FRL Airforce Addons release thread

[sickboy 13]

Hmm but now people having the missilebox, will be in advantage over people not having the missilebox - seems to be the same, if not bigger problem?

If the gameplay changes would be split, signed with seperate key, server admins can allow or deny either addon, so there comes more control / flexibility.

I'm glad you agree that things are never easy though - and can't please everyone - that's what we felt for-ever with ACE too ;)

Edited March 30, 2011 by Sickboy

[R0adki11 3945]

To avoid that case i've included the config changes to the Missilebox so also BIS planes will have equal weapons to fight with. Removing these improvements now would disbalance the aerial gameplay.

That makes perfect sense, it keeps things balanced regardless :)

Hmm but now people having the missilebox, will be in advantage over people not having the missilebox - seems to be the same

i would assume if a mission requires the missilebox addon pack on a server you wouldnt be able to join the server anyway?

[sickboy 13]

i would assume if a mission requires the missilebox addon pack on a server you wouldnt be able to join the server anyway?

The problem is with missions that don't require it. It are config changes - which are always active.

[Defunkt 431]

What ANZACSAS Steve has suggested is the correct way to approach this with a view to MP compatibility. There are two separate improvements ideally deserving two separate addons, one extends the available range of weapons but keeps the new weapons scaled within vanilla capabilities while the second (which requires the first) enhances realism for all types across the board.

One addon is harmless when loaded but not specifically required where the second should only be used if the server-op can be sure all players will have it. The problem with combining these improvements in one addon is that it binds the first improvement up in the more stringent requirements of the second leading to an all or nothing choice for server-ops and the 'all' (requiring every player on the server to have it) will be unpalatable for those not running a closed server around a centrally administered modpack.

Edited March 30, 2011 by Defunkt
Spelling

[xeno426 10]

Myke;1886092']

@Xeno426

Sorry' date=' missed your post. So far no new weapons for the next release, just a few equipment like dualrails and triplerails. But i'm always open to suggestions. If i can make them is a matter of reference material i can find for.[/quote']

I'd really like to see some Kh-25 variants (Kh-25ML, Kh-25MP(U), Kh-25MR) as this weapon is a closer mirror to the AGM-65 than the Kh-29T/L is.

Some of the Russian rocket pods as proxies, like the B-8V20 (found on the Ka-52 and Mi-24P), the B-8M1 (pod found on Su-25) and UB-32 (pod found on Mi-24D) would be nice to have. Russia also made some big-ass rockets, like the S-24B and S-25, which would be sweet to see. If you do the S-25, the S-25L (bottom of page) wouldn't be that difficult to add, since it's just an S-25 with a seeker head added to it for pinpoint strikes.

Since Russia loves its thermobaric weapons, the ODAB-500PM would be a sweet addition. Getting the thermobaric effect right might pose a problem, though.

For more decoration/immersion, it'd be nice to see the AN/ALQ-131, SPS-171 Sorbtsiya and MSP-410 jamming pods (I've also seen the latter called MPS-410).

Sorry if this appears too demanding. I like flight sims, so I've plenty of weapons I'd love to see in ArmA2.

[galzohar 31]

IMO this should be considered similar to ACE vehicles and ACE. There is the mod that changes the game to be more realistic, and then there are extra mods that require that original mod. If you don't want the realism improvements that the new vehicles are relying on, you can't expect to be able to use the vehicles that are made by the same guy that is trying to make the game more realistic.

As for fairness against people who aren't running the missilebox - IMO it's a much better situation than simply crashing the server in the case of ACE and non-ACE users logging on the same server... In both cases, though, this is only a small part of a bigger problem which probably requires some more creative solutions than those that have been suggested here (aka, some kind of "equalmodrequired" system that actually works).

For starters, though, Myke, you could probably include a "Requires Missilebox" module, similar to the "Requires ACE" module in ACE, which basically does nothing other than make the mission require the missilebox (heck, this would probably be useful to have with any mod really, since some missions spawn stuff with scripts rather than place them in editor and thus don't create addon dependencies in mission.sqm).

[xeno426 10]

In both cases, though, this is only a small part of a bigger problem which probably requires some more creative solutions than those that have been suggested here (aka, some kind of "equalmodrequired" system that actually works)

If BIS would finally get around to creating a URL redirect system for missions and mods, like what is found in the Unreal 2/3 engines, there would be no more problems.

Except for people complaining about how much they have to download from a server when they join it.

