehicle channel, so we can play and listen to music in a vehicle without having to put the mic to the speaker. Direct channel seems to work fairly well inside a vehicle anyhow. so vehicle channel can still be the same but optianally act as a stereo system, This could maybe work as follows, on the front end the driver and co-pilot/front passanger will have additional options in scroll menu (play, stop, skip, shuffle, volume up/down) and on the backend, it will source the MP3's via a folder that needs to be populated by personal collection of MP3's and then in game it will be streamed and played. So I guess that will require a built in MP3 player?

    on the subject of radios, we need a slightly better radio system. Currently it can sometimes be annoying as hell when everyone is talking over each other, on one hand your squad is all communicating, and then on top of that the squad leaders, pilots and other form of support are communicating over the side channel, and honestly, sometimes it just gets really annoying to try and talk in group channel while others are constantly talking in the side channel. So I am thinking of being able to enable and disable channels, maybe even adjust the volume per channel. For example I can disable or opt out of the side channel, like mute it, that way I dont have to receive incoming traffic on the side channel, which would be really nice since the squad leader or radio operator recieves it all and relays the necessary and relevent information via the group channel, and vice versa for outgoing information gets sent to squad leader/radio operator and then broadcasted out. And it can always be enabled/unmuted again if needed. Additionally maybe add some audio filters, to make it sound much more like radio broadcasts, and when you hit the push to talk button, all other radio traffic (excluding directional ofcourse) would be muted. will that be difficult to do?

    Editor:

    and a 3D viewport in the editor. Doesnt have to be a fully functional 3D editor, though I would wish for that instead, but something like a seperate viewport, so we can view in 3D how and were we place things and see their actual position in the world, maybe even be able to make minor adjustments, instead of doing preview 100 times just to place a guy on the second floor of a building for example.

  23. Posted

    I too have been at this point wondering the same, and I guess it really is more a matter of frustration, but to be honest, to a degree, I am just learning to accept ARMA to be what it is. We will have popping tectures and models, and though it can be dealt with, it will probably depend largely on a modder hacking away on a game, and we will have the horrible mid range texture where most of the ranged contact happens, and we will be stuck with the horrid parralax mapping that we can't disable without forfeiting the landscape geometry and grass rendering distasnce, and there are so many other issues, that made me wish they would do a new engine, but then I just learnt to accept it. Not saying I am happy accepting it, but ARMA really has very little competetion, right now, I think Project reality is pretty much it as far a realistic propper team orientated tactics go.

    But that all said, switching to another engine isnt the answer. No other engine is made to do what ARMA does, thats been made clear, so it needs to be inhouse, but instead of rewriting the whole engine at once, maybe do it piece by piece. Like what Infinity ward has done. They had rewritten so much code for Call of Duty, that it no longer runs on Quake 3 engine, it is a completely rewritten engine, and has no traces of the Q3 engine anymore. (So they claim, I cant be sure of it myself but making a point here). So maybe BIS need to rewrite parts of their engine. Focus on the core of it, like hardware utilization etc, and then later the other parts. Ideally in my opinion, they could make seperate franchises or games, or even expansion packs, where there is emphasis on these parts being rewritten and reworked.

    So they can do this in two ways, for example, for one, they could make A4, but A4 initial release could be focussed on the core basics, engine and infantry as in depth as possible, then after that they can work on the expansions which will focus on other various portions, like armour, helo's, jets, naval, diving etc. Each one of these will be made to focus on the detailed aspects of each. or option two, they could make seperate games/sims focussed on each individual core aspect, like take TOH for example, and use the code from TOH for the helo portion of the game, maybe even make TOH a module you can load up with ARMA, like you would a mod. This will push sales for these other games, and even though one wouldn't necessarily play TOH itself, they could still reap the rewards and reworked flight model from TOH. Ofcourse this will be a pricey way to go, and incompatability issues will be prevalent, but hey, hardcore fans would do it if it meant better realism right?

    Also, I think some technologies can be better improved or even replaced. For example the soft shadows are great but have their downsides, most notably the jaggies on the shadows itself, now I have seen that there's some new feature in DX11 that fixes this, so the devs should look into that, also parralax mapping should be scrapped, replace it with tessalation rather, will do a better job and look better! but at the very least, just allow us to disable parralax mapping. But there are other things that can be improved or replaced by something better, and this will most likely require reworking the engine anyways.

    Lastly, open up the engine and game more... Sometimes i see a potentially great idea or mod, but the modder can only do so much mentioning the limitations they have to work with, and hope for a fix from the devs side.

