new command - TargetsAt

[Evil_Echo 11]

observations = unit TargetsAt direction, distance, radius

unit - unit observing

direction - bearing to area of observation in degrees

distance - distance to center of observation in meters

radius - radius of area under observation

The call is similar to nearTargets, but offset from the observing unit - allowing for seamless integration with doWatch to simulate directed spotting of targets

Data returned would be in same form as nearTargets command.

[dmarkwick 261]

Outstanding idea ;)

[Big Dawg KS 6]

direction - bearing to area of observation in degrees

distance - distance to center of observation in meters

So essentially a position? :j:

[dmarkwick 261]

A position relative to the spotter. Sort of like a watch direction command, but for area contacts suitable for artillery. The only alternative currently is to center it on the unit itself, which for most scenarios means that a lot of unnecessary observation area is going to waste. It makes more sense for a spotter to observe an area from outside that area, while still being somehow "attached" to the spotter.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

What makes more sense is a position parameter, instead of header & distance parameters.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Everything else (afaik) in the game regarding positions are handled using [x,y(,z)] arrays. It's really not a big deal transforming cartesian into polar and vise versa when you need it, and the (typical) polar method usually tends to forget all about the second angle as well - elevation angle, normally we don't need it. But I remember from Arma1 that there were cases when my sniper team wasn't able to spot shit (I mean, seriously obvious targets) because they were at an elevated position.

So yeah, I tend to agree with Big Dawg KS; positions are what the game normally expects, and if you need polar it isn't hard to do.

[Evil_Echo 11]

Postion and radius are fine also. It's just the notion of offsetting the spotting as DMarkwick has said.

Aside from how we define where we are looking, any other thoughts yes or no?

[dmarkwick 261]

In fact the current nearTargets command could be utilized by adding a couple of extra optional parameters representing an offset.

e.g.

Array = unit nearTargets range [x,y,z];

Edited October 1, 2010 by DMarkwick

[Big Dawg KS 6]

e.g.

Array = unit nearTargets range [x,y,z];

You would have to use a nested array for those trailing parameters since I'm pretty sure ArmA's interpreter assumes the format of "<param1> command <param2>" for all commands (or, at most one preceding and at most one trailing). Ex:

unit nearTargets [range,[x,y,z]];