[galzohar 31]

If BIS would finally get around to creating a URL redirect system for missions and mods, like what is found in the Unreal 2/3 engines, there would be no more problems.

Except for people complaining about how much they have to download from a server when they join it.

This isn't even about that, it's about that one guy can have an addon while another one doesn't if the mission doesn't have it listed as a requirement in the mission.sqm, which can result in all sorts of trouble already mentioned a gazillion times in this thread and others.

Of course what you're saying is another (unrelated) major issue.

[[frl]myke 14]

You may stop the discussion as the problem is known. But until now i haven't come to any decision because whatever i do, it will result in the possibility that some players may have dis/advantages, either one way around or the other.

The only thing i can say for sure (and which i wont change my mind): dumbing down the Missilebox weapons is out of question for me.

And this whole discussion made me some headache of another sort: regarding this whole discussion about dis/advantages when using this addon but not that or vice versa....well, i doubt i will finish the work on the F-16 as it changes so much gameplaywise, the discussion would even be louder than it is now.

Just as example: you wouldn't have a ingame HUD, so no compass and radar on the upper screen border, no RWR, no weapon display that tells you which weapon is selected. You have all this info in the cockpit though.

And this is just one of the minor things.

Actually i really don't know what to do.

[PuFu 4591]

myke, you should be doing whatever addon for yourself before anyone else...that's all i can say on the matter

[Defunkt 431]

Myke;1886635']And this whole discussion made me some headache of another sort: regarding this whole discussion about dis/advantages when using this addon but not that or vice versa....well' date=' i doubt i will finish the work on the F-16 as it changes so much gameplaywise, the discussion would even be louder than it is now.

Just as example: you wouldn't have a ingame HUD, so no compass and radar on the upper screen border, no RWR, no weapon display that tells you which weapon is selected. You have all this info in the cockpit though.

And this is just one of the minor things.[/quote']

But Myke this isn't a problem because those changes/advantages/disadvantages can only come about when the F16 is specifically used in the mission, everyone must have the addon and any balance issues are the mission maker's to address. The issue we're trying to bring to your attention is different and involves inadvertent changes in mission balance based on global changes to weapon behaviour for only certain players.

[[frl]myke 14]

But Myke this isn't a problem because those changes/advantages/disadvantages can only come about when the F16 is specifically used in the mission, everyone must have the addon and any balance issues are the mission maker's to address. The issue we're trying to bring to your attention is different and involves inadvertent changes in mission balance based on global changes to weapon behaviour for only certain players.

Erm, it is very unlikely that the opponent is also sitting in a F-16 (but not impossible).

[Defunkt 431]

I should add I'm not even sure balance is the biggest issue as it sounds to me as though the missile box makes missiles less effective and if people choose to shoulder that disadvantage in the name of realism good luck to them. I (as a server-op) would be more concerned about more general multi-player wierdness when people have differing object behaviours.

---------- Post added at 11:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:19 AM ----------

Myke;1886662']Erm' date=' it is very unlikely that the opponent is also sitting in a F-16 (but not impossible).[/quote']

Yes but an imbalance like that is a mission maker's choice, the other is, as I say, inadvertant and that's where it has the potential to be unfair.

---------- Post added at 11:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:21 AM ----------

Indulge me for a little longer and I'll try and clarify...

If I make a mission that pits your F-16 against an Su-25 that's probably a poorly balanced mission but everyone plays it knowing this and presumably if balance is important the mission maker has included some other mechanism to achieve it. To play it you must have the F-16 and therefore you will also have the missile box, behaviours are consistent (if not even) for everyone.

If I make a mission that pits an A-10 against an Su-25 that's probably a fairly balanced mission right up until one player has the missilebox loaded (because its allowed on the server as part of an island used in another mission). The two players have differing capabilities and one or both players likely won't even be aware of this. There is also the potential for differing object definitions between players to create various other multi-player glitches (tanks that bounce is one I remember when one player was using an addon that changed the abrams for them only).

[[frl]myke 14]

To be honest, actually i'm just in the mood to select drive P:, hit CRTL + A and then DEL.....

Somehow i think all this is not worth it.

[Spartan 163 0]

Don't you dare. To hell with everyone that is bitching about the missle box. They don't like they don't have to download it. If that means they can't use an island or addon that has it to bad for them better for the rest of us. Addons are made for free and for fun. Let them make their own addon that will cancel out the missle box. You have done soo much for this community already. You don't have to solve everyones problems. You have a kid on the way and should be happy about that. The fact you have done all this and still had time for family is another acomishment to be proud of.

