ARMA 2: OA beta build 101334 (1.62 MP compatible build, post 1.62 release)

Do we still need to have a separate copy / install of OA to be able to run HC?

Do we still need to have a separate copy / install of OA to be able to run HC?

Given that server and client need to be local to each other, I would say...fundamentally, yes. I can't see that changing until - if - there is a specific client exe released which is only for HC and is run alongside the server exe.

... or they finally optimise the server so we don't need a 'crutch' like a headless client.

... or they finally optimise the server so we don't need a 'crutch' like a headless client.

This is a form of optimization; surely not the most elegant solution, but a simple and effective one.

Also, Suma said something a while back (on dev-heaven I believe) about "integrating" the headless client directly into the dedicated server. In theory, the dedi could then automatically spawn a headless client process and have it auto-join the server if an appropriately designated HC slot is present (or even multiple HCs for multiple HC slots). With a few additional tweaks (like adding a purely virtual "playable" HC entity, making the HC slots invisible etc.) this functionality would become fully transparent and much less of a "crutch".

This is a form of optimization; surely not the most elegant solution, but a simple and effective one.

Also, Suma said something a while back (on dev-heaven I believe) about "integrating" the headless client directly into the dedicated server. In theory, the dedi could then automatically spawn a headless client process and have it auto-join the server if an appropriately designated HC slot is present (or even multiple HCs for multiple HC slots). With a few additional tweaks (like adding a purely virtual "playable" HC entity, making the HC slots invisible etc.) this functionality would become fully transparent and much less of a "crutch".

THAT would be awesome

This is a form of optimization; surely not the most elegant solution, but a simple and effective one.

That's highly user-unfriendly and a pain in the ass to script for. No substitute for a truly optimized server.exe at all.

Fingers crossed they ditch the HC fast and integrate something similar into the .exe.

Still, it is great that BIS works on optimizations at all for a game as old as ArmA2.

D.

One pro of the headless client is that you may be able to run it on another PC or in the future use multiple headless clients on other PCs.

One pro of the headless client is that you may be able to run it on another PC or in the future use multiple headless clients on other PCs.

This is already possible, since the number of HC slots is not limited and HCs don't necessarily need to be running on the same machine (although having them "close" is recommended, i.e. on the same local network). Basically this already allows the creation of a clustered server architecture with multiple headless clients running on dedicated systems. An appropriately designed mission could make use of this by deferring AI control to all connected HCs with a relatively simple load balancing algorithm.

I have to wonder if BI has begun implementing the HC functionality for exactly this reason. ;)

Yes, I agree that in many ways the HC is much more flexible than changes to the server.exe, particularly if your dedicated server has a number of cores available, giving you the freedom eg to have one dedi server running with several HCs, or a few dedi servers each running with one HC.

Would be nice to make a headless client keep in sync all unused slots and if a jip player logged in, he would sync with the headless client and not pull off resources from the server.

What do you mean? I mean, if the sync with the clients is not done by the server, you might as well remove the server.

This is already possible, since the number of HC slots is not limited and HCs don't necessarily need to be running on the same machine (although having them "close" is recommended, i.e. on the same local network). Basically this already allows the creation of a clustered server architecture with multiple headless clients running on dedicated systems. An appropriately designed mission could make use of this by deferring AI control to all connected HCs with a relatively simple load balancing algorithm.

I have to wonder if BI has begun implementing the HC functionality for exactly this reason. ;)

This is when,we in Intel and AMD, decided to create the multi-core concept -.-

Headless client is an excellent feature but i think it will be temporary used, until we get some decent AI managing solution in the next title !

Is it possible to get a proper working targeting system? Now with AI as gunner it's a gamble to hit the right tank with action menu (6) selection with only "Enemy tank at 12 o'clock" lines. Just place 8-10 tanks + some with AA capabilities (or an base with proper defense) and fly an ground attack. Expected: to assign contacts + targets and "slave" them with selected weapon on - via HUD/optics, action menu and as optional possiblity via key. Keep in mind the AI isn't able to communicate and share infos like human players can and do. Now it's more of a gamble or luck to select & hit the right tank through action menu lines....

Is it possible to get a proper working targeting system? Now with AI as gunner it's a gamble to hit the right tank with action menu (6) selection with only "Enemy tank at 12 o'clock" lines. Just place 8-10 tanks + some with AA capabilities (or an base with proper defense) and fly an ground attack. Expected: to assign contacts + targets and "slave" them with selected weapon on - via HUD/optics, action menu and as optional possiblity via key. Keep in mind the AI isn't able to communicate and share infos like human players can and do. Now it's more of a gamble or luck to select & hit the right tank through action menu lines....

^ ^ Is this related to A2CCP changes, or other changes? Has this behavior changed recently?

Guess someone who cut the TAB targeting out is also responsible for this.... just someone who didn't made proper tests of his own fixes/tweaks. So much to do, so little time!

Guess someone who cut the TAB targeting out is also responsible for this.... just someone who didn't made proper tests of his own fixes/tweaks. So much to do, so little time!

The "Someone" knows very well the the problems this removal will and does cause, but "they" wont discuss it, accept compromises, acknowledge problems etc, etc. So what can you do?

I noticed the offending change was removed from the A2CCP recently but was then added back in, so who knows....no discussion or information on what is going on.

Dont talk trash

I always get following error message when in menu with this build:

Invalid Crew TK_Soldier_Crew_EP1 in BTR60_TK_EP1

@seany

please report bugs/broken features in the Bugtracker so the BI devs can take care of it. everyone else is free toup/downvote such tickets. Thank you.

plus separated process which can start as needed or/and terminate separately to the server binary

has much more uses than you can see ...

Does that mean things like instanced maps?

@Qazdar and others some simply not realize you can use cluster of HC within shard or whole datacenter ...

it's not limited to just 1 computer with some CPUs ...

plus separated process which can start as needed or/and terminate separately to the server binary

has much more uses than you can see ...

Why not both? Build the HC technology directly into the server exe, running on another CPU core, and then allow for expansion through separate HCs.

is it already implemented ?

lol as far as I remember there is setting in game regarding lock isn't it ?