Jump to content

kerodan

Member
  • Content Count

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Posts posted by kerodan


  1. 1 hour ago, The Man Without Qualities said:

    Issue is that you are might younger and never experienced times when games were almost fully finished before release.

    So you simply got used to crap and hence it is your "normal" level.

    You are "fault tolerant". :-)

     

    A bit offtopic but: Yes, I am fault tolerant even though I have some experience of the "good old days" and am very happy that we passed them. To this day, I still remember downloading a 21MB patch for Spellforce at 4-8kb/s just to install the damn thing on launch day. So much for the release of a fully finished product.

     

    1 hour ago, The Man Without Qualities said:

    And using harsh wording is intended, it is to avoid that BIS is trying to "improve" something that needs to be dumped and done from scratch.

     

    You can be harsh as long as you want but BI will not dumped their current AI system in this stage of development. Way out of the scope of post-release development for an engine that may not even see a next iteration in ARMA 4. Improvements are the things we can and should look forward to.

     

    1 hour ago, The Man Without Qualities said:

    The funny thing is that I even get much better results when ordering a bunch of vehicles individually to the same destination compared to move them as group in formation.

    In my experience, this depends on the combat mode. If you group them up and put them in "SAFE" mode, they form up nicely and will reach their destination. In "Combat" mode this will - unfortunately - not happen. 


  2. 32 minutes ago, Tankbuster said:

    So your workaround for the ai driving problems is to have a human fix it live, in the mission using zeus?

     

    For the moment, yes. Weirdly enough I noticed that changing the elevation of the vehicle (-> letting it fall half a meter) fixes many issues of the AI getting stuck on open roads.

     

    34 minutes ago, Tankbuster said:

    It's doubly frustrating for us when bi say they are going to fix it then walk away, whistling innocently like nothing happened.

     

    I totally agree with you on that account. I was also disappointed by BI reallocating their ressources. Especially if you consider how much progress was achieved in a short amount of time by a dedicated developer. 

    However, I also believe that it is not productive to call the whole system broken. It is in many cases functional and servers a purpose but it definitely needs improvement. Although I hope that BI will refocus some attention on driving, I do not believe this can be achieved by stating that the AI is completely broken as this is no resonable base for a productive dialogue.


  3. 1 hour ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

    did you watch the vid?

     

    I did and I never encountered severe issues like that since the overhaul. Furthermore, I am not disputing the fact, that the driving AI has issues. In general, I am just annoyed that the term "broken" is thrown around every time something is not working as expectedly. In my book "broken" means that it is completely and utterly useless.

     

    7 minutes ago, The Man Without Qualities said:

    This is a common marketing strategy on own bad product...mainly used by companies selling their products in the mass market. Make people so used to bad quality that they consider each improvement as the ultimate hyper thingy.

     

    Well, my comparison is situated in the realms of ARMA and in comparison to ARMA 2 my statement is still valid. 

     

    8 minutes ago, The Man Without Qualities said:

    That constant bumping when doing driving in a column is just inability by BIS.

    The fact that infantry is killed by vehicles is simply the unwillingness to invest a severe amount of resources into that issue.

     

    Bumping does not happen in my convoys. They may take a weird turn here or there but they do not drive into each other.

    In contrast, infantry being killed by vehicles is happening and there is definitly room for improvement. But, in my experience, this issue is not very consistent and seems to be related to performance issues (i.e. the resources of the client who has ownership of the ai or the general server performance).


  4. Can you please stop referring to the driving ai as "broken"?

     

    Based on my experience, especially if you remind me of the 1 year mark for the overhaul, the AI is driving better then ever before. Sure they sometimes still get stuck in certain places, circle around invisible obstacles on open roads or just stop entirely for no apparent reason but this does not justify to call the underlying system "broken". Also, most of these situations can be resolved by using Zeus if time allows it.

