Jump to content


Community Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About McKillen

  • Birthday January 12

Contact Methods

  • Steam Name

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Northern Ireland

ArmA 3

  • ArmA 3 Player Name
  • ArmA 3 XML Remark
    I'm ugly :(


  • TeamSpeak Name

Recent Profile Visitors

536 profile views
  1. Personally use PBOManager by WINSE and have no issues with anything. Very similar and simple to use. Maybe try it out? http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=16369 Unless of course its the one your using then it may be you messing it up!
  2. A few issues

    Fair enough, my summary of all points on topic to I&A Communication isn’t/wasn’t there Prioritisation needed but not there As other users say: More changes and additions than fixes On the off chance someone wants to follow this up then let me know.
  3. A few issues

    @Ryko This is the general list. If you want it more specific then let me know but Stan has also admitted that there are multiple files out of date, that will probably provide more FPS. If he is working on them then great. Thanks for letting me know, if he had done that earlier this would not get dragged out so far. Although I do also realize I never tried to keep up to date with what he was doing in dev. Frankly I didn't care as I had lost all will to try to develop, but I still want it to do well despite everyones opinion of me. @Xwatt Thanks for clearing more of it up to me. @Stanhope & Ryko, I hope you are satisfied with your replies.
  4. A few issues

    @Xwatt That's good to hear that it is getting better. All the best. (and im not being sarcastic, this is honest) Thats fair enough. I get I may be asking a bit too much, but just say so. Not going to lie, I do forget this sometimes. But please, if I ask for to omuch then just say so. If you say, look I don't have time right now but maybe another. Or just say, there is no way possible I can do that. I can get behind. However, if I recall correctly there were some ideas I suggested that I was told could not be done. Such as removing derp. Yet here we are, removing derp. If you explain to me why you can't get it done then fair enough, but I won't take a no for a reason. Im sure some of you know that. Then I ask core staff, why is there an issue with posting all ideas publicly whether they go ahead or not. Just state that it is undecided if it will go ahead or not. This is only aimed at I&A dev only, not major decisions on plans etc. for AWs future. However in my opinion, its a community, the players should be allowed to see all ideas that are thought up of. Even if it is a simple "Why not do this", "Its impossible, thats why". At least it shows an attempt. It shows thought, and it give players more reason to come back to the forums again and gives them a reason to join the community. Alright, I'll lay off him. I have tried before on telegram but I keep getting a wave of the hand. For example the time I tried to ask him a question, I knew he was active as he was on teamspeak so I moved to telegram. Yes I did spam him a bit there, but if someone flat ignored you when they told you a few hours prior they would talk to you it would be agitating, no? Anyway, after sending 14 messages he replies. Then after tells me he is busy. If in future it started with Im busy, I wouldnt get fed up and annoyed. I can wait. I have tried in the past. But apparently the only way to get someone to read your posts and ideas is to get another admin to say it is rude or bad. Otherwise you get ignored as I said in a previous paragraph. I honestly do feel like to get a reaction/reply to a topic the only way to get a clear one is to make it blunt. If it means I piss off people then I'm sorry but I'm not sitting around for a week to get someone to reply to me. However, I know I'm rude. I will try to stop it to be nicer. But I would also like to point to @Stanhope, look at xwatts reply. His is a lot more clear, in my eyes. Just flat out say why, if you argue with me, then by now if I'm already labelled as arrogant & rude (apologies) then you know I will argue back. I don't want to spend my entire evening arguing here. But I feel to make a point I have to.
  5. A few issues

    @Stanhope It doesn't take a strong opinion to say 'Yeah sure thats great' or 'No don't try it out, will explain another time.' I'm not expecting a novel on it, just SOME form of answer, it could even just be the letter Y. Rather than a wall of dead silence that will never be replied to ever. I have put things in their that probably still aren't replied to. In the past when I asked, you have said it can't be removed because it is too deep into the I&A code. Now it is being removed. Deny it if you want but it was said. But what made it doable all of a sudden? It has been making so many issues for so long. Why not start earlier? Why leave it for roughly a year? I'm not trying to say you do nothing, if i did then im wrong and shouldn't of done. My bad. Want I meant to say is things aren't prioritized. Stability and performance above content. When games are released with awful optimization there is uproar. The devs fix it then release content. They don't leave it for a while then decide to change it. Well, in the case of Bohemia they have but look at some of the abuse they have gotten. They are joked about constantly for having terrible optimization. No we are not a company but its not bad to take notes from them and see what they do right and wrong. If everyone here wants a large community it almost needs to be treated as such. I don't care about the small things, but the bigger gameplay changing things I do care about. I said about displaying the idea of reducing the AO EI to public. Then, my signature was your reply. Who are you (formerly we) to decide what happens on EU1. The dev team is 10 heads all put together. But not all 10 play on EU1 as the regular players do. Its the regulars who should have the most input on the game. Not you, not I, not even Core Staff. Its a community hint is in the name. Even if the idea doesn't go ahead, it is still good to get feedback so you can have an idea on players opinions. Why not announce the new EU2 ahead of time? "oh well we weren't sure at the time" Well say that to them. Tell them that. Then they can understand if it does not go ahead. Your argument for not posting on the forums is that nobody is here. Well, What are you doing to attract them? ay? Nothing, you expect players to come to the forums to seek out info, wrong, they should come here to find out things, to join the community. They shouldn't be expected to use the forums, but regardless, staff should use it to communicate even with that 1 player that comes here. As if to reinforce the point. Why only discuss it inside. Why not on the outside? Why does it have to be kept on the inside for only devs and mods to see? If it will cause a certain feature to be lost then why are you not talking to your playerbase about it? That is the whole point of having a playerbase as large as AWs is. Use the players, don't ignore them. Yes and thats fine. But e aren't talking about bugs. I'm talking about commits to the gitlab, if it were a bug then yes I could get behind this, but this isn't a bug. It was your idea. Therefore, if I talk about it im obviously going to address you. If it were say Chucks idea. Then I would have addressed him rather than you. Its not personal, just coincidence that I strongly disagree with it, and that it happens to be your idea. If anybody else comes up with one I strongly dislike I shall let you know. In the past I have mentioned many a thing. The response was always "you do it". I don't think its a huge secret that im not good enough to do a large amount of things. But I was up for trying. You can't just jump in, you have to start small yet I was being told to sprint rather than to walk. It started off fine, but as time went on I get more of the "you do it" and the "i cant help you". Yes there were indeed times where you would sit and help me. That I am actually thankful for and fully appreciate that. But I did need just some more, I try but then I get stuck.
  6. A few issues

