#dev_rc_branch
1 messages ยท Page 14 of 1
Win10
also are you using maxram or not ? (auto it shall take what it needs)
negative, i cleared it all to let it do it's own thing.
it seems to be spreading core usage pretty well up until that point, and then it goes downhill quickly. but i'm putting stupid demands on it. just so we're clear.
it did not crash after sitting for a couple hours with AI fighting it out in god mode @ stupid low fps. so thats something i guess.
something else i noticed on the gpu side, even when i crank the VD's up on everything..
https://gyazo.com/d89586087c3c3a1198a4238b4231719b and with everything on blast. im only seeing at best 45% GPU usage (TitanX), and hitting low teens FPS flying around at ground level. holds a solid 20 if i get above the ground detail.
and this scenario seemingly drops the CPU usage, consistently to around 20%. which is odd, but it holds. if i throw AI into the mix the CPU usage falls apart. but it'll hold 1fps for a looong time.
6.8gb current record. (no mods, just dlc)
if it always reproduce approximately then deliver the scenario e.g. feedback tracker and send me url ๐
yeah, yeah.. i had to fix my testing foo mostly. i'll log some data over the next couple of days. all in all though, in a 'normal' scenario, i have no complaints other than the lod switching (seriously.. ๐ )
so, anyone got crashes on the 64 yet?
what s the branch code for the server anyone know
@timber sorrel
App ID client: 107410
App ID server: 233780
thanks i only wanna test local tho i dont wanna use steacmd on my test client
id prefer to use the steam GUI
Arma3Update166RC maybe
Arma 3 client and Arma 3 server are different app IDs not branches. Arma3Update166RC was for 1.66 release candidate branch for the client and server.
166 RC is obsolete ... DEV branch is on 1.67, MAIN branch is on 1.66.hotfix #1, profiling branch is newer than hotfix #1 (see #perf_prof_branch )
wrong, next RC will be Arma3Update168RC
odd number = dev branch, even number = main branch
so which 1 has the x64 exe for me to test
that's DEV branch ... not RC man ๐
they have 1 channel because RC is just before release , made from DEV branch minus what's not yet ready
just the server unless i just use the -server flag
RC is short term (usually 2-4 weeks before new patch) so new channel would be overkill
107410 -beta development
... so new channel would be overkill
That's funny.
@cloud comet most of channels has it's use, rest i'm not erasing because Discord atm. got no admin-merge-channels feature
about x64, one important detail the -maxram= is now limited to 8191 , this is temporary limitation and shall be lifted sometime in future
I didnt define max
ah nice info
running without page file with 64-bit and 16GB of RAM isn't going to work well if anyone is doing that ๐
runs out of memory in a minute just like expected. I tested it only to see that happening. normally I've page file set on SSD
Well it insta crashes on windows 10 insider but works OK with vanila win10
man the 12/12km view distance is so smooth
@timber sorrel report it to Microsoft ๐
@tulip bane ๐ try 44km ... over Altis or Tanoa
@past moon I tried earlier 50km but it crashed my game ๐
So whats the proper protocol with me testing this dev-branch?
What do I do if the game say crashes?
@past moon
@past moon I have definitely noticed a considerable improvement in performance in regards to a lot of activity going on.
What do I do if the game say crashes?
The thing you'd do if it crashed on the main branch.
I used to go all the way down to 27 FPS in 32bit versions with YAAB
I get average of 40.5 FPS now
So there is definite improvement.
@cloud comet Got a problem with arma 3 now.
The single-core clock performance problems just got worse.
@timber sorrel From 27 to 40 in YAAB? The difference shouldn't be that big IMO. Unless you're running the game from HDD?
I7-5820K ?
Could have something to do with?
it?
All I know is YAAB definitely ran worse before.
@candid dew
I don't think the CPU explains the difference. But I know going from HDD to SSD improves the result a lot. So the increased amount of usable RAM in 64bit could also make such a big impact on YAAB. Sort of compensating the slow disk reads.
So do you have the game on HDD?
crashes, anyone ? ๐ฌ
https://feedback.bistudio.com/T122145 - Crash when switching maps Arma 3 X64
Ok, how do I FORCE my arma to NOT load any mods?
How do you start Arma 3? If it is via the Arma 3 Launcher then press the drop down arrow next to "Play" and select "Play without mods", @digital geyser.
yes, one would think that is the sollution, but if I start arma3 with the launcher first it default to a pre saved mod set.. second it doesn't start 64bit even if i deselect all.. When i force start just the exe 64bit it suddenly wants to load cba..
I just deleted the whole arma3 root folder content and i will let steam verify and download
I'm about to delete all
for some reason it's getting start up parameters from somewhere
@cloud comet :(
@digital geyser, check that you have not set launch options for Arma 3 via Steam.
Arma 3 Launcher: Try restore default parameters and unload all mods.
D:
My brain is frying.. too little arma.. and too much excitement over 64bit version that i can't even test.. I will now f ing destroy all arma files ouh wait my koth profile
=) shoudn't have installed dev build
seems like memory isn't cleared well after changing map. I saw over 7GB of VRAM usage and game crashed soon. I'll send reports later and try to repro the thing
@digital geyser Hello again sir, could you pls send me Launcher logs (Options / export Launcher logs to desktop)
(and game troubleshooting report might be helpful too)
@timber sorrel i'm sorry i just deleted the whole steam folder... currently redownloading 19GB i'm hoping it will help
I will upload if it persists
@timber sorrel Sorry for causing you this grief.. :(
@digital geyser You are not missing out on a lot
I tried it.
I did notice smoother FPS
but not much else.
@timber sorrel http://kuningaskunta.fi/~jonekone/wasteland/debug/
screw me
with dwardens BE files it doesn't want to start 64bit arma3
Sorry, I don't know what is in the Dwarden's BE files (but I'll ask him), but you need the new version of BE that was released to dev-branch with 64-bit game. The old version of BE is not compatible.
So apparently, Dwarden's BE files are for profiling branch. They are not compatible with dev-branch and 64-bit game.
What's the current download size from 1.66 to 1.67?
@timber sorrel Yeah, for some reason, BE doesn't want to update to the correct files.. it just loops and re downloads constantly
5.4gb
GB even =)
๐ ๐
new DEV branch update https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/140837-development-branch-changelog/?do=findComment&comment=3128425
including engine and launcher fixes related to 64-bit
nice
64-bit crash https://feedback.bistudio.com/T122186
https://feedback.bistudio.com/T122164 - Crash
User is on development branch using 64-bit.exe.
updated #Arma3 startup commands BIKI doc with actual usage at 1.66.> -maxmem= , to put an end to another Urban Myth https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Startup_Parameters#Performance
updated -maxVRAM= description too just for sure ๐
Added: Sensor Overhaul
Added: Airplanes Hitpoints Extension
I missed those, nice find
Normally, I couldn't care less about planes in Arma, but this adds such an interesting dimension to flying that it's starting to sound lot more interesting.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna take to skies on my 64bit. I'll try to be back before christmas! ๐
anywne know what 'Custom Display Information ' is?
@Adanteh#0761 it's this https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/200468-jets-custom-info/
"Custom because it allows you to pick in the game which ones you want to have displayed. Custom also because creates a framework for modders to use - more about that later on wiki."
Is trackir broken / disabled in the 64 bit version? Or is something with my setup wrong?
btw. i hope everyone noticed last DEV and https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/140837-development-branch-changelog/?page=38#comment-3128859
Added: New animation sources for airplanes:
"aileronTLeftDamaged"
"aileronTRightDamaged"
"aileronBLeftDamaged"
"aileronBRightDamaged"
and some first tidbits from jets ;)
https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/200467-jets-sensor-overhaul/
https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/200469-jets-hitpoints/
https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/200468-jets-custom-info/
05-12-2016 EXE rev. 139546 (game) EXE rev. 139548 (launcher) Size: ~1.5 GB (depends on Apex ownership) DATA Fixed: Swimming would make no sound Fi...
Magic radar is dead, long live the feature-creep! Before we start I recommend you to reset your keybinds to A3 or Apex preset (and dump all the ...
Flying jets in combat used to be quite binary in Arma. You fly or die. We herd you like hitpoints, so we put more hitpoints in your airplane so you can ...
MFW: ๐ฎ
https://feedback.bistudio.com/T122114 - CRASH
Dev branch - 32-bit.
https://feedback.bistudio.com/T122224 - Memory Read Error
Dev branch - 64-bit.
Fixed Wing showcase with new jet features https://youtu.be/un3BDVzY6Uk?t=48
Thanks for the video.
https://feedback.bistudio.com/T122235 - [1.67 DEV] CTD with the 64 Bit A3 exe
Dev branch - 64-bit.
Ref: Dedicated environment. The new arma3server_x64.exe in the dev branch does not want to authenticate with the steam servers. If I run the new arma3_x64.exe with -server switch that authenticates just fine. Firewall is all setup for both.
@formal dome i think it's bug, try this: run arma3server_x64.exe binary with steam client installed and just running in memory (no need to have account logged)
Rgr thx dwarden
it was ok in previous dev release so there is something 'not right' to be forced for such solution but at least it work
also for me it does happen with both 32 and 64bit dedicated server binaries
Thx for the info I'll give it a go
so, are you ready for performance binaries for development branch ? ๐
channeling magic
@autumn sage thanks for the report but i'm sure that must wait till next year ๐
it's not my report but yes I know, just thought I'd bring a little attention to it ^^
it's time for some xmas surprise, DEV branch got performance binaries ๐
https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/200359-64-bit-executables-feedback/?do=findComment&comment=3131230
thus you may test the fixes for -enableHT, -cpuCount= and new command-line parameter -HugePages
note: those were already available in #perf_prof_branch since monday
@past moon seems that https://feedback.bistudio.com/T122322 is still there after the last couple of updates ๐
todays DEV : *Tweaked: The 64-bit executable now supports 64-bit FreeTrack and TrackIR DLLs
๐ ๐ ๐
is there any chance we could get counter clockwise loiter command for UAV terminal?
So how are the 64bit servers
hmm i see only 2 DEV servers
New DEV 64bit Domination server set up if any wanna try the DEV 64bit in mp coop - search HUD in serverbrowser.
i take it the perf RC exes are now not needed.