     

    So please stop exaggerating and report your specific bugs in a responsible manner. Exaggerations like that will not likely convince BI to shift its priorities.

    • Like 1

  5. 15 hours ago, captmoose344 said:

    AI being too accurate, knowing where they are and having laser accuracy. 

    Yes, people complain a lot about this issues but never mention the situations where they occur. I have been playing ARMA coop for over 4 years now (so A2 OA and A3) and never perceived a game-breaking flaw concerning these systems. In my experience, most of these complains could be easily resolved by setting up the AI configuration properly.

     

    So I would agree with you, that BI could invest more resources in making the AI configuration easily accessible and document the subskills in more detail (for example, I am still looking for a definitive answer to the question if the view distance setting influences the AI's visual spotting range). However, I would not agree on scraping the whole AI system as I am repeatedly astonished by what the AI can actually do given the unpredictable situations thrown at it.

     

    On a different note: Why is everybody calling the current iteration of AI driving 'broken'? They still drive far better than before work started on improving the driving system and I haven't noticed any glaring issues with the current version. But I still hope for further improvements, of course. ;)

     

    • Like 2

  6. I would actually argue, that it is okay to allow monetization for server owners as it guarantees the owners to cover their costs (although I am also skeptical if these costs actually need that big of a compensation).

    But monetizing the server should also entail paying the addon authors a share of the generated income. So, if you chose to monetize a modded server, every content creator benefits from the money generated by the monetization scheme.

     

    The problem with this concept is - of course - that it would need a more active involvement by BI to bring the different content creators to the same table...


  7. I'm not acting any child, i'm just writing my opinion. Would you like to see Niko Bellic in GTA 6 (Malden in Arma 3)? Would you like to see Niko as gey?

     

    Why not? A character's personality can change if you provide appropriate reasoning for understanding that change. It is a natural process occuring all the time.

     

    Bringing this crude example for yours back to the original topic:

    Bohemia provided reasons for using other assets and this is reasonable to many maybe not all.

    I understand it however and am very happy with the changes they made.


  8. Hmmm. i've jsut seen that VBS3 uses Oculus Rift but ARMA3 not and i would guess they uses the same engine. I cannot understand why Arma 3 will not support it... no words. Create a payed DLC and i would buy it and some more i guess.

     

    VBS and ARMA do not only have different developers but also use different engines/iterrations of the same engine. So this would be cross-company and cross-engine feature implementation. Along this line of thinking you could also demand that Spintires has deformable terrain so it should be no problem to implement this feature in Frontiers' Elite Dangerous (I am exaggerating of course).


  9.  Anybody understand how exactly enfusion changes animation system?

     

    I would suggest to keep an eye on the DayZ Standalone development and their devblogs. They are in the process of implementing a new animation system and it is very likely that we will see this system (or an adaptation of it) in future ARMA games.

    • Like 1

  10. [...]

    All of those that you listed with the exception of hovercraft are simply out of scope for both the engine and gameplay-wise [..]

     

    Although I whole heartedly agree with you that naval combat on that scale is out of the question for a game like ARMA, I would really love to see some kind of naval asset which can be used as a base of operations. A place where I can store equipement and provide players with a logical starting/regrouping position to mount a submersible or RHIB. If it can also house a chopper and be moveable at the same time, all my expectations concerning naval-based operations would be completley satisfied.


  11. I can only speak of my stable branch experience at the moment but I do not really see the need to provide extensive feedback as I do not encounter alot of critical issues.

     

    Small issues like a vehicle running into small objects or getting stuck taking a certain turn are still present in some situation but are these things to report? In my opinion they are not as I suppose that these issues are getting smoothed out over time and can not really be fixed for every difficult spot on any given map.

     

     

    Maybe no communication whether more AI driving improvements are planned to be implemented or not?

     

    They just implied one the last page that changes to tracked vehicle AI are coming at some point.