    I'll reply but each time I do a new post comes so i reply to the new one Not all that out of context, I asked why not to display it and that was the response. I tried to fit both in but you couldnt read it
  7. A few issues

    As for itemization, the main mission file I was told was outdated, along with scripts that I have looked into in the past (im not recalling individual ones) that havent been touched since 2013. Some of them are fine but others I know are outdated having asked at the time and getting told they were outdated. I was going to add derp to the list but I just found out it was being removed. I may get specific names of files but for now I'm too busy to go hunting.
  8. A few issues

    I do understand that I'm being rude. I don't necessarily enjoy it but it has gotten me involved in more discussion than being polite has. You start a discussion politely and get the reply of "yeah we'll look at it" then 3 months go by.... and you wait. Whereas if you are blunt you get an instant answer. I replied to the topic bluntly and got a reply within an hour. Back when I had joined for the first time, it would take maybe a day for a response. And we all know how shit I am at explaining things, which is the reason I am blunt. If people have a problem with it then why not say? The only time I get told I was rude was when I actively seeked it out. It all boils down to communication. And if anybody wants to talk about it im fine. But talking to Stan nets a sarcastic reply 50% of the time, which after months of talking to him does get annoying and you do get exasperated. But I can't help it, its the only way people actually pay attention to what is said.
  9. A few issues

    With respect, has nothing to do with anything that I said. We are talking about the ideas I disagree with, the testers you chose had nothing to do with that, you did. Yet I get told to quit the personal attacks? They aren't personal attacks. I am talking about the mission with 99% of all posts bar one which the public can't see. Yet still I'm being told to quit the personal attacks... There isn't anything personal about it. I don't like the idea. The testers aren't developers, unless they too have access...
  10. A few issues

    So I got told to itemize my problems. So here they are: 1. As an ex member on the dev team, there was never enough input. When I joined I got told if there was no reply in a day, to just go ahead and do it. Yet that chat has over 10 people in it. Why have 10 when they don't give opinions? 2. Effort - Many times I asked why certain things weren't done the reply from Stan was that he couldn't be bothered and that it was too much work. The mission won't work out well and won't be excellent unless a lot of work is put in. 3. Control - This links to part one. At the minute Stan is pretty much the leader of I&A dev. At least he was for my time in development. If that has changed I don't know. As you can see from my signature and past arguments that I made many times, he doesn't see the need to release things to the public. Yet look what was said last night... Players want to know whats going on yet you won't give it. Don't hide behind player liaisons, what stops you from posting it publicly rather than behind closed doors? Nothing. Its a community, not a hierarchy. I don't mind large decisions such as the future of AW and things to do with private matters such as selecting core staff. But when its about the game itself, why is there such an issue to post it on forums. 4. Optimization - Rather than sit and play with smaller mechanics, why not change bigger ones. Derp causes some of the biggest issues with the mission yet nobody toys with it, no one tries to fix it because they can't be bothered. Stan says the mission files are unoptimized yet won't optimize them. Yet when I say anything about how the community hasn't mentioned having things fixed such as the AO size, he says "They don't have to complain for us to fix" yet there are many things that could be optimized which arent even glanced at. Whilst @Ryko you have said to me to not make it personal... how can I not? I don't want it to be but most problems with the files start from him. Why? Because he is the only person who touches them. If there was a group to complain to I would be complaining to them. Thing is there isn't one. You are tied up with 3 and other projects, which is fine and I can support that. Other scripters are either gone because they were mistreated or have their own projects. Maybe one day there will be an actual 'team' that works on I&A, but for now there is on person, so it is impossible to make it personal without talking about him. Its like complaining about how America is being lead by its president, without mentioning Trump. It cannot be done.
  11. Units spawned by the main AO