@past moon how do you setup dev server? Is it possible for developers to have access to server devbranch if any and if not care to explain how to do it? Would be usefull for testing under dev or RC build.
Or its just copy of Arma dev build to separate folder and launch the server from there? I assume this cant be done on linux anyway.
there was none and is no DEV server data branch, just client, use arma3.exe -server or arma3_x64.exe -server
yeah thought so wont work for me Im on nix
@neat cosmos couple of suggestions regarding the sensors:
- could we get bearings degrees around the edge of sensors?
- I'm not sure how display distance is handled. Is 2km by default the maximum range of the sensor? if not then if the target/contact is beyond the display range (but still in range of the sensor) it should be indicated with a small arrow around the edge of the sensor
good points.
2km is default for compatibility/legacy. The indicator on edge is something we wanted, but it proved technically complicated and unlikely to happen :/
Otoh - a bit unrelated - indicators retained on edge if they are out of FoR was something recently added to MFD (HUD) tech.
you mean bearings of horizontal min/max of the sensor cone?
I mean a simple 360 compas like thing like in the old radar, so eats easier to get your bearings
should already be on dev ๐
didnt see it
oh, sry, not yet. Today probably
you see the HDG letters on sensor display?
That control is fed from engine with heading numbers.
no I didnt see those
(since engine rev. 139945)
aslo having heading on radar and stuff would help out in reporting bearings f the contacs
what if contact is to your left? i undestand the heading is you vehicle's heading
it's your turret's heading
as for the edge indicator, no sure if would be possilbe, but just freezing the contact display when it reaches the edge could work pretty well. Like you have a check to see if the distance is more than the sensor display then the reported range is simply set to the edge somewhat like this:
if real range > max sensor display range
then
display range = max sensor display range (so target appears at the edge of the sensor)
else
display range = real range
I do realise this much more complicated and I'm n00b at scripting
@neat cosmos as for the bearings I meant something like this:
http://i.imgur.com/7XvWu8I.jpg
I see
a suggestion for jets DLC: have planes use the auto-hover button to engage wing level. This way player can keep the plane flying level when using TGP and stuff
you mean autopilot?
Hi, I'm trying to run arma3_x64 and arma3diag_x64.exe from my separate dev branch folder installed by Game Updater, but neither starts the game, just a process consuming 1,8 Mb of RAM. I'm able to start the 64bit game through dev branch launcher with no problems. My goal is to use diagnostics to play with configs of my custom terrain. Am I missing something here?
have you restarted steam since running game updater?
Hah, silly me! Ofc I didn't restart steam. Now I rebooted whole pc and it works. Cheers! : )
When using diag_mergeConfigFile, my terrain's config file is changing(checked from config viewer),
but my clutter doesn't change visually. Before merging updated config.cpp, I imported my cfgSurfaces from separate cfgSurfaces.h file to the updated config.cpp. Originally my terrain's config.cpp had just "#include cfgSurfaces.h"-line in it. Could it be the cause?
are you reloading the island? Most changes don't take place until mission restart rather than happening in real time, but I guess with islands it might be only when reloading the terrain
I restarted the mission everytime from ingame. Didn't go to main menu or anything like that, though.
Would try that or load the VR map in the editor (probably the fastest to load) then load your island again
Thanks for the tips. Tried that but no dice. All loading screen texts(etc.) will change but nothing on actual terrain. I tried the classical way of just extracting the pbo and packing it after editing the config.cpp. That way it worked, so I atleast have something ; )
@Hinkkiz#3873 it should work for terrain configs too
@scarlet root I can see modified clutter configs from "Config Viewer" ingame so it somehow works. But my actual rendered clutter doesn't change at all, not even after restarting mission or restarting Eden. I will keep trying to figure it out.
what exactly do you try to update?
I try to update CfgSurfaceCharacters. I want to try different clutter probabilities and amounts. In my earlier failed test I tried to change field's clutter density by changing probability from 1 to 0.5.
some parameter get merged into the wrp during binarization
not sure if thats true for CfgSurfaceCharacters
it could be the case if the engine is meant to show the exact same clutter composition for everyone in MP
not sure if thats true for CfgSurfaceCharacters
unless the distribution algorithm has no randomness to it
that said you should test with way more extreme differences to make sure your change is just too insignificant
okay thanks! I will look into that : )
how do set up the new patrol module thingy? I can't see it in the editor
it should show a couple of modules in the modules list I think
@past moon any kind of word on https://feedback.bistudio.com/T122322 ? It seems to be still present in the current dev build ๐
Alwin claimed this task.
yay ๐ค
i wonder why he closed the ticket since the problem is not solved yet..
@scenic gyro @light lintel but also for guided-weapon modders
For what it's worth I took a look at the PCML ammo config (M_NLAW_AT_F) after it came up in the dev branch changelog, and now it's got a 5 degrees horizontal/vertical visual sensor with minRange = 500;/minRange = 800; before range modifiers (i.e. visualTargetSize or view distance) for both air/ground-silhouetted targets, seems not to have issues with distinguishing targets from ground clutter and can 'specific vehicle type' (not just 'vehicle role') vehicles at 2 km, but also only able to detect targets moving at/up to 120 km/h... this apparently overrides airLock = 0; / irLock = 1; / laserLock = 0; / nvLock = 0;
As importantly, thanks to new properties in M_NLAW_AT_F, the PCML's also able to start locking a target within 5 degrees of the ammo's current direction and can lock a target which is within 20 to 600 meters and moving at up to 80 km/h, although it can detect/track targets further out or moving faster up to the effective limits of its visual sensor in the given situation.
so it's kinda multi-purpose now? But narrow fov and limited range
My entire missilebox no longer works with dev branch..it actually crashes the game and I don't really know why..any ideas
@dire reef Any chance you've got the RPT corresponding to the latest CTD handy?
Hey I got it fixed
Great! What was your solution?
@neat cosmos the laser sensor template seems to not function as well as laserScanner = true;. On my AC-130 with the laser designator sensor component, using SensorTemplateLaser, I routinely lose lock on the laser marker. Whereas if I only have laserScanner = true I never had such issue.
Is it possible to make the new laser sensor to be as perfect as the old laserScanner?
@neat cosmos It kinda is, as it is tied to the new sensors stuff and I'm on dev, but if you want to then ok
honestly I'm not quite familiar with the different groups, but I'd expect RC to be Release Candidate thread (patch RC). Sensors won't get there yet ๐
@neat cosmos /topic is "Discussion related to DEVELOPMENT and Release Candidate branches" ๐
Time to add another channel!
GOD NO!
the point of it being merged with RC is that RC is short lived ... usually 2 weeks hence majority of time it's DEV discussion
@light lintel I just realized that as of the Thursday 2 February 2017 build the Buzzard's gained IR (though not visual) to go with its (air-optimized) active radar... shorter range/narrower coverage (3 km, 30 x 30 degrees, 10 degrees of which is above the nose/long axis of the fuselage and 20 degrees thereof below) than the Neophron/Wipeout's IR (4 km, 60 x 60 degrees, 20 above/40 below) but it's still a passive sensor for the Buzzard to go "silent hunting" with (no pun intended)
BTW i was told that visual sensors appear to be more effective than IR
probably shouldn't be the case, since they'd involve image processing and stuff
@light lintel oukej has specified a lot of possible drawbacks to visual though versus a primary benefit of 'doesn't need a heated up target'
is dynamic simulation included?
uh didn't that make it in to 1.66?
No official servers yet
Tested the 64-Bit Client for some hours now: Worked nice for me! Currently testing the 64-Bit-Server Version....
If anyone encounter the error "Missing MSVCP140.dll" (http://imgur.com/a/YqV5m) too, just install the "Visual C++ Redistributable for Visual Studio 2015" (https://www.microsoft.com/en-US/download/details.aspx?id=48145). This is the easiest way to get rid of it! ๐
^ do make sure to download the 64-bit one ๐
@timber sorrel My 64-Bit Server needed that files. For the launcher I am not sure, as this files were installed by default on my workstation.
Ahh nice thanks
Tested 64-Bit Client with 32-Bit Server: Works smooth! But I am unable to test 64-Bit-server, as my client says "Steam Authentication Failed" when I try to join. The server wont show up in the server list (only direct connect is possible) too. I have also noticed that the server Console (console! NOT Log) with 32-Bit displays the following line at startup 20:06:29 Game Port: 2342, Steam Query Port: 2343, but my 64-Bit server doesn't display this line. Maybe that's the problem? Maybe it is just for RC? RPT: 20:44:11 Client: Staynex - Kicked off because of invalid ticket: Invalid ticket - Ticket invalid Console: 21:06:00 BattlEye Server: Player #0 Staynex (IP) connected 21:06:01 Player Staynex connecting. 21:06:03 Player Staynex connected (id=ID). 21:06:03 Player Staynex disconnected. 21:06:03 BattlEye Server: Player #0 Staynex disconnected -_- Any ideas how to fix that or how I could connect? (Internal Ticket ID: https://armajunkies.atlassian.net/browse/AJWL-157) EDIT: I found the following line at the beginning of my .rpt: 18:26:20 SteamAPI initialization failed. Steam features won't be accessible!
Arma3Launcher seems to have a bug on the rc build (i don't really use it on stable to be honest)
http://puu.sh/tWdkl/6d3518dc85.png
Basically all 8 cores were closed to maxed untill i killed process
edit: From glance at logs, might be caused by me deleting addon files while launcher was scanning the files. Maybe stuck in loop trying to rescan files
@timber sorrel
@timber sorrel Could you please send me the logs?
Will there be official servers for the release candidate? Combat patrol possibly?
Had a weird thing last night. Trying to use Game Updater from A3 Tools to get a second install of A3 on the box for testing purposes but wasn't able to get the RC code to be recognized until I went back to regular Arma login on steam. Anyone else have this happen?
Btw will x64 Linux server be a thing on 1.68 release? Or will that come later?
@full sonnet @timber sorrel 64-bit for linux unsure atm. still quite crash-bugs in nix server binaries
arma3server.rpt
10:31:18 Warning Message: You cannot play/edit this mission; it is dependent on downloadable content that has been deleted.
a3_characters_f
That warning is still here in 1.68.140365 RC01.
