Ryko

Likely yes, the timer ran out

Hi folks, As some of you have noticed lately, I haven't been as active on server or in development of the Stiletto mission. Things have become busier in my life over the last few months, leading to less available time to put into Arma; coupled with the fact that Stiletto is more (or less) at a stable version, the purpose of this post is to inform you that for the foreseeable future, I won't be continuing further development of the mission. There is a notable exception to this: on the staff level, we are envisioning an update to the mods employed on the AWE server, which will necessitate an overhaul to the vehicles available for spawning and equipment available in the arsenal. I'll be putting forward a version 061 of Stiletto to accommodate this, but after that, I don't foresee a version 062 (except of course, when there are minor bugs to quash from 061). What I will consider for 061 are essential mission fixes seen in 060 (if something is broken in the current version, I'll want to have it as fixed as possible). In addition, the vehicle spawning system is new, using points, and this is an opportunity to fine tune any point costs that haven't been working. I haven't seen any feedback about that, so I'm assuming it's not causing big problems. That said, I'm willing to allow other interested developers to extend the mission beyond 061: if you're interested in this, drop me a message. I do hope to be able to get online again, it's just that for the next few months, I'm going to be swamped with a few projects IRL. As I've always been the first to say to everyone else - real life has to come first. Thanks, - Ryko

Real life comes first! You will be missed. We must organize something fitting to send you off before the 19th!

What you're asking for is to redefine the default standard of the mission. I would argue the majority of players would prefer a Vortex at 0-8 players. If you want to try it out and see if your theory is sound, go into Plat Co and remove Vortex as a group.

So as it turns out this was related to the Tembelan map, had nothing to do with the server. We've changed out the Tembelan mod, so that issue shouldn't resurface.

Yep, that'd be fine. You'd need to go platoon commander to activate the Logistics squad, then change roles to one of the engineers.

Yeah we'll probably bring the computer back, it's fun to do the ranging manually but in the end there are so many variables that don't line up it's too unpredictable. For the RHIB, from what I can see it's baked in by class name, so you will have to bitch at ace for that.

It's built in to Stiletto

Stiletto version 060 is now on the server. Change log follows. Tembelan will be reverted to the previous version on the next update of the repo, until then it has been pushed to the back of the map rotation (Lythium is now default after server restart). CHANGE LOG 060 1. Updated Stiletto engine to allow manually spawned missions and enabling / disabling of Stiletto mission engine during the mission. 2. Added Taru to Russian EMF and Desert player factions 3. While the M27 is available to all Blufor factions, the 60-round magazines are available for autoriflemen only. The new 40-round magazines are available for all M27 users 4. Kill HVT mission completion has been overhauled. You now just need to locate (be within 8m of) the HVT's corpse for the mission to complete. In Kill HVT missions, the HVT is armed. 5. Added point system for vehicle spawning. Values are set at an initial state and will be adjusted over time as we see how the system works. Vehicle resource points are refreshed at 1/1000th of their initial value every minute (so at a default of 150,000 points, 150 points are accumulated each turn). In addition, accumulated intel points are added to this rate. All default initial combat vehicles (except quad bikes and repair vehicles) have been removed from player bases. 5A. Added the C-130 variants and AN-2 to unarmed plane spawns. Be very careful when placing plane spawns with LOGi: these are large vehicles. 5B. Added the Mi-24G to Eastern faction vehicle spawns. 5C. Added artillery vehicles to vehicle spawns. 6. All vehicles from allied factions are now present in their respective vehicle spawners, so specific factions are no longer relevant (you do not have to be US Army to spawn a Blackhawk, but you do have to be a Western faction). Vehicle rarity is now governed solely by point cost. For clarity: Vehicle respawn points are separate from Logi points.

ACE is a local effect, so nope

ACE has this built in, if you can't push an object, it's probably because it's too heavy.

Good lord, has that happened?

It was implemented during a phase with low server pop, when no one wanted to run Vortex. Original implementation was that it was disabled when a Vortex was online, and then people asked for it to be more regularly available so Vortex could be used for CAS. I feel the responsibility for using the rally point exists strictly with the Squad Leader deploying it: yes, they must be aware that by using this function they are removing a need to use Vortex for insertions. I can think of several scenarios where this is preferable: for example, going after an AA unit objective, using Vortex to re-insert troops is not preferable.

