oddballsix

What seems to be simple but I am quickly finding is not: Is there a way to link the PIP (Live Feed) source to an aircraft so that it stays with that aircraft? Incidentally, limited (try near none) material in the wiki on this subject. As this community gets a little aggressive if they feel that the issue isn't researched, here is just a handful of what I have read: 1) Everything spawns and is directed but the UAV/Helicopter/Quadcopter leaves the camera behind as soon as its moves. 2) http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?158141-PIP-help Camera target and commitment directly seems to play with my screen, doesn't modify PIP as intended (of course unless I am failing at it). No one ever replied to that person's thread back in the day. 3) http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?160455-PIP-on-off-switch No one appears to know how to turn it on/off so no handle from this thread to figure out what to do with it. 4) Clearly got it working, no hint on how, other than a vague reference that getting the helicopter not to leave was a chore... 5) http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?150962-Heli-addons-WIP-vehicle-tracker-PIP No download link any more. Therefore I cant look at the scripting to figure out what is going on. What works but I am trying to avoid, for simplicity of maintenance: Applying techniques gleaned from http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=19614 where I create a proxy object that *is* the camera that I attach via script to my aircraft.

Is there a way to slap down some dollars and download high quality audio (pref high bit rate or lossless version) from the orchestra recordings? Did I miss the link the recent announcements, etc, to where to do that?

So I am in the midst of creating a fun mission. Fly small heli, low altitude terminal flight, quiet insertion of a covert team on the end of a pier. Infil accross a cargo yard, through a street, take down a target, and get out safely before the reaction force a couple towns away pins you down... Except 3 seconds after we land, my AI teammates are walking off the pier like freakin' lemmings. Anyone have any ideas? Seems to be a pathfinding awfulness, and not even "natural" "barriers" that I had hoped would stop them - like rope fence objects - stop them from doing that because rope fence is not a barrier...

Thanks these are all helpful, im working through trying it.

Thanks, its a bit late replying, but none of this actually works. From the moment they hop off the helicopter, and before they get to next waypoint, they walk off edges.

Tilion confirmed the functionality exists in the engine in July 2013: https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/146430-reflector-lights/#entry2372239 I created a new system listing to help track this, but couldnt integrate past / legacy items: https://feedback.bistudio.com/T119160 This has been raised as a feature with no BI response for literally years: March 2013 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T59877 June 2013 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T68596 June 2014 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T77584 June 2014 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T77590 Directional lights also need to create a small amount of off-axis illumination based on reflections and the light sourcing: May 2014 https://feedback.bistudio.com/T98482

I think the challenge is creating the directional light in the first place and attaching it to editor objects. Delving into class names and class attachment rather than having a scripting interface like we do with "orb" lights is a significant limitation to do things like prisons, directional night lighting for landing spotlights, and many other things I am sure I havent thought of but others will.

A cursory search is showing a multitude of threads where people needed this feature in ARMA 3: https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/174500-there-is-any-way-to-emulate-a-flashlight-without-using-a-flashlight/?hl=spotlight#entry2730047 https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/176903-making-a-light-sweep-an-area/?hl=spotlight#entry2775315

I would really love the opportunity to set an interface scaler. I use a 43" 4k monitor. The interfaces are massive on my screen, and having the ability to either have more text space for scripting OR to just have the overall dialog box be smaller would be welcome.

Seriously. Thank you, BI, this is a huge step forward. Ill take the bugs and the maturity process for the massive step forward in functionality already in the RC.

My desperate hope is that Arma 4 is on a new engine that is built for modern parallelized operations form the start. I have a six core i7 and GF GTX 780, neither is being stressed because so much is hung off of one monolithic pipeline.

I have a mission where I would like the independent side to meet in peace with csat. Two officers walk out, they have a disagreement, and run most of the way back to the APC. When they get near the APC, that side goes hostile to the other. So the mission is configured so that independent is friendly to CSAT. I need to tell the game to make independent hostile to CSAT. I tried using "independent setFriend [csat,0];" Which doesn't appear to work. How do I do this in ARMA3?

Thanks. "east" works. SetFriend is... inconsistent in how the AI reacts once hostility commences.

In http://dev.arma3.com/spotrep-00024 there is a line that addressed the MX SW suppressor bug fixes: They indicate adding a specific suppressor for the MX SW. Anyone know what the classname is for this new SW-specific suppressor, or how to get it? ---------- Post added at 15:54 ---------- Previous post was at 15:02 ---------- Incidentally this page is now an outdated export: https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_CfgWeapons_Items

I think thats exactly what I was looking for. Das, I could kiss you. Confirmed working. This appears to be the "SW" specific suppressor.

I cant get any of the suppressors actually to attach to the weapon.

Anyone?