@cloud comet i posted already in the RC thread but would be good if you could do too
I commented in the respective feedback tracker issue (https://feedback.bistudio.com/T121712).
Crash dumps for RC Builds go where? Thanks
known issue with 1.68 RC arma3server_x64.exe , it seems the STEAMworks API isn't initializing, the workaround is to install STEAMclient and run it at login screen (no need login)
32-bit seems to not be affected by this problem and thus workaround isn't needed (similar bug existed in DEV branch for 32-bit and was resolved some week ago)
@cloud comet thanks ye i noticed that too
@past moon Thanks! I'll try that tomorrow!
@neat cosmos Probably bug: unable to change the underwing stores on the Wipeout (Dynamic Loadout) left wing only? Right underwing stores dropdown fields all seem to work normally
@past moon Regarding the 64-Bit and Steam-API: Thanks! Your workaround worked for my dev Server! But the logs still show some steam errors: RPT: 16:02:01 Unable to initialize Steam API. 16:02:01 SteamAPI initialization failed. Steam features won't be accessible! Console: 16:06:49 Warning: Current Steam AppId: doesn't match expected value: 107410 Anyway, I am able to connect now - so lets test it!
64-Bit Server is working smooth! Finished all my tests.
Will make up repo + ticket later.
But using _unit setSpeaker "NoVoice"; in a unit init eventhandler will cause segfault.
@bleak rivet np, glad it works for you too
With the new sensors I miss some kind of compass that old system had for vehicles. Especially since you cannot open the compass inside the vehicle like you can do on foot. It would be great if the new sensors got a compass indicator/overlay (NSEW + angles) or if you could open the personal compass inside the vehicle
none of my compasses are terribly accurate inside my car, hate to think how they'd cope inside a big steel box on wheels
so?
That does not mean I have to be completely unable to get any bearings when I'm inside a vehicle
All I ask for now is the ability to view the compass like I'm on foot
The sensor displays have a numerical heading value 0/360 = N, 90 = E, 180 = S, 270 = W
yeah, but its not as readable as the compas
it would be great if the values were added to the rada wheel background
like this: http://i.imgur.com/KwVP3wH.jpg
@past moon
Added: New speedZomMaxSpeed and speedZoomMaxFOV view parameters
is there a typo in the dev branch changelog or is the actual command speedZomMaxSpeed ? (zom instead of zoom)
@light lintel Speaking of dev branch changelog, notice the line about drones sharing acquired targets via datalink?
Yes, I did! Should make them interesting to use now. (I also wonder if that applies for the darter?)
That's a great addition, makes drones much more useful in small teams or singleplayer
@light lintel @scenic gyro Here's my trip report: https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/200467-jets-sensor-overhaul/?do=findComment&comment=3152751
Stuck aย Tayran (CSAT AR-2) and an ammo-lessย Xi'an with a UAV Terminal-equipped pilot behind a hill, the active radar off and the gunner-operatedย IR/visual sensor pointed away from where I'd stuck three Hummingbirds and a HEMTT Ammo on the other side of the hill some distance away... once the Tayran had moved into position to detect them their hollowed symbolsย appeared, and though I couldn't mark themย they had been identified by the Tayran enough for me to tell my AI gunner to target them via the (complex) command menu in anticipation of a "pop-up" attack, leading to the gunner pointing the turret with its sensors in theirย direction.
interesting!
Tweaked: Jets can now perform sharper turns
weren't they sharp enough already? ๐
@light lintel @scenic gyro https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/202173-dynamic-vehicle-loadouts-feedback/?do=findComment&comment=3153665
The Plamen gunpods, Scalpel, DAGR and AMRAAMs were made accessible in the loadout menu in todays's dev Branch update, even if it's not mentioned on the changelog. ย The Plamens are described as a "Test" in the UI, so it might only be interim that these are available for the Wipeout.
interesting - didn't even think about gunpods
@scenic gyro The BIKI previously mentioned that the system was supposed to be "future-compatible" but no mention of when until today's reveal
I'm almost glad that I'm out of the country for a few weeks, it's pretty tiring getting excited by each of these little reveals ๐
They've gone well beyond what I expected with the engine changes for this DLC. I wonder if we're going to see the same for the other DLCs
One can hope!
And yeah, people in our community have been dreaming of 10 gun pods for the past few days ๐
Really happy with how this is shaping up, I don't even care about which planes they intro in the DLC, they're all effectively multirole now
apart from sensor limitations, of course
Hey someone quick ? How to update to RC?
what is the steam code thingy
should also be in the notes / description @past moon
found it Arma3Update168RC
There's a 4.4 GB update for 1.68 RC02 (client), but I don't see a change log.
I didn't see it updated in the changelog either, but in Skype Iceman said
"the update contains mostly fixes on structures (data wise), adding some missing strings and couple of crash fixes and fixes connected to weapon switching"
๐ ๐
Not sure if on-topic since it's about community modding, but one cool thing about Bohemia leaning so hard on config-based/minimum-of-model-access-required for Jets systems: granQ who you may know for Swedish Forces Pack has unveiled seeming-first public screenshots of the air vehicle loadout system in both "community jet" and "community weapons on vanilla jet" use:
https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/202173-dynamic-vehicle-loadouts-feedback/?do=findComment&comment=3154294
Note that he mentions that he hasn't been able to get the setup to show on his own made jet though. He's gotten the Attributes/UI applied but he's having some difficulty with understanding the needs of the jet model itself
@tame rover True, though I guess that there's a disconnect between the BIKI article and 'understanding imparted on non-dev from reading it'...?
I imagine so. Or Binarise needs to be equipped to do it with a potentially new .p3d version
I dare say Test_Plane_01 will be updated at some point with dynamic loadout in mind, to serve as an example
๐คฃ
@tame rover Rather looking forward to that possibility... although I must note (re: Binarise) that we already have community-stores-on-vanilla aircraft so that's a positive sign re: whether or not a new p3d type is involved
anyone else having a gamecrash when you try to delete a occupied vehicle in editor?
on latest dev branche
arma3.exe
@silk cargo it happened to me a few times while trying out radar in the editor ... provide them with the error log if you can ...
it is CTD without even a crash file
is there a new tail rotor kill script with the RC as we are getting cloned units that get killed by the tail rotor
and if so is there a way to disable this
tailBladeCenter = "rotor_02_center";
tailBladeRadius = 0.5;
tailBladeVertical = 1;
Seen that bug with current arma.
Easy enough to repo
Basically the clients getting confused over if unit is dead
yer but i replaced the whole arma handel dammage so it should not effect my players and only happens with the tail rotor of the choppers
Yeah you could try submit a bug report.
I just lack motivation because they will want repo mission aswell
But that bug has been in the atleast 1-2 arma versions
Ontop of that they ignore you when you try and talk to any of them this is why i stopped trying to help along time ago
Here is another strange bug if you load the 64bit client without the arma3 launcher so no battleye it asks you to enable it then it reverts to the 32bit exe with the 64 bit as a parm
First launch
http://pastebin.com/HkbEib2z
Reload after hitting i agree to restart with battleye
http://pastebin.com/GQZmzj12
@scenic gyro @void magnet @light lintel As per the dev branch changelog, now the AH-99 Blackfoot has Dynamic Loadout support
wonder how many missiles we can put on that ๐
only 6
it doesn't support the new 3x and 4x Scalpel pylons that the Wipeout has
in case others didn't notice them: http://i.imgur.com/DhinXIZ.jpg
well, boo... that Wipeout though. ๐
Putting DAGR pods on the Wipeout is possibly even dafter though. Since those are laser-guided as well, and like 12 shots per pod
would be cool to have DAGRs that don't lock (only SACLOS), for the wipeout, would make a fun mini-game for the pilot ๐
@crisp wyvern aye, I saw ๐
I wonder if the Jets DLC will bring two-seater jets
@light lintel That'd be an interesting dynamic to say the least
@past moon could you consider making dev branch entity(?) in steam library? Its really time consuming to switch from Dev to Standard builds all the time when testing new things out
@hollow shard Download the Arma 3 Tools, use Game Updater and you can maintain separate dev/standard builds simultaneously.
or just use steamcmd like me ๐ (^ the abuse use it just more end-use friendlier)
@crisp wyvern Thanks xD
@scenic gyro @void magnet @light lintel From the 22 February 2017 dev branch changelog:
Tweaked: Sensor displays now have 4 range modes (e.g. 4km, 2km, 16km, 8km)
Exactly what it sounds like, if you have the sensor display in either window selected then RCtrl+left-or-right-bracket-key will cycle through the aforementioned display resolutions
Tweaked: Increased Radar range of anti-air platforms and the Buzzard airplane
Cheetah/Tigris active radar now good out to 8 km vs. air background/5 km vs. ground background (type recognition at 4 km) and pointed 45 degrees upward with 100 degrees of vertical coverage; Buzzard active radar is 8 km vs. air/4 km vs. ground (type recognition at 3 km) plus horizontal coverage reduced by 25% to 90 degrees
Added: New sensors for the Titan AT, AA (both IR) and the Zephyr (Radar)
Both Titan versions' IR sensors have detect/track cones of only 7 degrees horizontal/4.5 degrees vertical and lock cones of 4 degrees, but the Titan (AA) can detect/track/lock out to 5 km with sky background or detect/track out to 3 km with ground background (min lock range 100 m) so long as the targets move 5 m above terrain level at up to 2500 km/h (lock @ up to 2000 km/h) while the Titan (AP/AT) can detect/track/lock out to 4 km (both sky/ground backgrounds, min lock range 50 m) but only if they're moving up to 120 km/h and can detect/track targets no higher than 100 m above terrain level, but it's more resistant to ground clutter than the Titan (AA)...
Tweaked: AA Titan now seeks targets automatically
No idea what's going on here, so far it seems all Titan ammo still has autoSeekTarget = 0; and lookSeekRadius = 0;
Thanks for the write up, man! Some of those changes are really nice, some of them are puzzling. Will write more soon.