It's whatever the command element has decided it should be.

I don't see how that's justified as I explained why Stiletto, and Gauntlet before it, was not structured this way. Locking down the arsenal to a bare minimum is something more akin to what a dedicated milsim server might do, and that's not the spirit of AWE. You've always been free to choose your own level of realism and immersion, and that's not likely to change, for better or worse.

So in the past we've explored this concept, but have decided to leave the arsenal as open ended as possible. Part of the appeal of the AWE server is that you can choose your own interpretation of the scenario: if your character is an IDF soldier or a South Korean spec op attached to US forces, you can choose to play that way. This philosophy also makes the mission much easier to maintain. If you want to have a scenario where everyone uses the same gear, consider submitting a game night.

I should have said "force" instead of "ask". I guess my point was that you're treading on ground that we as staff see all the time, you can have what you see as a perfectly reasonable change to the rules / modset / game mode and not get consistent or rational feedback from the user base. You have to expect that some people are just going to disagree with you without elaborating on why. It's the exact same reason that people don't like playing as a Russian faction and will go play something else instead, despite the mission having made allowances to make Eastern play more West-like (by adding Picatinny-style AK's, for example, which mount Western optics). I would suspect that the main reason a SAF faction would be unpopular would be simply that it's not a conventional Western style faction, which the majority of the user base seems to enjoy playing the most. As I've stated in another thread, I'm on hold for further development of Stiletto, and limiting my time on this mission to game-breaking updates. That said, if you want to build your own SAF faction, structurally it wouldn't be that hard; however the arsenal as coded right now envisions a pretty strict delineation between east and west factions, and a SAF faction would fly in the face of that. If you look at the Spetsnatz faction (1043.sqf) you can see how there's a custom addition of weaponry that adds the NPZ weapons, and that'd be the way to get around that. - R

If you poll for stuff like this, you can't ask voters to explain their choices either way.

No - it is specifically exempted from body despawning

Not really, no. These are essentially retextures of the existing Russian assets. As I stated before, Middle Eastern Factions present a custom faction with a completely different weapon set, where ALL factions in RHS that aren't Blufor are slight derivations of the AK+Soviet gear. You can make an argument that SAF is different but that's essentially a motley of Blufor and Opfor gear. I'm not really excited about making them a player faction or an enemy faction because there will be an increase in friendly fire due to similar weaponry used by players and enemies. Why the hate for middle eastern factions? It's literally a 100kb mod. I get that people have a perception problem with PLA China, but as has been demonstrated repeatedly the idea that they are overarmored compared to RHS is a bit blown out of proportion. Release date: April 2019 I wouldn't open up that can of worms. This was fixed in my update of the mod, unfortunately we have a config error we can't track down at the moment, so for the time being it's not being used. Still available in vehicle selection

Yup, I like it. ACE historically didn't have these, must have been recently added. It'd be nice if they could be made as player inventory items as well, but that's probably a stretch.

The problem I believe was that it worked for scopes from 4x up, so of course if everyone takes an ACOG, then it considers you a marksman, so the server got boned for performance

These are our ACE Ballistics CBA settings: force ace_advanced_ballistics_enabled = false; force ace_advanced_ballistics_muzzleVelocityVariationEnabled = true; force ace_advanced_ballistics_ammoTemperatureEnabled = true; force ace_advanced_ballistics_barrelLengthInfluenceEnabled = true; force ace_advanced_ballistics_bulletTraceEnabled = true; force ace_advanced_ballistics_simulationInterval = 0.05;

People go on and on about the textures in the mod packs. Yes, there are subtle differences in the textures, and it's mainly noticeable if you are comparing Arma 2 (pre OA / British Forces) gear and A3/RHS gear. From about 5 feet away. As soon as you get further than 5 feet away, another LoD (Level of Detail) kicks in and all those wonderful textures are history. Not to mention the fact that the majority of combat in this game takes place at distances of 200+ meters. At which point you're basically shooting at forms which are about 10-20 pixels in size. For me, it's about functionality and providing assets which (more or less) accurately model the battlespace we're trying to present. I agree there is a baseline of quality that is pleasing to the eye (the CUP US military uniforms are legitimately garbage) but frankly all that stuff disappears when you're in the heat of the moment.