    When there are larger issues at hand, yes it is. I don't really care what you do with your time. But there are other things that could be getting worked on, bigger problems that every time they get brought up 'Its too much to do'. You know there are larger issues and a lot more work to be done, hence why you need more devs I assume. But alas here we are getting dragged off topic again... I know you have. Honestly this seems a little uncalled for and rude but w/e I see you won't properly listen to me so fair enough. I'm sure all things that get added into I&A get accepted well. But I feel an increase in FPS will get accepted more strongly than a minor change, that is why Im complaining strongly. There are bigger fish in the sea yet you choose to stick to the shallows and ignore them. This clogging up the forums though, but if any of you actually care enough to follow this up let me know, but I doubt you will
  12. Units spawned by the main AO

    No, but the need to accelerate an AO seems pointless to me since they are similar
  13. Units spawned by the main AO

    Well as Stan just said, this is more largely focused on EU2. With the new 77th format coming to 2 I don't see any need for it at all. In my opinion the sooner the 'Project whatever it was' gets done the better. This will go a bit off topic but I will bring it back. Essentially when the format gets created, we will have a tiering system. Chaos -> Organized mayhem -> 'The Elite'. And no I can't believe I just called EU3 the elite either. But this way, people will get a taste of more organised gameplay and will hunger for more, leading them to join 3 and 6 and stop the whole problem of them dying, which many people have said. My proposal is to leave it. Others have agreed it isn't a huge problem. In my eyes it does not need handled. Players go to the same location, to do the same thing, the same gameplay regardless of the number of EI there is. All this does is increase the number of times the big circle moves.
  14. Units spawned by the main AO

    wut? Bit off topic but okkk.... I dont get what you mean by this? For me, I don't care if I even don't make it to an AO. A fun night for me can be me getting my arse kicked by AI for an hour flat, not being able to move most of the time because if I do I die. Its not about how much I do, its about the experience. Nothing can beat the feeling of being chewed up and spat out by an AO, it is fun because you realize you got your ass handed to you by a robot, then you get to think again. In a way to justify this a bit more why not change up AOs a bit more. If this is done then I can get on board more with the idea. At the minute, which Im not sure if I got across clearly enough but will try again; every AO is the same. This means the same units, the same task etc. The ONLY difference is the area. Practically a carbon copy. Why not add variation. An example would be for in a town, not too have multiple T-100s but rather more MRAPs or maybe toy with making a mechanized infantry unit for OPFOR. Make it more realistic. This would make each AO unique to itself. It could also stop a lot of people sitting on hills with titans (cough) as there may be very little to no armor. But then the next has multiple armored units on a glass plain. It would also keep excitement going as no two AOs are the same which is what it feels like. Sorry, meant currently. Well considering what has been said in the past, it seems vital to you. I just don't get why it is so needed. I personally haven't heard many complaints of this issue. Yes, you shouldn't wait for complaints to fix or improve something, but on the counter, don't fix something that is working well. In the past on my times on the server, I didn't hear one complaint other than a spartan moaning about it. I personally feel over the past two times we have argued about this you have yet to answer my question. What does it change? Not in terms of mechanics. In terms of gameplay. To make you understand my point read this: In the near future, from what has been said it appears you are debating removing FOBs, which many people support. If this is to happen then AOs have no huge significance other than a place to fire your weapons at the bad guys. That is fine. But what makes it that it needs to be shorter? The core gameplay is the exact same. The players will still point their guns, and fire. With or without this change. The only change it makes is that the specified area shifts slightly to one side. I just don't see the point in it, but I guess you will still implement it regardless which is fair... I guess.
  15. Units spawned by the main AO

    Fair enough, but then how are server restarts going to be handled? Normally on server boot up there are 15-20 people on when mission starts. Then the flood of players join another 5 minutes later. Now you have the problem of 25 v 50. Or what happens, since restart is now scheduled, when it is restarted and there is 0 players online? Does it default to if 1 players is on? What does it default to? If it goes back to acting like there are 60 players on then the issue of a full AO still remains. Also, will having this script not also fully extend the time that it takes for a new main AO to spawn in? Now that it has to calculate the number of players that are on the server will this not increase the delay? There are times when delay is quite long due to multiple scripts running at once. Yes this might be slightly negated due to the fixed daily restarts but it will still be a factor. Lastly, is it 100% needed? What is the difference between one AO and the next? The scenery? The terrain? What makes it so vital to increase the time of one AO? Are the units spawned completely different? No. All that this will do is decrease time to get FOBs, which appears that they might possibly be getting removed in the near future. I just don't understand the need to go from shooting things in one area for a prolonged time, to doing it in a different area for a shorter time. And as one other person has pointed out to you, Malden server is very quiet. There is a very low player count on Malden. Yes it may say there are 7 people online in one day but for how long? Those 7 people may have joined for one minute then left. Just another opinion.