@light lintel Well hey, Hatchet's tried to get me to set up an Arma blog at least three times over the years I think, I think even dslyecxi brought up my... experience ๐ so this is something I'd like to try doing in lieu of one
@light lintel Edited my synopsis to include the Zephyr's new stats
So my issues/concerns are:
-
what is the logic behind the Cheetah/Tigris/Buzzard's type recognition at 4km? Is this visual or radar based? If radar based, then why does distance make a difference? Additionally, if radar based, it's sorta weird, because if i'm not wrong you can only get a size estimate of a radar contact (i.e. you'll looking at the reflected signal from an object, it shouldn't be enough to tell you what it is - just its estimated size).
-
The titan stuff is weird. Isn't the Titan (AA) supposed to be a combination of both IR and optical detectors? In which case, why the different sky/ground background differences, and why a minimum lock range? I also think the lock ranges are excessive - should be capped to 3km imo (tbh i'd cap it to 2 km, but okay, 3km...) to avoid overlapping with vehicle AA roles.
-
Similarly, midly concerned about the Titan AT's 4km lock range. Current range is about 1.5 km i think, ideal would probably be 2km from a gameplay PoV. And yeah, IRL Javelin has effective range of 4.7 km... but for Arma, i don't know if it's not too much. Will AI be able to engage from 4km away? Again slightly concerned about the min lock range, I'm not sure why it's needed, or what the logic is?
can detect/track targets no higher than 100 m above terrain level
also a weird thing. What's the logic behind this? It uses IR :/ why does being 101m suddenly make the lock unattainable? I would understand not being capapble of hitting flying stuff if it had top attack mode but...
And in combination with the 50m min range, there's a strong possibility you can't lock onto something hovering 45m away from you (to be fair SACLOS exists for that)
the speed limitation seems fair though
Auto target is nice
It's also maybe a good idea to let the MPRL actually be multi-purpose? ๐
Many modern radar systems are actually capable of identifying targets by their radar return.
Defence laboratories go through the effort of analysing and recording the radar cross-section of different targets, and using that data to generate a database for comparison
Video shows some of the imagery that can be generated by the F-35's APG-81 radar operating as a Synthetic Aperture Radar https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNhc4y1jPwk https://youtu.be/SnqeqEtbvo8?t=2m55s This is the sort of things that radars actually "see". How they are displayed on the pilot/gunner's screen is derived from processing this information to a more simplified way
that's interesting
but does it actually work in combat? AFAIK the F-35 hasn't seen combat yet
But yeah, it can tell a tank from an APC maybe
But can it tell between two tanks?
Or two APCs?
Can it tell a Buzzard (CAS) from a Buzzard (AA)? that is the question
Or rather, that is one question.
The other then becomes, if target identification is indeed done via radar, then why limit it by a range less than that of the radar?
esp. vs air targets
(assuming that ground targets need a stronger SNR)
why limit it by a range less than that of the radar Resolution
at 8km should it make a difference against air targets?
I mean 8km vs 3km seems like a small difference for radar...
esp considering what the videos implied
it is. IRL you'd be able to do detection and ID at much greater ranges. But this is a game
Aye, but what's the point of it
I can see the point of it when the target has the ground behind it
I can't see the point of it when it's against the sky
i.e. what's the rationale of doing this?
feels arbitrary
just keep ID at 8km
Background shouldn't make much difference in terms of ID with radar and thermal since at the ranges that a thermal or radar sensor is able to resolve the image, it's probably got significant contrast against the background anyway
then probably just keep ID at 8km
for vehicles, yes, I can see the shorter range argument
because ground clutter, less distinctive shape, angles (will relative angles affect identification?)
the thing is, it sounds like it's not too far away from becoming magic radar again, in some aspects ๐
But a metal object creates a higher return than clutter, so you have more data to process about the target than its environment
Ground clutter etc. does limit the detection range anyway in Arma. I wouldn't be surprised if ID range scales with it
I don't have any good data for how well radar detection vs ID scales, just some stuff for hand-held thermal and I2 systems http://i.imgur.com/r898p67.jpg
@light lintel From what I can tell the typeRecognitionDistance is the point at which you go from "Helicopter" to "PO-30 Orca"
Aye, but on what basis
Considering that the system is abstracted my explanation is "the point at which the onboard systems are able to narrow down the marked target's radar return to an individual database entry"
Jets-wise nothing much to note in the 24 February 2017 changelog, just these items:
Added: A new reportRemoteTarget script command```
@neat cosmos Would that last item be to have a vehicle (even if it does not have *reportRemoteTargets = true;* in its vehicle config) do a one-time transmitting of its detected targets? Also, rather interested in knowing just what the heck a Side's 'center' is...
couple of request:
- could we get animation sources for pilots/driver X and Y view direction rotation (aside from the pilotcamera)
- could we get an option so gun can be zeroed in and locked onto a target in manual fire, even if there is no AI present the gunner's position, only player-driver
This would allow to get around the problems with inability to animate gun memory points on the "hull" config of a vehicle
On Dev Branch locking ground targets on the Blackfoot with DynLoadout is not working too well for me. (Using T as the keybinds say.) I have to get really close like a few hundred meters before it starts locking. Is there a new way of locking targets that I missed? Anyone have the same issue?
I might have had that with the Blackfoot as well overnight, have you tried 'Next target (in veh.)' keybind (on Arma 3 Apex Preset that's R) instead?
Yep, that didn't work either. I tried it on the Wathog, too and on both versions, 'normal' and dynamic loadout, each.
That's an oddity because on the Blackfoot the air-to-ground weapon would be the DAGRs, which have not yet been outfitted with the new sensors system(s) or the new missile lock restrictions (i.e. max distance)
4.7gb RC update
๐ฏ
Updates
28-02-2017
Tweakes Ambient Occlusion of structures
Fix to the Respawn Screen
Fixes to character animations (https://feedback.bistudio.com/T123369)
Fixed cars getting stuck on bridges on Tanoa (https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/143930-general-discussion-dev-branch/?do=findComment&comment=3153369)
I believe that is the third RC update.
This was the second
Previous updates
Ambient Occlusion fixes
Fix of vehicles of Apex owners getting stuck (https://feedback.bistudio.com/T120992)
Fix to characters clipping through the Mora vehicle
Fix to proxies of flags (used for CTF)
Fix to the Firing Drills freezing mechanics
hmm... wonder if that fixes all vehicles with AI and bridges. thanks for info guys ๐
can anybody confirm that the x64 dedi server returns : [1970,1,1,1,0,0]
for the "missionStart" command?
appears to be only during preInit (and some time after that)
after some time it returns the correct dedicated server time values
All these ct commands gonna be some type of excel looking dialog stuff? https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Category:Introduced_with_Arma_3_version_Dev
Sure do hope sooo ๐
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9JJUfoq3VfmQXNCZGxydm1ZaXc/view?usp=sharing
Hm, less FPS with the latest 1.68RC...
No, you can see while the mission runs that fps are lower (FPS counter)
Well yeah, if the average is lower too. :)
But in that test it's not a meaningful difference. Unless you see the same after running the test 10 times each.
I mean, I wouldn't worry about it.
Xeno, probably use FRAPS + https://sourceforge.net/projects/frafsbenchview/files/
analyse frame time data
see if there's a significant deviation in things like 99th or 95th percentile frame times
I'm not talking about the mission fps counter, but external fps display. FPS have dropped in the latest RC. But who cares. It really doesn't matter, the fps are too low anyway.
And it seems I'm not the only one...
https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/183856-release-candidate-branch-discussion/?do=findComment&comment=3159814
@hexed citrus is the FPS drop consistent all the time or just in specific parts (e.g. map, inventory, usage of certain equipment or inside vehicles) ?
@past moon for me FPS are lower all the time
@past moon And it got even worse with the latest RC update from thursday or friday...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9JJUfoq3VfmUjBybVM2SGZxZzA/view?usp=sharing
Also many error messages like Error compiling '' in 'HitArms' in the RPT
hmm i had lower FPS too with v19 yesterday, after two missions
New tank FCS stuff is pretty damn sweet
Works nicely. Seems to get the traverse speed from the target vehicle rather than calculating from turret movement, but nice none the less
Oh shit, I did my daily routine and forgot to check dev on the day we get sweet tank improvements. Looks sweet!
Were the sensors fixed?
Can't find it in the Changelog
It still requires some skill. Doing good track and choosing the right time to lase and shoot so that the firing solution is right for the heading of the target
It's no more OP than say the ACE FCS or RHS' Abrams FCS
@lucid prawn you mean for missiles/AT launchers?
Yes
I forgot to try it. Will have a go in a sec
i see. never used ACE FCS/RHS FCS
Nah, launchers still aren't locking on
Thanks for testing, though!
btw did anything of the COOP variant of the APEX campaign came to light yet?
? What do you mean, the Apex campaign is already coop...
Some improvements were announced on the roadmap.
sorry meant the non COOP variant
I haven't been paying attention to campaign changes...
Dwarden heard anything about any planned VON system updates? Like volume sliders for direct etc ๐
10-03-2017
Fixed AI behavior on Dedicated Servers
Fixed several crash cases
Fixed AI driving to the corner of the VR terrain
Tweaked to Ambient Occlusion settings
This must be the 830.3 MB update I'm downloading.
anyone knows why i have ~20 fps more in 32bit client than 64bit?
specs?
Intel i7 3635 2.4GHz
AMD Radeon HD 8600/8700M
i was just wondering, is there a plan to pre-load more assets like building textures once 64-bit lands?
would help prevent stuttering when looking at a town and zooming in
Now on dev branch: Wipeout "game element PIP" replaced with in-HUD-only CCIP for cannon, rockets, and GBUs, credit to Ampersand for the screenshots: http://imgur.com/a/pkvRQ
Addons can be configured to do the HUD CCIP offset in the RC already for 1.68. impactPoint source was added to class MFD a while ago. The range indicator is new to the dev branch though.
Also new in dev today is that the red and yellow view cones for the visual and IR sensors, rotate in the "radar" display depending on which direction the pilotCamera/TGP is pointing. They're no longer fixed forward
@tame rover So far that's only for the Wipeout, thanks to animDirection="PilotCamera_V";
Yeah, the changelog for today specified it was only the Wipeout with the adjusted sensor so far
Other aircraft have the CCIP stuff
Chortles: thanks for the link, good stuff. will love to be finally be able to use CCIP pipper.
any update on 1.68 this week or not?