Despite multiple searches, I cannot figure out how to set it up so that multiple units can get into vehicles that are in a single group. So lets say you have 6 HUMVEES that can hold 4 people each. These are a group. You have 3 different units that add up to 20 people. How do I set it up so that the 3 groups of infantry can all load into the single group of transport vehicles? The only way I can think of to do it is to do a join then a get in which destroys the units getting into the vehicles, and then I have to script individual units to go off into thier own unit through a later manual script. Is there a way to do this using the correct get in / load and get out / transport unload features?

You know, that might be the best way to do it, even if it is probably more complicated than it needs to be.

Because it doesn't work. Only one of the units actually gets in, then all of the humvees leave because one of the units has fulfilled the condition. I have used custom scripting to keep the humvees there, but neither of the other groups actually attempts to get in.

Your CPU works or the game wouldn't run. Not working as fast as you like, with as many units as you like, in the way that you would like is a different matter. I think that you grossly misinterpret where CPU features come into play. Do they need to look at memory management and general code parallelization and efficiency? Absolutely. Does that have much to do with supporting CPU integrated instruction sets... uh... nope. That is mostly up to the libraries and compliers they are using, together with the flags they have set in the compiler, but is still (mostly) irrelevant. It's not like they can just turn on the -UseIntelNiftyFeature compilation flag and that will fix all of the architectural problems they have with the lack of parallelization - which is the actual problem here.

The level of vitriol and personal attacks in this thread are getting excessive. 1) Putting any bias aside, people using the bug tracker to rant or as a forum back and forth make it harder for the developers to extract useful information form the bug system. It also decreases the emphasis they may put on user generated concerns given how much 'chaff' they get in the system versus 'wheat' that allows them to move forward. 2) Performance is an issue in both MP *and* SP. This thread is (and probably should be) about both. As I posted many, many pages ago in this thread, Multiplayer performance is very challenging to troubleshoot. SP performance allows systemic performance characteristics to be isolated away from the netcode and server interaction. There is then a second layer of performance elements that need to be addressed in the server/client interaction, together with compensation for internet latency. 3) The claim that the developers are not aware of the performance issues, don't care, haven't responded, etc is simply patently false. Not only have they confirmed they read this thread almost every day, interacted, asked questions, and engaged in other community threads on the subject, the roadmap published today squarely addresses this issue.

I built out a load test mission that is 64 helicopter AI units from 3 sides getting into an air battle over the main airport. Added to which are a handful of ground units and a single plane. http://www.wanderson.org/arma/Furball.Altis.zip Running through this custom mission, I started a windows performance log while I played through the mission. http://www.wanderson.org/arma/ArmaPerformance.blg Concurrently, I was also logging a graphics card session using the old Riva stuff built into the eVGA PrecisionX tool. I didn't post it, because it doesn't matter, as I will talk about in a minute. My GPU never got even scratched. Platform: Windows 8.1 Update Intel Core i7-930 @ 2.8 GHz 12GB DDR3 Triple-Channel SDRAM @ 1033Mhz eVGA GeForce 780 SC with ACX Cooler GeForce 335.28 Driver System Drive is a Crucial M4 SSD Application/Data drive for the application is a RevoDrive PCI-E hybrid using the nvelo dataplex software. Key observations: 2+ GB of private memory allocation There are a lot of pagefile operations. In a heavy-weight AI mission like the torture test this created mission represents, the actual graphics card load is so low that the graphics card is never spinning up significantly, operating at ~360Mhz instead of the ~1GHz max sustained clock rate it is capable of The monitored disk loads that are specific to the process actually are not that bad, just as you might expect. The system activity - which includes page file actions - is where the disk operations actually are and may have a correlation to performance indicators. Edited to add: Thinking more about the Windows 8 mechanics, I generalized some of my text above. Difficult to draw conclusions and I am suspicious because the memory allocation maps exactly, byte for byte, with claimed process-associated page file utilization. Indicates that windows' perfmon capture may be inaccurate for determining the cause of the actual page file utilization.

I can get the AI to do just about anything I want once it is in the air. Not a problem there. How do I get the AI to take off from an air field? I cannot figure out the right combination of waypoints and/or scripting to get to do anything more than roar slowly down the runway at full throttle until it eventually slides off the runway somewhere. It looks like there are only 1 or two airfields in the whole game where I can force it to auto-takeoff in some way.

I've spent a lot more time with this in mission editing, and it looks like as long as the aircraft starts on the taxiway, the pathfinding is appropriate. If you put the aircraft in front of a hangar, say, it will turn on the most direct path to get to the taxiway, rather than following any actual taxi routes for the airports. In some cases, it can mean banging into other structures (like another hangar or something put in the field) which will impede further progress.