Havoc
Affiliate
Posts: 42
|
Post by Havoc on Dec 25, 2006 17:20:47 GMT -5
I was curious now that Armed Assault is released, how much do you think it has done to simplify or "aid" in coding addons/scripting systems?
Unfortunately I don't have ArmA yet, I don't even have the PC to run it yet (my old P3 800mhz still). However, that should change at the end of February or very early March. I'm getting then a Dell XPS with Core Duo processor probably in the 2.1 to 2.4 Ghz range, 2 Gig RAM, 250 Gig HD, not certain which NVIDIA card I'll get yet.
If they have Vista already out and it causes problems, I'll write nasty letters to MS support denouncing their OS as yesterday's white collar trash dug out of the compactor. However, if they don't have it preinstalled on them yet, I'll be glad to accept a free upgrade disc via mail delivery.
I was glad to see in the community wiki that they now have a command called assignedtarget to return the object's name of the current target selected by a unit. Whether this is truely the desired command that OFP should have had, time will tell with experimentation.
I heard some discussion saying that the "time to live" issue with weapons has been eliminated I believe. This might be rumors or hearsay, but if this is true then coding work will be a lot easier dealing with weapon objects.
I also noticed a good discussion going on about new commands that are for Armed assault dealing with all of the axis' of an object. That means directly ingame you can not only control the velocity of an object (x,y,z) through a different command, you can also control the yaw, pitch, and bank of it through two new commands.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sa8Gecko on Dec 26, 2006 4:12:50 GMT -5
Well, perhaps Hater_Kint could try out assignedTarget and post back his finds.
A little offTopic: I have a core duo 2 E6600 2,4 Ghz, overclocked with stock cooler at 3 Ghz, 2GB ddr 533 @ ddr667 and a 7950GT 512mb (stock): the ArmA MP demo runs fine at 1280*1024@75hz, quallity preferenge set to 'very High', view distance set to 4033 (I think it works like about 2000 meters), AA set on low (I don't like normal, too blurry), terrain detail 'normal', object details 'normal', texture detail 'high', shading detail 'high', postprocess effects 'low' (HDR is badly implemented in my opinion, so I set this level), anisotropic filtering 'normal', shadow detail 'normal', blood 'high'. I've still to measure framerate, but I didn't notice any slowdown. My advice for your future PC is that you get a dx10 card, either Nvidia or ATI, but that anyway doesn't have less than 512 mb onboard, should you choose an older dx9 one, instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by h- on Dec 26, 2006 11:07:04 GMT -5
How you mean simplified  The game offers much more in sense of new scripting functionality, material penetration, editable AI etc. so it is not possible for it to be more simple.. Of course some new scripting commands remove the need for some long work arounds from OFP scripts thus simplifying those scripts, but some of the new commands add new possibilities with equal or 'worse' complexity.. There's also some confusion how total conversion mods are implemented (some inheriting oddities) but no official word from BIS about that as far as I know.. Slight, basicly aesthetical, correction  "Returns the target assigned to the vehicle." returns values - "0x100", when the vehicle of which assigned target you are trying find does not exist (is queried with a wrong name, etc.. ) - "<NULL-object>", when there is no target assigned or the target is not valid target (see below) - "target's name", for example "EAST 1-1-A:1".. Functionality: - Returns only 'live' targets, meaning buildings and other 'dead' objects as well as empty vehicles are ignored (returns "<NULL-object>").. - If player is a commander of a group that has AI commanded vehicle, AI commanded tank for example, does not return targets the AI engages on it's own assigned to it by the tank commander, the targets need to be assigned by the player (the leader).. - does not return any target assigned to a player, not even when the player is under AI leadership and the AI assigns the player a target.. And not even when the player locks on some target = useless on players - returns the target chosen by a lone AI (not commanded by the player nor other AI), because a lone AI is it's leader and it assigns targets to itself.. - returns the target which has been assigned to an AI by it's leader, be it a player or another AI.. Well, my recent tests (aimed as high as they can be fired, 0.5 second delayed while loop): - TOW Humwee in ArmA showed the TOW living approx. 19.5 seconds.. - Bullet (fired from abrams mg) approx. 2.5 seconds - Shell (Abrams main cannon) approx. 19.5 seconds Nothing extensive, just firing on the intro island.. |
|
Havoc
Affiliate
Posts: 42
|
Post by Havoc on Dec 26, 2006 14:29:36 GMT -5
How you mean simplified The game offers much more in sense of new scripting functionality, material penetration, editable AI etc. so it is not possible for it to be more simple.. Of course some new scripting commands remove the need for some long work arounds from OFP scripts thus simplifying those scripts, but some of the new commands add new possibilities with equal or 'worse' complexity.. Sorry for not clarifying... I was meaning less workarounds that tend to make scripting projects immensely more complex. Having to deal with new commands and other "differences" is all in the fun of porting code to something new or different. Without these problematic issues, a larger number of programming professionals would be in the unemployment lines.  Functionality: - Returns only 'live' targets, meaning buildings and other 'dead' objects as well as empty vehicles are ignored (returns "<NULL-object>").. - If player is a commander of a group that has AI commanded vehicle, AI commanded tank for example, does not return targets the AI engages on it's own assigned to it by the tank commander, the targets need to be assigned by the player (the leader).. - does not return any target assigned to a player, not even when the player is under AI leadership and the AI assigns the player a target.. And not even when the player locks on some target = useless on players - returns the target chosen by a lone AI (not commanded by the player nor other AI), because a lone AI is it's leader and it assigns targets to itself.. - returns the target which has been assigned to an AI by it's leader, be it a player or another AI.. This command needs to allow returning of the target's name used in scripting reference when used on the player, I see no reason why this information should not be returned. I don't argue against it ignoring destroyed units, but buildings should be included as being returned if the building object can be referred to like a vehicle/man/aircraft. Well, speaking of career unemployment, I have yet to gain an IT position after 2 years of hard searching and countless interviews. It seems my bachelors in Management Information Systems just isn't cutting it here, so I'm getting a minor's worth of Computer Science courses. Despite graduating from a good university, it doesn't help when you don't get career counseling during college. Company IT personnel & recruiters, and my IT instructors were little of help either on specific focused qualifications I should have sought. I've already finished their first course being C++ focused on basic programming for a console application using Visual C++ 6.0. That basically dealt with all the fundamentals of C++ including pointers and structures. For me it was easy (although time intensive), I blazed through the course and scored a 98% overall average in a course that elminates 40% to 50% of the class because they can't cut it. This spring I deal with the other half which I'm somewhat more familiar with since I've had Java and VB, that being using classes, inheritance, polymorphism, etc. God I hope I get a bloody IT career soon so I don't turn from mildly frustrated to long term pissed off individual. Anyways, I'm going to update the BIS ArmA wiki to request those features be modified for assignedtarget command. EDIT: Fixed the second quote  |
|
|
|
Post by h- on Dec 26, 2006 15:19:49 GMT -5
Actually I don't know whether they even have the requests section anymore, they only have bug reporting page.. And you can request all you want untill you go blue in the face, there's about 0.0001% change they will add/change anything..  To me it seems all the new scripting commands are directly related to the new fsm AI tasks, if they would not have added that I'm pretty sure the amount of new commands would have been a bit smaller.. I might be wrong though so don't quote me on that  .. I can: Even if the leader assigns a target to the player the player can target and engage any target he/she likes so the information provided by this would be completely useless.. Sure, you would know what target was assigned to the player but so what? Actually, being one is not fun.. I've been pissed off at least 20 years now, and counting.. |
|
..