If it's coming this week it will be tomorrow or Friday, it's already overdue. At a guess, I would think it would get pushed out at 5 o'clock ๐จ๐ฟ time on Friday ๐
Added: UI control for incremental throttle (WIP)
excited
Interesting....
Tomorrow (Thursday) is the most likely candidate. BI hasn't done a Friday release in awhile, and for good reason.
1.66 - Thursday
1.64 - Thursday
1.62 - Monday
1.60 - Monday
1.58 - Thursday
1.56 - Thursday
15 March 2017 changelog:
Tweaked: All CAS airplanes' sensors now reflect the targeting pod view;
coughsomeoneforgottheNeophron The Buzzard config now has the same IR/visual sensor config parameters/values as the Wipeout, including animDirection="PilotCamera_V"; which the Wipeout received the day before; the Neophron config seems to be unchanged.
Tweaked: Targeting pod modes and zoom have been adjusted
Buzzard and Wipeout gained "NVG" in addition to "Normal" and "Ti", while the Medium FOV ("5.0x") now has initFoV/minFoV/maxFoV values of "(6 / 120)" instead of "(15 / 120)", Narrow FOV ("15.0x") has values of "(2 / 120)" instead of "(3.75 / 120)", the maxTurn/minTurn values are +/-160 instead of +/-150, the minElev value is now -20 instead of -10, and the initElev value is 5 instead of 0.
@unreal cypress ... you made some guys very happy over here at BI.. with your clutter thing
๐
@unreal cypress keeps better track on days of releases than me ๐ i just wish i can forget
Chortles too!
Hey, just wanted to drop by and say that the new 3rd person camera for planes and helicopter ROCKS! It just feels so good to flying 3rd person without the need to constantly readjust camera
Great job!
Yeah, I was playing it yesterday. Feels great flying in 3rd person now. Especially the Neophron.
I couldn't find the airbrake control in options. I found a wheelbrake one though that I didn't know was there for planes
This seems to be a bit of a big deal... 21 March 2017:
Tweaked: Passive sensors now do not allow marking by default
Oh boy the Xi'an gettin' in on the TGP action:
Tweaked: The UI gunner aim indicator was removed from the Xian vehicle Added: PNVS (pilotCamera) to the Xian pilots (WIP)
Ahahahaha:
Tweaked: Increased the passive radar template range to 16 kilometers
heh yeah like twice the stratis length ๐
I imagine that the devs do know that people have bigger terrains being cooked up... ๐
Xi'an still having the HMD display in pilotCamera is a little odd though (and it getting zoomed in). Hopefully they can fix that
Makes me wonder if they could use the MFD/HMD tech to make first focal plane reticles for rifle scopes though ๐ค
anyone recall which update had the jet ILS?
The runway outline? I think I noticed it on the neophron around 140738 or 140761
Coding the MFD/HUD stuff is mostly done by config though, so could have been done in a much smaller update
Wow, Dev feel smooth as silk
And thanks to @blazing sorrel for this screenshot confirming the existence of the Buzzard (Dynamic loadout): http://imgur.com/lU6gWsM Although the in-game loadout is two HE Shrieker pods, two Macers, two Falchions, and the gun pod plus it's not an "every possible weapon on every station" situation, there's limited stores on the outermost pylons and the centerline fuselage station only allows the gun pod for now
Sorry if this has been asked but when I looked on the forums I just wasnt sure with @neat cosmos 's response but will there be some sort of service menu for the dynamic loadouts while in mission?
Oh did I post this in the wrong area? Sorry, there is so many channels!
@lament dawn no in mission service menu afaik
but in editor
you can script one in, i suppose (already done by some mods) but no vanilla solution
It's mentioned on the biki that there will be provisions for mission designers to allow players acces to loadout selection either at mission start or ingame
I assume it'll be a module
Aye, but then of course how much can/should a 'mission start' (Briefing screen) or in-mission loadout editor be able to break the limits imposed in the magazine and vehicle configs? Namely, both must have at least one entry in common between their respective hardpoints arrays, the mass of the 'dynamic loadouts version' magazine must not exceed the pylon/station's maxweight value, i.e. the Buzzard underwing pylons will accept any bomb/gun pod/missile/rocket pod that both shares the Buzzard pylons' hardpoints[]={"B_BOMB_PYLON"}; and has a light enough mass, i.e. the Twin Cannon 20mm gun pod (PylonWeapon_300Rnd_20mm_shells) has for its compatible hardpoints B_BOMB_PYLON and B_A143_BUZZARD_CENTER_PYLON and its mass value of 230 lets it fit under the inboard (maxweight=400;) and midboard (maxweight=320;) pylons but not the outboard (maxweight=200;) pylons. (The centerline fuselage station currently only supports the B_A143_BUZZARD_CENTER_PYLON hardpoint so currently only the Twin Cannon 20mm can be fitted underneath.)
@lament dawn What SuicideKing and da12thMonkey said, and here's (some of?) the scripting commands associated with the current system on dev branch: https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Vehicle_Loadouts#Scripting
hey if missiles/rockets are being tweaked, then could we get some flyby sounds for them? Like a whistling or whooshing noise when an RPG passes by? Has gameplay benefits - at least you know it wasn't a launched grenade causing the explosion(s).
so does anyone know how to actually setup the pylons? is anyone able to link me to a thread or something? (other than the biki as it doesn't explain it enough for me)
@lament dawn Haven't been able to take a crack at it just yet but as far as I can tell in the model you have to set up an ejector rack/launch rail proxy for each station -- and in the Buzzard that actually includes the gun pod
Ayyyy sound update for Altis and Stratis on dev now!
And I'm stuck in classes for another hour at a minimum. Curses.
Dude I have 3 hours and then I gotta walk home. :c
Well the good news is that thunderstorms for Altis/Stratis are now on par with ones on Tanoa.
And the Prowler now comes in black. Unless you could always get it in black.
could always
BTW can the AI use vehicle FCS?
Can it please not?
It does a great job of tracking and killing targets while wizzing past at 100 kmph as it is...
@burnt raft Wished there was a Gendarmerie blue though.
I wish this for a bunch of A3 assets... though I'm not 100% sure what role the Prowler would have served them over an Offroad.
The right gunner in the Blackfish gunship doesn't seem to get a calculated impact crosshair.
Just as a tacti-cool vehicle (unarmed prowler)
I wish there was a blue helmet, so i could pretend it's UN ๐
I also wish the armed prowler got one extra seat so we could use it for 6-man teams
attachTo him to back ๐คฃ
@burnt raft I dunno I suppose it just feels out of place unless the idea is the Gendarmerie consciously trading of seating capacity (not so much protection) for off-road mobility versus the Offroad.
hmm, canonically, would a police force, even a paramilitary one, on a remote island really have the budget for brand new tactical vehicles?
they might have been saving part of their yearly budget in a treasure chest burried deep in the forest
1.68 hotfix #1 was released , fyi, thanks for the RC feedback
@scenic gyro I've seen stranger things.
So despite the Loiter waypoint telling me that aircraft will not copy terrain, aircraft appear to do just that.
hmm, isn't that just an issue with the height being specified as AGL (above ground level) instead of A(M)SL (above mean sea level)?
It's likely.
Regardless, it makes trying to gun from an AI Blackfish rather annoying on mountainous terains.
can't add flyInHeightASL to the waypoint?
@neat cosmos I can't remember if this has been a part of the recent discussion for jets DLC, but could it be possible to get a script command to disable locking of targets? So as to force SACLOS mode on (vanilla) helicopter ATGMs, for example?
something like
vehicle disableWeaponTargetLock "WeaponName";
vehicle disableWeaponTargetLock [gunner vehicle, "weaponName"];
vehicle disableWeaponTargetLock [turret, "weaponName"];
this post in the community i play with reminded me of this
In the jets update with new sensors, any idea if it will be possible to require a gunner using ATGMs like the DAGR (?) to wire guide the missile and not be allowed to lock on? I'd love to have a helicopter with missiles that aren't fire and forget```
(we play vanilla)
I had summarised here, too, at the end: https://forums.bistudio.com/forums/topic/194434-arma-3-targeting-review-revision-2/?do=findComment&comment=3109927
+1 for your post SuicideKing! Well done!
Kinda outdated though seeing how much of it predates the Jets platform update reveals...?
oh yeah it's outdated now
it's pre sensors stuff
i was mostly just pointing to the part at the end re: script commands
@past moon any reason for post release fixes not included in the hotfix(es)?
means we'll have to live with annoyance bugs like https://feedback.bistudio.com/T122322 until 1.70
while it has been (supposedly) fixed in DEV since the 22nd of March (https://forums.bistudio.com/forums/topic/140837-development-branch-changelog/?do=findComment&comment=3167182)
it sometimes happens @autumn sage
@light lintel I am sorry, there's no such script command atm
Cool, thanks oukej
@neat cosmos Blackfish (Armed) pilot and left gunner have radar control but co-pilot and right gunner do not, is this intentional behavior?
@crisp wyvern it is and in line with how vehicle crew roles in Arma have been working (driver - commander - gunner; in this case driver+commander are the same person)
copilot and sec. gunner are just "another turret", but Arma's core still relies a lot on the driver/commander/primarygunner trio ๐
Did not expect the co-pilot to be a gunner instead of a commander here, unless what you describe was necessary in order for the pilot to have radar control
Added: Single release mode for countermeasures
this is really cool BTW
Any chance of seeing flyInHeightASL being fixed again before 1.70? As is it doesn't work for loiter type waypoints again unfortunately.
Played around with the new jets, they feel nice to fly and I'm really happy that BIS incorporated an idea of planes having own designators used with pilot's camera (something I modded in before).
However I have to admit that flying perfectly fine at 200kph is pushing it a bit, although given the relatively small size of arma maps its fine I think.
My suggestion would be:
- add the sound barrier breaking effect
- add an additional, optional 3rd person camera mode that also follows the plane's roll as well as the pitch (ie. Ace combat style camera)
- increase the turn limits for the pilots camera so its free rotating
- increase the turn limit of locked on pilot camera. The current -180 to 180 causes issues when flying over the target (camera usually freaks out a bit trying to look at the target)
Didn't we always have the Cammera and Laser designator on Jets? Pretty shure I have been using that for a long time.
cammera yes, laser designator is new i think
nope, pilotCamera was added to planes a few patches ago and laser designator for the camera was added to dev branch back in August
think that means it was added in 1.64
There's something oddly amusing about how the premium jet stats make it look, on the face of pylon and sensor stats, like they're actually better at ground attack than the attack jets...
