Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31

Thread: Modern War(fare) Crisis

  1. #11
    Ah yes, it's possible that it doubles the vertices count at every edges like if you apply an edgesplit modifier in Blender, as after conversion back into MLOD, the real vertice count is the same as the one i saw (+/- 2500 vertices) on the original MLOD.

    For Inquisitor models, the ones i used with permission have been modified in WW4 (simplified in polycount and texture count like every models included in WW4), so if you want better visual quality, it's always a better idea to use the original models, not the WW4 versions.

    The WW4 versions were made with a large amount of models used in the same time, leading me to lower both the quality of the models i used and the texture quality.

  2. #12
    Well if you look at the numbers you'll see that it's completely impractical to provide a model for every single attachment combination in MWC. So as it stands people are going to have to accept that the gun they'll be holding isn't going to look exactly like the one they have selected. If it were done properly then for example the Groza alone would need 72 models (36 if you combine the two suppressor options, the masterkey with the grenade launcher and don't provide separate models for guns with grips fitted). Currently the Groza is done with just five different models. While it's possible some generous people will help increase the model count substantially, the priority is currently to replace non-bis/ww4 content.

    So I would say that 90% of the time the gun model you hold won't have the optic on it that you see when you aim down the sights or appear to mount all of the attachments you selected. If people don't like that then I'm afraid this mod is not for them. I would say the innovations this mod brings to multiplayer gameplay outweigh the purely cosmetic limitations imposed by the restricted model count.

    The only reason I brought up the vertex and texture count issue is to provide some target numbers for volunteer modellers to aim for.

  3. #13
    72? I manage 5 optics options(Iron,Aimpoint,Reflex,Eotech,ACOG), 3 under barrel(VFG,M203,MK) options, 2 muzzle(Flashhider, Suppressor) options in 30 models for my M4's(no surprise 5x3x2 is 30) what am I missing?
    STGN

    OFP addons:SOPMOD M4's Black OPS WW4 textures WW4 reload Animation Diemaco SFW
    "The M4 is flat out the best Assault Rifle in the world...period...the end." - rgrgordo

  4. #14
    hi,

    Nice project. Keep it up.

    cya.

    Nikiller.
    [LOL] ofp/ArmA clan since 2004.
    No Respawns, No Crosshairs, No Muppets.
    Want a good ofp/ArmA2 coop? Visit the [LOL] clan homepage | ofp [LOL] addons pack | ArmA2 [LOL] addons pack

    WW4mod25 sound replacement mod v1.1 | Nikiller's scripts pack

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by STGN View Post
    72? I manage 5 optics options(Iron,Aimpoint,Reflex,Eotech,ACOG), 3 under barrel(VFG,M203,MK) options, 2 muzzle(Flashhider, Suppressor) options in 30 models for my M4's(no surprise 5x3x2 is 30) what am I missing?
    STGN
    The 72 attachment combinations for any of the carbine type weapons:

    Spoiler:


    No other weapon type has that many combinations, I can provide a similar grid for the other types if you want.

    The blue text above indicate the WW4 models available for the M4 (which has the most models available compared to any other weapon, see the spoiler below for an example of the most common situation). The red text indicate attachment combos that are not allocated a separate class in the config because they are currently implemented using an alternate magazine rather than a weapon to achieve the desired stats. I could change how the database coding works to implement these as actual separate weapons but there's no point in me doing that unless the models were actually available. The remaining items in black text are defined weapon classes that use the closest model in appearance (so it would use a model from one of the weapons in blue text).

    Jackal326 has given permission to use material from his SJB weapons pack which is good news. That leaves the G36C, M39 EMR, M1014, claymore and the mildot scope requiring replacement or permissions to use. Assuming a 1:1 replacement for a release to take place of the currently used models the list of required replacements is:

    Spoiler:


    Which is actually quite short! So er... any volunteers yet?
    Last edited by *Zeewolf*; Jul 9 2012 at 17:54.