    Now, on the other hand, my faith is slowly being restored by the devs, I know they are a small amount of people working on something this big, but when I see things appear in ARMA that I was not expecting (like rainbows and new rain effect), I smile big =) The devs have not given up now that they got ARMA out the door on launch. So I am giving them the benefit of the doubt that there is still much to be done. Also the AI, it appears AI has been improved quite a bit, by no means am I calling it perfect, but I have been in situations where AI were doing the right things, in fact, so well i easily mistook it for human players. but, there are still some occasions where they are superhuman -sigh- but AI is improving, and I am liking that! Also performancewise, definately improving as well. Still not utilizing what I feel it should but frame rates are getting better and closer to acceptable. So it is getting there, and I have decided I will not pass judgement until the devs call quits and officially call it completed.

  24. Posted

    Stable or Dev?

    Both, just switched to Dev before posting... Minor improvement to dev, but still a pain.

    Also think i found something odd, those new outpost towers, the big ones, I can run a lovely 40fps running around the tower, but the moment I get on the stairs, or right to the top, fps drops to below 20fps, inside the outpost its fine again, and when crouching at the top (not viewing the landscape it's smooth again... So I figure it had to do with my view distcance which I never had this problem, but if for example I stand on a hill or hover with a heli right next to the outpost, same settings, no lag, as soon as I set foot on the stairs of the outpost, heavy lag when looking out in the distance??? Can anyone confirm this?

    ---------- Post added at 19:26 ---------- Previous post was at 19:19 ----------

    That is a vicious circle indeed. Frustrating tweaking hell.

    The solution is simple. Don't tweak, find one combination that works rather well and stick with it.

    The view distance and object distance is usually enough tweaking after that.

    Running Arma 3 comfortably 60fps with ultra ...you shouldn't use word "even" :D

    Running Arma 3 with rather big fights (not huge battles) and very high/ultra settings and reasonable view distance, 30 fps is comfortable.

    Constant 60fps would be a dream, not likely to happen.

    I know this, and as I said, I know it's futile, but for some reason, it annoys me! Best progress I have made is disabling my FPS counter, so essentially what I dont see wont hurt me... But there are times you just really notice that spike, and it sometimes causes my death because it is at that critical moment or shot... I would have been fine if ARMA3 looked like ARMA 2, or even ARMA 1 really, as long as they addressed all the major performance issues before deciding to push it further requiring even more power... I sincerely hope they keep working on this... I will start playing again after all SP episodes are released, hopefully by that time it is complete and optimized, will still test a few dev updates when I read anything of interest in the change log.

    ---------- Post added at 19:28 ---------- Previous post was at 19:26 ----------

    Noticed some LOD issues with vehicles. Are those dev build related or also in stable?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS87gmkrf0w

    There are loads of these, have you seen the parachutes LOD??? Very distracting isnt it lol

  25. Posted

    I am so depressed =(

    Performance really sucks balls, and I spent quite a bit of money on my PC which is really only dedicated for ARMA3 based on the provided recommended specs before release, and my rig is just a notch above that... I dont mind mid range performance, I mean I played ARMA 2 just fine on low to medium at around 30fps, but the rig i was using was just pretty generic, but after investing so much into a dedicated rig just for ARMA3, and seeing it struggle like this, it is depressing... I mean I can bitch about the annoiying popping of models and textures that distract me, the crappy mid range textures, the awful shadowing, the AI, the horrific parralax mapping that we still cant disable independantly, but all of that is moot, when we cant even comfortably run ARMA3 at 60fps on ultra with the recommendid spec that BIS provided... I litterally hardly get to play the game, as soon as performance drops, I start tweaking, even though i know it's futile, I still do it, and it takes up almost an entire evening... I hate it, it's frustrating as hell!

    I shall end my little depressing rant here, and go finish my bottle of whiskey and play some GTA5... but I humbly wish that the devs would put in more effort to get ARMA 3 performance into tip top shape, hell even the DAYZ team seems to be coming up with some solutions, like the short range sync update, that sounds friggin like a major leap! why do I want network data sync to sync data from things happening on the other end of the map that doesnt affect me in any way? Likewise why does everything have to happen at such a large scale when it isnt even in range.... bleh, there I go again... I'm gonna shut up now... Just wanted to share my feelings lol, still a great product, I love ARMA, but I also seem to hate it (from a performance point of view).

    and I am ready to be crucified by the hardcore elite fans now =)

×