They probably should be. Expensive multi-role jets usually do have better sensors than cheap CAS ones
IRL the trade off in favour of attack aircraft usually comes from loiter time and cost
The former of which isn't (the latter definitely isn't) simulated to nearly the same degree in A3, I guess...?
Dunno. I haven't seen how long it takes things to run out of fuel
I did find with the new jets it's sometimes hard to stay in sensor range on a marked target when moving so fast though
going low and slow with the older jets gives plenty of time to establish what you're targetting
@da12thMonkey#2096 keep in mind the fact you can target stuff using the pilot camera
@neat cosmos is it possible to have a custom HUD in 3rd person view for the planes, with CCIP and such?
That's what I do usually. But depending on altitude, fog etc. speed can mean I am approaching quite close before finding the target visually, and gives limited time to lock and release without going around for another pass
The new jets fly perfectly fine and stable at 200kph so yeah, you've got a lot of time to acquire the target in such case
- increase the turn limit of locked on pilot camera. The current -180 to 180 causes issues when flying over the target (camera usually freaks out a bit trying to look at the target)
can confirm this, as I have had this issue even with old vanilla jets
might be easier to handle the camera if jets were dual seater but with one...
would be nice to have video uplink/downlink ... commanders on the ground able to see what the pilot sees via the pilot camera or bomb cameras in realtime
I think they can...or is that only from UAVs?
what would be realy intereesting is how the information sharing setings are working amongs vehicles ... there are new settings for this ... basically a few strategically placed tigriss should be able to get you all the available radar intell on altis
if I understand this setting correctly hat is
BTW: I meant the camera mode (CTRL+RMB), not the normal view when you sit in the plane
@scenic gyro in theory you could BS through this and attach a hidden model UAV to a plane get the camera feed
@severe nimbus what would be realy intereesting is how the information sharing setings are working amongs vehicles ... there are new settings for this ... basically a few strategically placed tigriss should be able to get you all the available radar intell on altis In theory this could work but in practice this is more for situational awareness, not targeting...? To say nothing of course of every Tigris probably showing up on every-in-the-vicinity aircraft's RWR...
^ejection seat related
Turns out you ejection seats make you invulnerable to impact/fall damage
@crisp wyvern that was for Finn?
Yep, my mistake
Man flying the new Jets with a Thrustmaster HOTAS is ๐
@inner pagoda Lemme guess, dat analogue throttle
And being able to bind everything to buttons and Hats.
Although going from DCS to Arma is...jarring to say the least.
I can pull a nice 30ยฐ bank in the F-15C and hold altitude just fine without any rudder input, but trying to do the same thing in the Black Wasp is nigh impossible.
Has the new carrier made an appearance on the Dev branch as yet?
@verbal ginkgo I'm sorry about that 3rd person. It would be low prio as we don't intend to have it in vanilla. And we're just too few over here and have too many issues that we really need to fix/do.
@neat cosmos not in vanilla is fine, but I would love if there was a way for modders to enable 3rd person CCIP and such. The biggest bummer is that it was working like that before.
it could lead to some fun mods
Any1 know what was on the new patch today ?
@light lintel 10Q
is that a way of writing "thank you"? ๐
Added: A new "vtolvectoring" MFD source This one's a definite plus for modders and possibly players as well, if only because it's more information that can go into the HMD/HUD
Added: A new "PylonAmmo" MFD source Not sure what this one means (yet)
Might be for numeric values of the ammo counter for each pylon. Currently there's just a depleting bar on the Wipeout's stores overview panel, and numeric values in the HUD for currently selected weapons
so i was shown a video recently; turns out that bombs do not require maintaining a laser lock on a position to actually hit
i.e. laze on release, then do whatever, bomb will hit spot
is this...er... authentic ?
@light lintel It certainly doesn't sound authentic, then again the seeming usual method of 'lase the whole way through' is also inauthentic to procedure IRL
@light lintel If Falcon BMS is a good source, then it looks like LGBs are supposed to be dropped unguided into the general area near a target and then guide on a laser that is only fired a couple seconds before impact. Not sure how difficult it would be to reproduce in Arma however.
Is the lock on on rocketlaunchers going to be altered from its current dev branch state? I have trouble locking vehicles warm and cold ones ... both with PCML and Titan AT
Seems like it'd make more sense to keep Dev Branch as the main Steam install to automate daily updates, and use GameUpdater to maintain the Stable Branch for playing on. Any horrible flaws with that plan?
For me there's an issue of needing the main branch to be on SSD where my main steam install is, but not having enough space for dev on the SSD as well. Otherwise I'd probably do the same
You can put the Dev Branch main install on another drive in a Steam Library though, right?
@Chortles#3140 @glass silo well this is what it looks like at the moment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N67hIG1XQeI
it looks like the laser is used at the time of acqusition, but the bombs aren't really laser guided per say, and appear to ignore the lase beyond point of release.
so it appears this is more JDAM than LGB
I suppose EGBUs could operate on that basis and use INS when they lose laser track. But I figure they're still probably employed in the same manner as regular LGBs or JDAMs IRL
hmm except the laser appears to not do anything post release
as in, if you move the laser around or turn it off (as in the video) the bombs don't care
Strange. I've managed to move the laser spot and have the bombs adjust course
Well, I'm going by the report of the video maker.
So it's possible he was doing something wrong - or maybe stuff has changed.
It looks like each lgb only maintains it's track until the next one is launched, after which it impacts the last location the lase was on before the next bomb dropped/was released.
i see, thanks
Might be changed on dev since I just dropped two bombs and they followed the laser to a new location when moved
and regarding the pylonAmmo MFD source added yesterday. These numbers in the bottom right of each box on the stores panel appeared today: http://i.imgur.com/Ln2ZUmK.png
apparantly i can fly the new jets in dev branch can somebody pls assist me in how i can do so?
@winter sonnet You switch over to the dev branch in Steam. Then open the editor and place the jets down and hit preview.
๐ thank you o7
@winter sonnet Note that what Greenfist describes requires the pilot to be Player (as far as 'Player', 'Playable', or AI) but if the jet is the only vehicle/unit in the scenario then the Player checkbox is automatically checked off; if you placed multiple jets/pilots it's the first of them that was placed (you can manually choose one to be Player before hitting Preview).
@crisp wyvern @candid dew roger that aprreciate it o7
Alternately you can select Tutorials from the main menu, choose Virtual Arsenal, and click the Garage icon, then go to the 'Planes' tab. ๐ Unlike the Editor preview, in this "Virtual Garage" you won't have the pop-ups that you would if you didn't buy the DLC! (by itself, as part of the DLC Bundle 2, or the Supporter Edition before Arma 3's release)
These are the two basic ways to 'try before you buy'!
Added: New "sourceLength" and "sourcePrecision" parameters to the "scale" MFD type
Added: New "clipTLParallax" and "clipBRParallax" MFD group parameters
Added: A new "pilotcameralock" MFD condition [0 disabled, 1 locked to terrain, 2 locked to objects]
Tweaked: Manual guidance of missiles was improved```
i'll admit, i don't understand the first two
best guess, it's the length of the bar and the increments for those bar type ammo indicators?
clip stuff, no clue
well, other than viewing angle clipping in the HUDs
There's barely anything in the engine improvements for this DLC which isn't exciting, the cockpit work is great, I hope some of it gets applied to the existing vanilla aircraft. Having real info in the MFDs instead of just static images is great (looking at you, Blackfoot et al)
woohoo! carrier!
yup
i'm being told that it doesn't come with the turrets pre-placed, but is there a composition planned?
can confirm turret mounts are empty
great start for carrier, Flax just fell through the deck
flax?
btw
Aircraft can get stuck on the carrier's deck after being placed in Eden Editor ```
i'm downloading dev branch too ๐
couldn't resist
another discord user who kindly offered to live stream his testing so I could see the carrier in action ๐
was running across the deck then just fell through it and got stuck inside the model.
:enginelimitations:
@neat cosmos will this be functional :o
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/101479298812121088/305007717867716609/20170421175127_1.jpg
interiors looking good though!
you wanna catch some sharks?
partial interiors, doesn't look you can climb all the way up the island from inside?
@light lintel what is that?
Looks like a boat crane
would be great to have a way to load and unload boats, so that ejected pilots can be recovered
that was my first thought, but there's only one and it looks a bit flimsy to support the weight of even a RHIB on it's own
I seem to remember someone else describing a similar feature and oukej or another dev said it was radio related
looks like there are some rough edges to work on still. planes catching the wires and stopping before the first wire on the deck ๐
well it's on dev branch, still beta
right, not a criticism, just an observation
the lighting at night is VERY nice
although, a little bit bugged, there are floodlights on the island pointed at the deck, but they aren't illuminating it
hmm, i suppose it's related to things falling through
reminds me of bridges on tanoa not getting illuminated properly
Anchors aweigh boys!
What would it take to add salute in cockpit =p
That's a slippery slope, what next, it plays the top gear theme every time you launch from the deck? ๐
I was about to suggest steam from the catapult, but then I remembered the GRF class uses an electromagnetic launch system.
is the centurion SAM not radar guided?
wait so players can't get on the carrier unless by air ? no lifts or anything ? ๐ฆ
@tough ermine Seems not, you spawn there or land there, no access from the water
And the only inside bit being the first floor of the main tower, slightly disappointed but hey it's free
Anyone want to hear a MAJOR LOL??
The UCAV can't launch from the USS Freedom, it won't attach to a catapult ๐
yeah, I'm puzzled by that odd random bit of interior. If they were only going to do a similarly sized space, the shelter on the deck would have made more sense
well, you can climb up a ladder to a walk way where you can look into a green box where the bridge should be so.....
yep, I can't shake the feeling that the plan is or was to do more, but timetables got in the way
or maybe performance
because being able to enter the bottom of the island but not being able to go any further is a huge tease
especially since it's a nicely detailed interior
@storm pewter the takeoff and landing distances are super short. you can fly the ucav off the carrier like it's ww2.
it blows up when going over the edge (if not attached to a catapult)
jets blow up as well
@Brian/Foxone the takeoff and landing distances are super short. you can fly the ucav off the carrier like it's ww2.