  6. #16
    With the exception of ELCAN sight, No flashhider and suppressors for standard handguard all those are covered in my latest released M4 pack.
    STGN

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by STGN View Post
    With the exception of ELCAN sight, No flashhider and suppressors for standard handguard all those are covered in my latest released M4 pack.
    STGN
    Ok, I'll use the ww4 M4s to make up the difference (assuming you're giving me permission to use your models which is what you seem to be implying, in which case thanks!). Given the incredible number of classes needed in MWC I've been worrying about the impact of leaving all the configs in the non-ww4 addon pbos. MWC uses the main bin\config.cpp for pretty much everything (it also provides unit and weapon replacement for stock BIS classes).

    All the configs in the addon folder will be concatenated and compiled into one class hierarchy so when the game starts the mod is going to be using memory to store effectively redundant class definitions (since they won't be used in MWC missions). For WW4 it's not really a problem since I can remove all of the configs for ww4 units and weapons (most of them are handily packaged separately from the textures/models they use). My thought being that people would just use the MWC mod folder to run MWC multiplayer missions and another mod folder for the proper addon .pbo.

    Assuming I can use it would it be ok for me to remove the config.cpp from your M4 addon and repack it with the same name (which saves me repathing all of the textures)? Or do you think I'm just being paranoid about memory usage?
    Last edited by *Zeewolf*; Jul 10 2012 at 19:56.

  8. #18
    Well you can use my models if you want but if you are not gonna include whole addon I will prefer it if you do not use the same .pbo name. Not sure if it will make a noticeably difference anyway whether or not .cpp is included?
    STGN

  9. #19
    Well I'll tell you what I've observed from years of butchering addons in that manner. If you have a PC that requires -nomap to run OFP with a large collection of addons, if you cut out redundant models and textures you can drop below the -nomap threshold, so obviously the size of the addon affects memory usage even if its contents are not instantiated. I think certain class definitions can have an affect on memory usage as well (I seem to remember having a big problem when I was making the config for a 210MB voice pack, it was ok up until a certain number of classes then it required nomap).

    Anyway, I digress. I appreciate your point of view on the matter of reusing models without repathing them. So I will defer the decision on whether to use your M4s until the high priority items (G36C, M39, claymores, M1014 and mildot) are sorted out. I still haven't had any replies to my emails and PMs from Laser or Nicholas Vinen (guy who made G36Commando.pbo no evidence he was ever a member of these forums so I'm relying on a 9 year old email address!), however Macser has kindly offered to have a look at the G36C which helps keep the mod moving. I'll start working on an editor guide that will describe the few steps necessary to customise the template missions and delve into the guts of how all the mission scripts work for people who want to expand upon any part of this mod (I'm intending all of my scripts to be completely permission free, attribution only, I've never released stuff with anything more stringent than a modified BSD license and I'm not going to start now).

    P.S. I'm still missing a claymore model of any kind, I can't imagine it would be hard to make a little green box on legs with some widgets on top (but who am I to say). Any one care to help with that one?
    Last edited by *Zeewolf*; Jul 11 2012 at 18:24.

  10. #20
    hi,

    Quote Originally Posted by *Zeewolf* View Post
    P.S. I'm still missing a claymore model of any kind, I can't imagine it would be hard to make a little green box on legs with some widgets on top (but who am I to say). Any one care to help with that one?
    I think you have a good claymore model in one of the mapfact addons. Maybe military objects or barracks I don't remember. I also made an AP mine script very performance friendly in MP I can send it to you if you want.

    EDIT: Claymore model is in JOF_Objects

    LINK



    cya.

    Nikiller.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. cold war crisis 1.91 patch
    By 12345678910 in forum GENERAL
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Feb 28 2006, 08:40
  2. Cold war crisis
    By Captiain Crunch in forum GENERAL
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Nov 20 2003, 00:19
  3. Cold war crisis [winter]
    By Bordoy in forum ADDONS & MODS: COMPLETE
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Dec 22 2002, 16:31
  4. Cold war crisis [winter]
    By Bordoy in forum TROUBLESHOOTING
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Dec 18 2002, 20:47

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •