Macser

I don't necessarily understand the protectiveness some authors have towards their creations. Non-commercial specifically. But even so, that's just my opinion. If someone specifically puts a few restrictions on their stuff, I just think it's the decent thing to do, to abide by it. The "no harm" argument works both ways. Would it really be any harm to just say "fair enough", and move on? Is it really impinging on their freedoms by not having access to a collection of addons? Obstructing the functioning of their daily life? I doubt it. If it's just entertainment , or a hobby, are they really losing much by just letting it go? I don't think it's as innocent as it sometimes looks. Edit: Regarding the last paragraph. In case there's any misconceptions about who I mean, I'm referring to people uploading or otherwise ignoring restrictions by authors.

I've often spent hours looking for a complex solution to a problem, only to find it was a typo or something else just as simple. Bloody frustrating. A fresh pair of eyeballs is often the best remedy. Glad to see you're back on track anyway.

Right. Well I'd expect the footsteps regardless of the animation being played. Just so we're on the same page, so to speak. When you move forward the character displays the default pose in your p3d. The rest pose? If that's the case, then the engine is looking for an rtm at a specified location, but can't find it. It knows where the model is and renders it. But doesn't have any rotations to apply. The engine uses actions to determine the appropriate states (rtms and their definitions) to call, depending on what the character is doing at any given time. I won't say the model.cfg isn't involved. But it sounds more like the source could be in your Cfgmoves.

Nice to see you're making progress. You mentioned that you managed to test out some crude animations, but in the last part of the post you say the character is stuck in the t-pose. Do you mean the animations can be run in isolation from OB, but the engine itself isn't calling them?

Some folks think because it's publicly available, and free, that means they should be able to do what ever they like. For me the reasons authors give are irrelevant. If they don't want you messing with their stuff, that should be all there is to it. It's not a grey area.

Yeah. If you check some of the more prolific posters, there's far too many models in their catalogue for one person to create. It's just not possible. Especially when you consider what goes into a single game ready mesh. You can see content from some very recognisable games. Call of duty, Battlefield or The Witcher series to name a few.

Just let it run, there's nothing to be gained by removing the thread. But it might not be a bad idea to try other places too. That kind of resource could benefit any modder. It's a pity BI ditched the groups we had on the previous version of the boards. There was one for voice actors as I recall. I could be wrong, but from what little research I've done, there seems to be more Russian communities still playing OFP/CWA than other nationalities. But I don't think they frequent these boards much.

I might be barking up the wrong tree, as the saying goes, but I'm pretty sure the relationship between a p3d and rtms hasn't changed. Rtms will always override mesh data. It doesn't matter how you configure it. That's why it's possible to change the scale of a character without actually editing the mesh. You can just use the rtms. It's been done many times in the past for the grandad of the series, OFP. While that sounds great, you have to create a whole new set of animations and configure them for the character in question. What ever way you slice it, it's a lot of work. A lot of very boring work at that. I've only gotten away with it, because I've been creating very large, sci-fi based models with a very small move set. That cut the workload down significantly.

Believe it or not Wiki, you're not alone in that. Although it's hard to see it, when it's very personal, and you're in the middle of it. Anything you do on a regular basis can become a reminder of low points. So sometimes it's better to try something new, or just leave it alone. Take care of yourself.

Congratulations to you and your "team" JDB.

I think this, or this might be a better place to make that request.

I don't understand how you can make that observation. The approach in each application is very different. You can assign specific weight to individual vertices or groups of them. Not to mention preview weight assignment in real-time to see how the mesh deforms. Blender is far from perfect, but any issues I've had regarding weighting were due to my own lack of experience. What exactly are you trying to do? If you don't have blends between different sections you'll get plenty of clipping issues. I can't think of any situation where you'd want "hard" defined areas for a character. Unless you're talking about some kind of rigid armour.

Kill you? Certain people might get a bit cranky if you ask questions without doing a bit of research first. Apart from that members here generally treat each other decently. Regardless of how long they've been around. Welcome on board.

The small gear icon, top of the page, to the right of your profile image. Look for "account settings".

That style of play does unfortunately bring a lot of knuckle-draggers to the party. Don't waste your energy expecting them to see the error of their ways, and change. I doubt they represent everyone who enjoys a more "sport" oriented experience though. You just have to find like minded people. I'm sure they're out there.

A bit more information would be good. What do you mean by "overlap"? Are you referring to blending between weights? Are you trying to weight parts of the mesh 100% to a given selection?

Basically what JDB said. Although the folder setup is slightly different, "Arma : Cold war assault" is "Operation Flashpoint: Cold war crisis" updated to version 1.99. They are the same game apart from the addition of a few scripting commands and eventhandlers. BI re-released the game as "Arma : Cold war assault" to seemingly establish it as a separate title. Codemasters owned the name "Operation Flashpoint" which they continued to use. Bohemia Interactive owned the original engine and content.

Well I don't claim to be an expert where hand anims are concerned. But that works reliably for me. But I have tried it by using the exact same method you described. And that works out just as well. So I'm not sure why that offset is happening.

Checking static pose won't correct it. I can only confirm this works with A2. But I don't think the process is much different for A3. Rtms certainly haven't changed. The first thing I do is load up Armarig. Then I import the P3d for the weapon model into the blend. For this situation I usually delete all the lods except for the first resolution and make a copy of it. This keep things neater. When it's imported it'll be perpendicular to the rig and centered on the grid. So I rotate and move the rig until it's lined up with the weapon. I then pose the hands and export the resulting rtm. The rtm is placed into the project folder with the model.cfg present. Which has the appropriate skeleton definition. Then it's packed..

I understand he's already tried that. And in a few different ways. The mesh itself doesn't seem to be the problem. It looks like the interaction between it and the armature is the source. If xjoker separates the mesh from the rig it'll export fine. But then the rtms generated from the armature become an issue.

There's no virtual arsenal in Arma 2.

Just find the class name you want to replace and put it into the appropriate section. So class SoldierWB, SoldierEB or SoldierGB ( Default West,East or Res soldiers) could be replaced with whatever WW4 classes you want to use instead.

Are you looking to get the default rotations for that particular bone (Pelvis?)? I'm not sure I can help. But it wouldn't hurt to establish what the question really is. So you can get the right answer.

It's not meant to work with the BVH exporter. I removed all the connecting bones that facilitated it anyway. It was too messy and added some layers of work for importing. It was created to work with Alwarren's Arma toolbox. That will allow you to create rtms directly. Al's addon is free and works very well. It doesn't add any significant workload to the process. Try it out.

There are no "skeletons" as such. Not for individual animations. The bones layout you see in a model.cfg for a human is used for all motion. That's the skeleton. The rtms are what contain their positions/rotations. Are you creating animations from scratch? The only thing I can imagine working at this point is getting animations into O2/OB and saving out the appropriate frame as a mesh. Then using that as your point of reference to blend naturally between them.