I assume that is not what BI intended ๐
you can also take off flying through the railings on one corner of the deck ...
Can takeoff and land fine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ntt4-Gt_go
Tailhook works fine, even though it's not available through action. But here's why the catapult doesn't work with ucav LOL https://gfycat.com/UnconsciousInferiorFirecrest
it's a radar AAA
mounted on a ship
absolutely shouldn't be engaging infantry
along those lines, it doesn't seem to be using radar at this moment
Centurion isn't engaging anything, as far as i can tell
There also seem to be audio issues with the AAA, but maybe that's because i've attached it to a HEMTT ๐
AAA is something like a Shilka not an Centurion, got confused there
but yeah i agree something like the Centurion should not be engaging infantry
but its fine, i get your point
No, it's not wrong really.
Anyway, yeah, it engages infantry which it shouldn't
it explodes when shot at by 3 bullets
which it shouldn't
centurion tracks but doesn't fire
lol, search Anti-aircraft artillery all i get is Shilka's and tunguska's ๐
Nicknames for anti-aircraft guns include AA, AAA or triple-A, an abbreviation of anti-aircraft artillery; "ack-ack" (from the spelling alphabet used by the British for voice transmission of "AA");[2
it just means an anti aircraft gun
artillery in the old days because of flak guns
oh another issue - neither the AAA nor the Centurion show up on passive radar (perhaps because they aren't configured to use it yet?)
can't hear the AAA firing either (tried without attaching it to things)
in autonomous mode, CIWS shouldn't engage anything except air targets. However in real life it's also used to engage boats, especially speed boats close to the ship (pirates and suicide bombers)
in manual fire mode that is
Yup, that makes sense
Are Dev branch bugs supposed to go to the feedback tracker too?
@scenic gyro @light lintel Either of you notice that classname-wise the renamed-Phalanx-to-Praetorian is using ammo w/ 35mm classname?
I noticed the 35mm, though at the time I didn't really think about it
yeah, neither did I but it's shown as 35mm if you switch to gunner mode in the UAV console iirc
real life Phalanx is 20mm apparently, honestly I wouldn't have remembered that until I looked it up
yeah, that was a surprise for me, I had wondered how they would implement the 'autonomous' part of those weapons, never even crossed my mind that they would just be static drones ๐
it makes perfect sense
I didn't know turrets could be controlled via UAV console ๐
(like the HMG or GMG)
there's a console controlled MG/GMG turret already, so I should have known
i want to see what's happening to the centurion now
aha
so the centurion DOES have a radar
it just doesn't work ๐
and it can't lock
I was able to manually lock with it yesterday. Maybe the target is too close?
hmm, will try again
the AAA's radar doesn't move with the direction of the turret
so unless the turret and body are pointing the same way, radar is useless
oh yeah, centurion's lock works, i was pressing T instead of R ๐
behaviour was odd in the quick test Flax did yesterday, where he flew directly towards the carrier in a Shikra with all three systems on the flight deck, the SAMs didn't lock on or fire until he had flown over the ship. The AAA was the only system to engage prior to that, and it only did so at less than 400m
of course that could have been pure luck
has anyone checked whether the AAA (guess we're not calling it a CIWS) will target missiles?
only the spartan SAM locks on
GBee i'd try if I could lock on to the AAA ๐
or any of them
heh
BTW the spartan seems to have a radar too
for some reason
doesn't appear to work though
nope, doesn't work, which is as intended, though why does it have it all, i don't know ๐
The Spartan system has a radar, the Spartan missiles are IR alone... like the Cheetah/Tigris
Well I did find the parameters for the Spartan system's active radar:aimDown=0; allowsMarking=1; angleRangeHorizontal=120; angleRangeVertical=120; animDirection=""; color[]={0,1,1,1}; componentType="ActiveRadarSensorComponent"; groundNoiseDistanceCoef=0.5; maxGroundNoiseDistance=200; maxSpeedThreshold=150; maxTrackableATL=1e+010; maxTrackableSpeed=1e+010; minSpeedThreshold=100; minTrackableATL=-1e+010; minTrackableSpeed=-1e+010; typeRecognitionDistance=3000;class airTarget range is 5 km, class groundTarget range is 3 km.
ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
nothing showed up on sensors till it was within object view distance
i.e. less than 2500m
Weird but... unfortunately that squares with my anecdotal experience with active radar
radar can track underwater ๐
Though for what it's worth the Spartan missiles' IR sensor has a 30x30 cone w/ classAirTarget range 5 km (groundTarget 4 km), while the missile cone properties are missileKeepLockedCone=45, missileLockCone=30, missileLockMaxDistance=4500, missileLockMaxSpeed=1600, missileLockMinDistance=150
considering the terrain scale, that's a reasonable distance, just a shame it's not working properly
i'm not sure why the spartan can engage ground targets though
it's a SAM
is there any SEAD fuctionality yet, BTW?
I haven't shown a ground vehicle to the spartan yet
is there any SEAD fuctionality yet, BTW?
i can see a cheetah on passive radar, but what's the counter?
@light lintel Missiles-wise there's the allowsMarking parameter which means that ARMs can use allows=Marking1; and componentType="PassiveRadarSensorComponent"; (this is an 'anti-radiation' sensor template) while RWRs use allowsMarking=0; (as in the pre-existing passive radar sensor template)
okay
What are you 'seeing' the Cheetah with?
Ohhh, to the best of my knowledge Bohemia has not introduced any ARMs and the anti-radiation template is for modders... although the aforementioned change of allowsMarking=0; to the passive radar sensor template means that the Neophron/Wipeout counter for a passive-radar-detected Cheetah is "move the TGP towards the Cheetah until it's picked up on IR/visual, then you can target it normally"
hmmm high chance you'll be dead by that time :/
especially since the TGP is really shaky when zoomed in (and well, object view distances...)
does anyone have that image showing all the available systems for the hardpoints and pylons?
What do you mean by that @scenic gyro?
there was an image shared, presumably by BI themselves of the weapons systems and other packages that were included with the DLC
@light lintel If that's the case then think of the passive radar sensor/your ability to detect the Cheetah on your sensor display as "where to keep away from" ๐
I just can't find it
haha fair enough really
but it would be really weird if there was nothing that could function as an ARM at all
Since AA vehicles can engage at ~3km
probably increases reliance on ground spotters
this is why I'm looking for that chart, it had a whole bunch of new systems shown, targetting pods, fuel tanks, missiles, gun pods, rocket pods etc
must have been in the forum now that I think about it
@light lintel Since AA vehicles can engage at ~3km probably increases reliance on ground spotters In that case probably intentional...
@scenic gyro Probably community-made
yeah, i'm mostly fine with that
except it does limit some mission possibilities
(like VTOL/helos with SEAD escort)
doh, found it, it wasn't BI or community made, it wasn't even for Arma ...
it was showing the systems mountable on the real life Gripen
I'd missed the context and got my hopes up for the DLC coming with all that stuff ๐ฆ
@scenic gyro It was someone requesting that level of customizability wasn't it
@light lintel I suppose there's config-modding AGMs to have the anti-radiation sensor template and upping their lock properties (read: the various range parameters) accordingly
is config modding compatible with vanilla?
either way, would be good to have some sort of HARM variant
i'd balance as follows:
Neophron gets it, future sukhoi doesn't
A10 doesn't get it, black wasp does
gripen gets it, Alca doesn't (actually i'd suggest giving both planes HARMs since AAF doesn't have radar AA)
@neat cosmos ๐๐พ ๐
although with dynamic loadouts it shouldn't really matter - though from what i saw it seems that the loadout choices are restricted to the plane's own?
@crisp wyvern am i going mad or does the black wasp have HARM https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/104982724762157056/305375925061550090/unknown.png
not that it works
assuming it's the Macer II
Yeah that thing doesn't correspond at all... notice the SDBs display?
Yeah i realised that nothing but the artificial horizon works
but why put it in bis
BIS please, stop teasing us
So i tried a dogfight
Ended up with the AI running away from me till we were both at 15km
my plane actually lost control, it went so high.
I thought they were actually producing fully working MFDs for the new aircraft ๐ฆ
@scenic gyro Should have abandoned hope thereof after they revealed the Custom Info display panels
it's strange, all the old planes have weapons information panels that work
BTW how is AGM missile lock supposed to work?
I have to lase a selected target before it locks on
which is clunky and redundant imo
(since the laser pointer is a diffferent "weapon")
i.e. if you can already target it, then why not allow lock on?
I was pretty sure the Macer didn't require a lase.
Under all circumstances? What aircraft?
Macer currently only locks "hot" vehicles right?
I'm not sure they have to be warmed up, but it would likely help since the D model of the Maverick uses IR contrast to find targets.
Granted, that's DCS experience spilling into Arma which likely isn't all that useful.
in arma it should be IR
Firing up my A3 client now...
vehicle was stationary
but the thing is...it could be targeted.
if i couldn't target it at all then it would make sense
or maybe the idea is that the camera targeting something uses visual sensors and the Maverick uses IR, and thus needs a warmed up vehicle?
which would make sense i guess (except of course it follows a laser lock too...)
What aircraft are you using?
A10
A-164 or community-made A-10?
@storm pewter what were your bug reports related to?
@light lintel carrier related, some flooring where you clip through, AA not working, blast deflector not lowering
Stuff like that
could you link them here, so I/we can subscribe/add to them?