  12. Apex assets don't eat any more ressources than other content...

    Having those loaded with your game does not affect it whatsoever

     

    Exactly this. Furthermore, you can try all the assets (except Tanoa of course) for free in virtual arsenal.

    I really do not get what you are complaining about? Do you want that the player base is split based on DLC content?


  13.  BIS did not deliver in improving performance in a significant way.

     

    When I compare it to my experience in A2 it is a huge step-up! Maybe it is due to me playing mostly small coop missions (10-20Players max with 100++AI) but my FPS doubled in comparison to the FPS I got in the same kind of missions in A2. Futhermore, you are forgetting the Geometric Occlusion feature added with Eden which improved FPS in cities tremendously in my opinion.

     

    Of course you cannot compare it to the changes made in DayZ where some achieved performance jumps from 30 to 90+ FPS but do not sell A3s improvements that short...

    • Like 1

  14. They're pretty much just bug fixing, while i think their resources are being transitioned to DayZ development.

     

    Can you elaborate on how you came to this conclusion?

     

    The release of Apex was only a few months ago and entailed a lot of new issues for the devs to fix. In addition to the demands to fix this or that issue made daily on these forums.

    So it is kind of natural to have a "slower" period, although they still managed to pull of some nice feature additions to EDEN.

     

    Does not really look like they start "abandoning" A3 to be honest. We will know more when we finally get a glimpse at the next road map but for the moment this kind of seems exaggerated in my opinion.

     

    Concerning naval assets, I would also BIS to embrace their diving/swimming feature a little more. It seems to be tacked on and is not really useable for long missions (equipment constraints due to the rebreather, slow speed of submersibles etc.). Would love to see a naval asset which can be used as a small base of operations out on the sea but do not have the feeling we will get it anytime soon. ;)


  15. If you are referring to the AI driving overhaul, this as not been implemented yet for tracked vehicles. Only the behavior of wheeled vehicles has been changed. Have a look at the changelog of the last mayor update for any new commands that have been introduced.


  16. Someone else encountered the bug that a vehicle in a convoi will turn around for no reason at all and drive back to the last waypoint? After reaching the last waypoint, it will then turn around again and try to regroup with the other vehicles in the group.

     

    By the way: Collision avoidance on route seems not to be calculated for the individual vehicle but for the complete group. This should normally not be an issue but becomes apparrent in situations like the one just described. My straggler keeped running full speed in oncoming vehicles like they did not exist.

     

    Edit: Just looked at turning around a convoi in the middle of road: It seems to me that not only is collision avoidance only calculated for the whole group, it also does not consider vehicles belonging to the same group. Means the leading vehicle will turn nicely on the road and than smash right into the following vehicle. Maybe an area you could do some tweaking. ;)


  17. What I'm trying to say is that arma 3 engine could be just as much improved as dayz if leadership decides to do it.Yes is a long and complex process.Yes it requires manpower, time and knowledge but is

    essential for actual longer term improvement where they finally break down frustration of phrases "not possible" "not within the scope" and so on.

     

    Although this is true, you have to consider the implications of such a change. For DayZ this was an okaish investment as it only pissed of people who expected a working product right of the start or had no idea what kind of work was involved in such a change. Aka switching out huge chunks of your underlying engine code while also developing assets and the like. Speaking of ARMA 3, it is not feasible to do such a thing as it is a finished product with a huge amount of user-made content. Content which would be put in jepardy by making such drastic changes at this stage in development.

     

    Best guess is that they will consider switching to the Enfusion engine for the next installment of the game but not before. Otherwise, they would have no window to prepare the endless creators of user-made content for the changes to come and provide them with a reasonable explanation of why their content - most likley  - will not be useable anymore. Introducing such drastic changes in a DLC or Patch is just bad policy in this regard as it not only annoys the user-base your game heavily relies on but also forces the studio to further invest in the conversion of all original A3 assets.