Thank you for your hard work, time, addons and advice.:bounce3:

[[frl]myke 14]

You have a kid on the way....

Well here you know more than i do. I have one kid which is 4 years old but none on the way...as far as i'm aware of.

[SigintArmA 10]

Honestly too me Myke, ignore them. This sounds too much like the crying about balancing tanks for PvP since the T72 is cannon fodder yet the M1A1 isn't. Ignore them and move on.

As a great man said 'Keep Moving Foward' -Walt Disney

And hey, look at that now. It's -Your- mod. They don't like it? As PROTOTYPE 001 said, the others can make their own to do what they want. I mean hell, if people want an F-16 bad enough but NOT your missile box, they can make their own that doesn't require it -Shrugs-

Only person you gotta make happy is yourself. Do bug fixes and what you want but ignore people who are almost demanding you do it their way.

@TheCryBabies: You have a choice. Use it or don't. (Goes for every addon out there. Not just this) No one is forcing you to DL anything damn it.

[Nightrain 10]

I must agree with what everyone above is saying. Make yourself happy, don't try and please everyone.

I couldn't imagine firing up ArmA 2 and not seeing your perfect missiles and bombs on all the different planes the community has made. Your work greatly enhances the game and makes more realistic and enjoyable. If others don't like it, too damn bad.

[Defunkt 431]

Myke;1886677']Somehow i think all this is not worth it.

Right, the ol' RKSL Gambit, cue a throng of well-meaning but terminally-uninformed cheerleaders to arrive and shout "Noooo! We love your addons - they're shiney!". Oh look ^, there they are. Myke these are considerations you really ought to be across when making multiplayer addons or creating an addon dependency and by your own admission you weren't particularly, it's still up to you to decide now how-or-if to act on them. Yes it is harder to make certain types of addon multiplayer safe and I think that's all just part of Advanced Modding 101. We might all wish the landscape was different (as Xeno426 says, it wouldn't be a problem given addon auto-download) but it just isn't, well until we all start using Six-Updater to join servers. But nobody's making this stuff up just to yank your chain and there's no reason to give up making addons that bring yourself and others a vast amount of enjoyment, it's just one more thing to learn, nothing really compared to the stuff you've obviously already learnt how to do.

[gossamersolid 155]

Defunkt, there is no reason to attack his work.

Nobody is forcing you to use GLT Missilebox, if you really don't like it, don't use it.

[wld427 1705]

Right, the ol' RKSL Gambit, cue a throng of well-meaning but terminally-uninformed cheerleaders to arrive and shout "Noooo! We love your addons - they're shiney!". Oh look ^, there they are. Myke these are considerations you really ought to be across when making multiplayer addons or creating an addon dependency and by your own admission you weren't particularly, it's still up to you to decide now how-or-if to act on them. Yes it is harder to make certain types of addon multiplayer safe and I think that's all just part of Advanced Modding 101. We might all wish the landscape was different (as Xeno426 says, it wouldn't be a problem given addon auto-download) but it just isn't, well until we all start using Six-Updater to join servers. But nobody's making this stuff up just to yank your chain and there's no reason to give up making addons that bring yourself and others a vast amount of enjoyment, it's just one more thing to learn, nothing really compared to the stuff you've obviously already learnt how to do.

lol you are so blind its unbelieveable......

[Spartan 163 0]

Oh dam sorry Mike I got you confused with another cool member of the forums. I just woke up when I typed that and gore freaked out about the quit thing.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Myke;1886188']To avoid that case i've included the config changes to the Missilebox so also BIS planes will have equal weapons to fight with. Removing these improvements now would disbalance the aerial gameplay.

To me this is the right solution.

No need to be put off by the rest Myke

The arguments there would be easily solved by any server admin worth his salt. Server admins have the tools. How all this gets put upon an addon maker just for doing his own thing is totaly beyond me.

[wld427 1705]

in the end its Myke's addon. He should do whatever the hell he wants with it and the rest of you should be greatful he shared it with you. If you dont like it you are always free to ignore it, not download it, and in the end jsut avoid it.

don't let this crap get to ya myke. you keep making whatever you want.

[esco7800 10]

in the end its Myke's addon. He should do whatever the hell he wants with it and the rest of you should be greatful he shared it with you. If you dont like it you are always free to ignore it, not download it, and in the end jsut avoid it.

don't let this crap get to ya myke. you keep making whatever you want.

wld427 is right, I second this^. In Myke's keep up the fantastic work, looking forward to your next release.