@light lintel For what it's worth I took a look at the Macer's ammo config... laserLock=0; but maxControlRange/missileLockMaxDistance both = 6000 while the missileLockCone/MissileKeepLockedCone both = 30, missileLockMaxSpeed=200; and weaponLockSystem="2+16"; and it only has an IR sensor (30x30 cone, allowsMarking=1; / maxRange=6000;, seemingly not vulnerable to ground clutter)... the weapon has canLock=2; and laser=0; and weaponLockSystem=2;
so does it mean it shouldn't lock on to a laser?
cheers
NP ๐
@light lintel or maybe the idea is that the camera targeting something uses visual sensors and the Maverick uses IR, and thus needs a warmed up vehicle? For what it's worth the camera also has an IR sensor, but yes the Maverick uses IR... did some testing of this
but i mean, camera has visual + IR (so it can see cold vehicles)
Yeah... think of it as "if it ain't warmed up enough for IR the Maverick ain't seeing it"... got this result when I tried to plant an Ifrit by itself on an airstrip and came in for AGM attack... couldn't see it nor begin a lock on the first pass, not until it had detected my A-164 and begun counter-attacking followed by my Immelman turning over for a pass from the opposite side
followed by my Immelman
by what?
๐
it's interesting, i was attacking a marid. I suppose it hadn't moved and thus the engine was off
but that's sensible, so it's fine >if it ain't warmed up enough for IR the Maverick ain't seeing it
For some reason the Ifrit didn't follow a Move waypoint, hence not being warm on the first pass... the Varsuk sure did though, so I was able to nail it from over 4 km out with a Macer on a first shot of the first pass
interesting, i did get an ifrit to move
but yeah if the vehicle is off there's no good way to see it (since visual sensors are limited to object view distance), interesting
i like it ๐
slotting screen may be broken in dev branch, BTW
i can't reslot if i die
how's performance in dev branch?
my game's stuttering a LOT getting things to load
@light lintel but yeah if the vehicle is off there's no good way to see it, interesting Correction: the Wipeout's visual sensor can pick up a stationary Varsuk, but the Macer cannot begin a lock on it ๐
well, yes. ๐
i also meant in terms of players
since it doesn't show up on thermals
and the flyby is usually too quick for me to pick things out visually between clutter
Note that thermals (as far as the IR sensor) are also subject to object view distance by default
except laser pointers and thermal strobes?
Correct, laser and NV sensor templates have objectDistanceLimitCoef=-1;/viewDistanceLimitCoef=-1;
oh hey i got the centurion to work
and the AAA to use its radar too
and in the process discovered amazing engine workings
or well, not that amazing
basically, if you place a turret without "crew" then it spawns as an empty vehicle
you can place whatever other unit inside it, as gunner
like you would in a normal vehicle
upon doing this, turret fires as it should, i.e. using radar etc
man i hope oukej doesn't nerf turret "crew" ๐
i can make the centurion, AAA and spartan OPFOR/INDFOR whatever, like this
glorious
by the way I saw what you mean re: Praetorian's lack of moving-with-turret active radar, which we can chalk up to the sensor's animDirection having a blank value
i see
i do think it's firing 20mm rounds instead of 35mm, though
going by the tracers and damage
might just be a weird classname
could be wrong though
Yeah I'm thinking that re: the classname
Oh and the significance re: the Praetorian's animDirection=""; is... contrast that with the Mk21 Centurion's animDirection="MainTurret";
Ah, interesting. Just an oversight then
I imagine by the way that you noticed that the Centurion must have active radar toggled on in order to begin/complete a lock before launch?
yup
the autonomous turret switches it off for whatever reason
the "crewed" turret uses it correctly, and can engage out to ~6km
you know i wish that the direction that the radar was pointed would influence its detection on passive radar...
23:56:25 Sound: Error: File: a3\sounds_f_jets\weapons\cannons\cannon_phalanx_sound.wss not found !!!
reason for no sound i suppose
23:56:25 Error during evaluation of expression _moveVelocity in FX_MissileTrail_SAM
game crashed after two of those
Is there a way to install the main and the devbranch at the same time?
Did I miss it or does the sentinel not have a thrust indicator yet?
@dull hull Download Arma 3 Tools, run the Game Updater utility... I tend to recommend is using Steam for main and Game Updater for dev branch, although if you're testing stuff like Jets you may want to do the other way around since from what I've heard the Steam API does not recognize your DLC purchases on a Game Updater-maintained dev branch.
@crisp wyvern Well there seemed to be a lot of MFD related stuff going in, and early in-game material seemed to show a less static cockpit, so I put two and two together, just reached the wrong conclusion. I am disappointed that while they have working ammo counters, they don't show the actual loaded weapons on the pylons correctly. I figured a lot of the custom dialog stuff was just for those playing in third person, or because you presently have to 'zoom in' to view the cockpit screens/instruments properly which you wouldn't need to do in real life.
ah well, there's still plenty to like about the DLC ๐
@scenic gyro After all these years you should have learned that "early in-game material" was worthless as a reference for where Arma 3 was headed. ๐ Truthbetold I'm not surprised that "they don't show the actual loaded weapons on the pylons correctly"... back before dynamic loadouts Arma 3 those were outright 'static' textures w/ a lot of show/hide animations to feign display changes, made exclusively for the loadouts that the jets originally had.
right, that's what I had for some reason thought they had finally improved, proper mfd instead of all the static textures and hacks. I mean if they can display video in the cockpit then I reason it can't be beyond the engine capabilities to render dynamic vectors/text there too
maybe in Arma 4 ๐
But displaying a video feed is... different, apparently.
For starters, no ability/need to switch from said feed, it's always displaying it -- and always in DTV (no NV or TI) at that...
something mods have managed though, littlebird in RHS (I think) has ability to change what is shown there
but yeah, not in vanilla vehicles
BTW have they nerfed FOV zoom in dev branch planes?
@scenic gyro Those have (by necessity) all required hack-arounds though...?
I'd guess so, but if it's possible to hack around it purely through scripting then it means it should be possible to do it directly within the engine and do it much more efficiently. After all scripts aren't magic, they can't do anything that the engine isn't actually capable of doing itself. In many ways, the ingenious hacks we've seen modders and scripters come up with will actually be more complicated than adding that same capability within the engine.
less or more?
๐
@scenic gyro A corollary issue is probably the extent of model work required...?
Versus the display panel system which seems to be entirely config-based.
And by "there seemed to be a lot of class MFD related stuff going in", did you mean all the various MFD source stuff in the changelogs?
well both would have to exist, so yeah, double the work. Though, going back to the original point about static loadout info, they already have dynamic content in the MFDs - heading, altitude etc So that much at least wouldn't seem difficult to add
yeah, the MFD source stuff, because while they are always exposing stuff for configs/scripts which isn't implemented in in-game vehicles/objects, they are working on a Jets DLC and it would be logical that this was all things they themselves added because it was useful to them internally. Maybe I'm misunderstanding it's purpose though.
I was thinking more the fact that model access/work was required, period, whereas there isn't that much about a HMD/HUD that requires model access other than setting memory points for boundaries thereof, and the display panel system is seemingly all config-based so no-longer-updated mods can be 'resurrected' with them
anyway, 3 weeks and we'll have all the answers
Unfortunately it's a misnomer... class MFD is actually the HMD/HUD stuff. ๐ฆ
yes, picked up on that
oh, wait, only the HUD?
I thought it was MFD/HUD/HMD
since they are highly similar, I thought they were basically the same class, just with differences in which surface they were rendered
You can make MFDs with it as well as HUD and HMD. The Wipeout's loudout screen is using class MFD
@tame rover yeah, that's what I thought ...
As was the F/A-18X Black Wasp's "full-dashboard-GPS", from what I understand
Thing is, from what I recall the HMD/HUD can't "switch pages" either...
oh, wait, only the HUD? I thought it was MFD/HUD/HMD
As per this tweet and the linked BIKI article: https://twitter.com/ondrejkuzel/status/826753088610504704
yeah, I saw all the new HUD stuff, just assumed that improvements there would feed back into the MFDs as well.
not talking highly interactive MFDs, just less static info that is dynamic in the overlays or hud - e.g. engine RPMs in the Caesar or the static loadout info which started this discussion
I admit I strayed into talk of video, but that wasn't what I was originally talking about
Ahhhh ๐ฆ hell if I would have known how this was supposed to be 'easier for modders' though considering the difference in 'texture background' versus a HMD or HUD glass panel
and I don't know if the current HMD/HUD implementation allows for being able to display all weapon/magazine statuses simultaneously as opposed to the currently selected weapon/magazine (see this example of Kajman/Orca HMDs: https://twitter.com/Lathspel/status/844099457276895232 )
the older aircraft are the worst for static (low res) MFD textures which don't actually convey any real info. Newer aircraft like those added in APEX were better
@crisp wyvern, they've added new MFD sources for pylon ammo names and ammunition
Older as in the CAS jets?
it's all maintained in the vehicle state, so it should be possible to make it accessible for use in the MFD
@tame rover For 'current weapon' sure, unless we're talking about two different things
Oh I've seen this before ๐
says the exact displayname of stores on each pylon and how many rounds
Ahhhhh
there's also the HUD indicator that says the currently selected weapon
Which is what I had been referring to
But what you linked displays names/numbers, not images, which would seem to imply that this only benefits simulating vehicles where the display is in this manner (i.e. not a Neophron/Shikra replacement)
this is the current weapon source as used on the Gryphon: http://i.imgur.com/1ofiu9W.png
@tame rover Yeah, I knew I'd seen images showing that info. So maybe we can assume the Black Wasp issue is just because it's unfinished?
oh yeah, class MFD probably can't handle images like that
Hence the limitations I've mentioned
So far only the Wipeout has the fully updated MFD features AFAIK. The DLC aircraft are behind even the old CAS planes in terms of what display features are included
I vaguely recall something special being done for the F/A-18X Black Wasp mod's "your dashboard IS your GPS, complete with a full-terrain view of all of your current terrain and a moving icon for your jet's horizontal location"
It's quite telling that the DLC jets don't even appear to have properly aligned horizon and pitch ladders
@crisp wyvern So when I said earlier I'd seen some MFD improvements shown it was obviously not the Black Wasp but the Wipeout
And it appears to me that this is gonna be hell for jet modders to implement ๐ฆ
the original mod had a map view? Oh, I'd love to see that implemented. I remember how cool it was when I first played with it in a Jaguar (the jet, not the car)
you can make MFD use custom fonts now though. So possibly there'd be a way to work around using symbols for different missiles as different letters
Got a link to the Jaguar mod?
wasn't a mod, the actual aircraft, when I was an RAF cadet many years ago
though, I wonder if there is a Jag mod