  18. i hope it doesn't come out until billion Arma 3 bugs are fixed, and i'm not talking about making textures look pretty!

    i hope they make more quality DLC content instead, as Arma 2 still has 80% more units and vehicles in it.

     

    Please elaborate on the "billion of bugs"? In my experience, A3 runs very well (did so since the beginning) and the amount of bugs is total normal for a game of this scale/modability. Furthermore, the comparison to A2 is just mind-boggling due to new tech beeing introduced in A3 (especially concerning unit loadout) und many vehicles in A2 OA (I assume this is the title you are referring to) beeing either ported from previous titles, which had a similiar setting, or having a very high number of variants of the same model.

     

    Concerning the topic: I also have the assumption that A4 will be based on a version of the Enfusion engine. As can be seen by DayZ, it seems to be the next step engine-wise and to some degree designed to accomodate backwards/cross-game compatibilty which is essential for a game like Arma and BIS as a developing studio.

    • Like 2

  19. setConvoySeparation

    I played around with it a little bit but I am not sure if its effects result from the command, by coincidence or from me setting the speed limits of the drivers.

    BUT the effect is only visible (if at all) on the vehicles in the back of the convoy. The vehicles in the front (especially the leading vehicle) will keep on trucking and not hold the same distance to the following vehicle like the vehicles in the back do.


  20. Well, after adjusting my script to spawn convois (setFormation is a real requirement now ;)) and observing the effects of the patch I must say: Great work!
    Wheeled vehicles and their pathfinding is tremendously improved and the vehicles now try do activly avoid infantery units. Have seen way less roadkills since the patch which is just awesome!

     

    Problems I spotted:

    - Hemett trucks still have some problems with turning around steep corners in cities but I would guess that this will be improved in the future. ;)

    - When coming to an intersection and the AI is supposed to drive straight over it, they sometimes make a weird turn where they drive onto the intersecting road and than turn back on their original route. It looks like they want to avoid an invisible obstacle on the central point where the two roads intersect.

    - Bridges on Tanoa are still a bit fussy. Some vehicles pass, some do not. Could not figure out a pattern yet.

     

    Keep up the great work!

    • Like 1

  21. @pvt. partz: The map is 10km², although quite a big portion of it is water.

     

    @pvt. partz, @jacobc679 & @ officialxtreme: The map should be ready for TB. Here is a little summary of what the different folders contain.

    • Folder "sosopol": Contains all the relevant data for the map. First, it should still be possilbe to just pack this folder with pboProject to bring the map into the game. Second, you can use the included files (like SatMap, Heightmap, and Mask) to setup a new project in TB. Most of the configs should still be useable. The only exception being the lightning config which is not up-to-date to the new standards introduced by the visual upgrade which was released before APEX.
    • Folder "sosopol.Cache" and "sosopol.v4d": Files that are created and required by TB. Theoretically, you should be able to open the original Project file ("sosopol.tv4p") by copying the complete folder "sosopol.Cache" into the folder "Terrainbuilder" as well as all the files included in "sosopol.v4d". Depending on how forgiving TB is, you maybe have to change the name of the folder "Terrainbuilder" to "sosopol".
    • Folder "SourceData": Includes the heightmap in L3DT Format and the source of the mask file. These do not have to be put in your pDrive and can be opened by L3DT or a photo-editing software of your choice, respectively.
    • Folder "Terrainbuilder": Contains the various layers with already placed objects, road shapes and used object libaries. Can either be used for restoring the original project file or be imported in a new project.

    Bring the whole thing into the game can either be achieved by rebuilding the original project structure (as outlined above) or by setting up a new project file and importing/copying all the relevant files from the folder "sosopol" and "Terrainbuilder". The latter is probably the cleanest/safest way. For instructions on how to do that and an overview on the file structure, I advise to have a look at the various guides on map making (like for example The Atlas Guide) or consult the official discord channel on terrain making.

     

    Hope I could help a bit.

    Kerodan

    • Like 1
×