Damaged runways
-
Forgot to ask. Mortesil u mentioned draw calls. Is there a generic rule out a tool to calculate them? Or u gonna implement it in your new tool?
It could be a great asset for 3d modelers.
Could we consider what you wrote as the rule?Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Well the tgp actually creates a new bubble that deagregates the objective so to show it and display the features according to their configuration in the database and the 3d model as set in LE.
The crater feature although exists in the features list in LE it’s not used as it has no texture. The mentioned 127 128 129 are used by the code and they have only one lod. I don’t know if the code would use other LOD’s if they existed and kick then in as per distance.
It would be nice to know.
We must look in to it. A quick test would be to change the lod 1 distance to 100ft and add as lod 2 a tank for example at a distance of 600000ft and see what happens.Could one perform such test and report back? Or a Dev that knows that part of the code answer our question.
Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
But I believe the Bubble is associated with the SPI, not the TGP position. So it deags the objects in the sense that they are all present in the render queue, but that may not make a difference for the distance culling. I can’t see anything to do with the SPI changes that were implemented, so I can’t answer this one.
As for the distance render calls, I don’t believe there is anything out there to calculate them. Most of them fall on the generic boundaries and haven’t been modified. You (I) could develop a tool to modify the distances based on size of object, but it would be a subjective evaluation. Unless someone else has the time to really research the data metrics about visual acuity and discerning objects at a distance. My code does provide the option to change the value, but no plans currently to write a function that would automatically generate the values.
-
The bubble comment got me thinking…
But what bout runway … it doesn’t change a bit on tgp …(at least haven’t noticed) … just craters ‘appear’ when in said range…and disappear when out … guess is that runway(s?) also use single lod. no? So what’s wrong with those pesky craters then…
Will dig bout said runway in lodedit features and/or craters some more … there must be some logic between. heh… -
But what bout runway … it doesn’t change a bit on tgp …(at least haven’t noticed) … just craters ‘appear’ when in said range…and disappear when out … guess is that runway(s?) also use single lod. no? So what’s wrong with those pesky craters then…
Will dig bout said runway in lodedit features and/or craters some more … there must be some logic between. heh…This is what I meant when I said it is probably not the LOD causing the issue. I think it has to do with the values in the Feature list for the Objective. I can’t open up F4Editor at the moment to see if the values differ, but I would start there instead of LE. As Arty pointed out, Craters are Features attached to the Objective. So is the Runway. The TGP is a sensor object, from the game’s perspective it is similar to a RADAR, it just displays the information differently. So if the TGP can’t “detect” the object in question because it is too far away, it will get culled from the display. Hence why the bubble argument makes a difference if it is based on the SPI and not the actual TGP location. If the TGP “location” is updated during zoom operations to match the camera object in DX terms, then this wouldn’t make a difference. But I don’t think it is. That’s my present theory anyway, mostly because it explains the observed behavior.
-
Nope … runways , that one in test session has 4-5 lods… (CT1412) so , I reckon its not that.
… don’t know is it still in use but ‘deagg’ (not bubble) on runway is 20 (nm/km?) , but on crater CT1067 is ‘0’ , and can’t change it via lodedit… will see in db-editor.
p.s.
realized … looking wrong at stuff, runway is objective/feature , but crater is sfx , so different class… and also different behavior (pears and apples)so if deagg for runway is 20 units , for sfx it is probably hardcoded, don’t (KNOW?!) think we can do something about it
-
Sfx?
You mean particle system?Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Nope, class data of the ct record.
-
could it be made to where tower or awacs, depending on whats available at that moment, as a menu option to state condition or status of home plate? not sure of the details that would be involved but would it be possible…maybe future update. till then though i just do overhead to visually check runway for damage before landing.
-
Actually, something like that exists in Falcon , you should hear AWACS? radio call if your base is under attack and/or destroyed/unavailable, and the call says something ‘re-route to alternate field’.
And also I’m positive, just don’t quite remember which previous Falcon version that was, probably Allied Force (BUT! IMHO that should work in BMS too) , once I called in my primary airbase, returning from mission, and asked for landing, tower replied that base was damaged and to go for alternate.
So that whole complex! warning system exists, ingenious in what detail, just is not so common.Eg, as a member of opposing team, sometimes when on 2D map playing with ground war, and my base is often under attack by Nato , I get audio played for the air-raid with siren and explosions, then follows that audio - airbase under attack, reroute to alternate field.
-
never heard awacs give that call
-
No call. When you request a landing clearance, the tower just answers with your callsign. That’s a bad sign usually.
-
Another related problem, after i attacked an airbase (ITO Campaign) i looked at the satelite picture of the base in the UI and there is no visible damage to the runwayes (part of it destroyed according to the target’s list). The sattelite image do give the correct damage to hangar and other assets on the base that were also attacked.
-
Oh they are there , but as we concluded, something is messy with 'em., not quite right, they are invisible from longer distances, aggregated?, or even ‘under’ the runway. You can’t see them and sure you cant drive over them, will break your gear and destroy your plane. Sometimes you can sneak peek craters when rotating the view of runways , they don’t appear in all angles. Yep, messy. Well, it’ll be repaired sometime. Anyway.
-
I hope that on the next update the guys will be working on it, i think it is a big issue.
-
would be nice if it just damaged gear once in a while instead of BOOM WTF… LOL