Project Reality Forums

High Mobility Logistics anyone?

- Can players ride in the vehicle that is being transported?
Yup, it works very well from a passenger's point of view, but due to latency it looks a tad weird from the driver (you appear to be lower than you actually are)

- Could it work with non vehicle dynamic objects?
It would indeed. As long as it has networkableInfo it will work

- What happens if the vehicle being lifted clips a tree or whatever?
Now there lies the biggest problem in the system, so I'm glad you mentioned it. The current system purely sets the position every frame, and the reason they don't explode when you land is because the wheels slow the vehicle down very quickly without letting the frame touch the ground. How can we get around this? Two forceobjects added to the airlifted vehicle in advance with a force of 10 or so, and have them facing each other by default. Python can then effectively vary gravity for the vehicle by changing the angle of the two forceobjects so that the vertical component of the sum of the forces is only slightly less than gravity (to prevent it floating off). This would make it act more normal on landing.



- I just wondered, have you done any work to try and apply this method to bypassing teh BF2 8 player per vehicle limit?

Actually I haven't, but VEPR did suggest using it as a way of making parts able to be detached and destroyed from a vehicle. The problem is the parts do lag behind a bit, which is absolutely fine for airlifting, but would look weird if it is meant to be firmly attached to the vehicle. And, heck, the trigonometry would be a nightmare!

Is their anyway to dissabled the gun of a apc being transported? or if crewed does it retain all functionality?

Also what happens should the transport be shot down at high altitude? How about low?

AgentMongoose wrote:Is their anyway to dissabled the gun of a apc being transported? or if crewed does it retain all functionality?

Also what happens should the transport be shot down at high altitude? How about low?

i would suspect that it's an all or nothing situation.

Yea pretty much airlifting is all we got that keeps us floating. To be honest i really don't approve of other mods having airlifting of vehicles, i hope you guys can respect that, the airlifting will stay with us as a secret. that's all we can say about it.

Brummy wrote:OMG THIS CAN BE TOTALLY USED TO SIMULATE FASTROPES!!1

Nah seriously, is there any use for this in PR at all?

INdded, we can place insteand of a hunve a Rope, and you get off the chinock you can quick press E, so you go down has it is a leader, has long the Rope is atached has a C4 to the chinock has well.

and alllllll guys saying that fasthopes has Hardcoded, LOL. this guys of Georgia Conflit shown hos is boss.

I prety sure we can trade the Old Russian Skin, and other PR stuff for that ''tecnology''.

HAAN4 wrote:INdded, we can place insteand of a hunve a Rope, and you get off the chinock you can quick press E, so you go down has it is a leader, has long the Rope is atached has a C4 to the chinock has well.

and alllllll guys saying that fasthopes has Hardcoded, LOL. this guys of Georgia Conflit shown hos is boss.

I prety sure we can trade the Old Russian Skin, and other PR stuff for that ''tecnology''.

We wont take anything... if you would read my post above.. we want it to be a secret and there is nothing we want from PR.


I am sorry but the topic is over... no way you are getting our code

Can this be locked because it is completely stealing ideas, Georgian conflict is unique I do not think it's fare for someone to say they want it in Pr, I asked a dev(Georgian conflict dev), he doesn't want people copying there ideas. So please lock this thread, it is stealing ideas the fact someone would even post this and it is also a misleading title as well as being a complete copy from on other idea, if you made a mod how would you like it if someone copied your idea, probably not. Think about it.

Also I don't want tensions between the two mods to heat up any more, so please some [R-mod], [R-Dev] lock this, If tensions heat up then it will ruin both mods, so why not find a solution or something and do not copy any ones ideas.

resuggestion: https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr-suggestions/31413-transport-jeeps-via-helicopter.html

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr-suggestions/18434-already-suggested-suggestions-***.html
Lock it, 3 reasons.

Look, the PR Dev team wont "steal" the idea. They may find a way to manipulate the engine for the same desired effect. Besides, PR is already the best mod and game for the genre out there. Anything they add now is just more icing....

Alternatively, the Dev team to ask to buy the code for the airlift vehicles. Until anything is copyrighted, however, these ideas are up for grabs.... Thats not to say that a sort of gentlemen's agreement doesn't exist.

You do know too much icing is bad for the cake, right?

ghoststorm11 wrote:Look, the PR Dev team wont "steal" the idea. They may find a way to manipulate the engine for the same desired effect. Besides, PR is already the best mod and game for the genre out there. Anything they add now is just more icing....

It is still the same thing, you still copied somthing just because it is diffrent coding, but gives you the same effect would be a copy.

PR Suggestions - Project Reality Forums resuggestion, also on *** list.

So by your definition any mod that has Russians in it is a copy of PR?

Men look if i Has a PR dev i would like to make A trade, but like you say, you guys are not loking to trade you ideias, Right?

besides PR have ALOT OF MODELS, like GUNS of all PR fan model art, and other stuff alike, but i see this is not the frist time a Air show is maded for, i see vidios of Paratrooper Air droop in Brasilian Faction team, that has BADASS.

It's currently their intellectual property, they have the right to do whatever they want with their code.

Think about it, if they traded it, and PR just cloned it, who would download the mod just to try it out and then later become part of THAT community?

EDIT: I'm actually lying, it's all theoretically the 'intellectual property' of EA. If PR really wanted to do the biggest of all corporate jackass moves it could request the mod to divulge their code and then use it themselves, but I've still got SOMe hope in humanity

Never thought of that McLuv good point =p

You guys already have so many maps and models why would you need airlifting?

We don't have a lot of models or maps , we don't complain about it. Why should PR complain that they don't have airlifting?

Vepr wrote:We don't have a lot of models or maps , we don't complain about it. Why should PR complain that they don't have airlifting?

Where did PR(ie the Developers) complain about not having airlifting?

The community saying "that would be a sweet addition" is something completely different.

projectrealitycanada wrote:PR Suggestions - Project Reality Forums resuggestion, also on *** list.

Look at this...

Last edited by [R-MOD]Saobh; 02-28-2010 at 06:18 PM.. Reason: updating

I wonder what would be the update?

Hmm may be Airlifting?

Zrix wrote:Where did PR(ie the Developers) complain about not having airlifting?

The community saying "that would be a sweet addition" is something completely different.

I don't know who developers are for PR and i have seen 2-3 posts on PR forums with airlifting so im thinking if fans want it... it's probably up to the dev to put it in.

Vepr wrote:Look at this...




I wonder what would be the update?

Hmm may be Airlifting?

Yea, though that was firstly updated long before the latest video and revival of the thread here, and most likely not in reference to that. Besides, airlifting has previously been suggested and far before this thread potential candidates for codes have been worked out.

In all honesty, no one's exactly complained that they don't have this code, least of all the Devs. They can first handedly know and respect that want to keep onès work on coding and such to themselves, but on the otherhand, if they develop a similar system from scratch independantly, well there's nothing wrong with that.

Personally, I`d far prefer to use implosions that python coding, which would open up completely different realms of coding possibilities and application than python, and would probably be far easier to the casual coder to implement.