Jump to content
acemod

ACE3 - A collaborative merger between AGM, CSE, and ACE

Recommended Posts

Will ACE3 ever give us the possibility to use mortars in the same way as in ACE2? By that I mean the whole loading system, sighting procedure using map tools etc? I know that a range table and map tools have already been added, however will you guys do anything more to make it even more complicated/realistic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is gbu 12 of A-10D still to configure to follow the laser target?

I tried everything:

flying low ,flying hi,short/long range...

but nothing!!

with F-18F works ,F_16 and A-10 of USAF MOD works

(someone just suggest me to use the gps Jdam,but is not a good solution 4 me)

so if this feature is still to do its ok...else i really need help to understend how drop that damn LGB!!

PLEASE ANSWER ME!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it me or do PIP optics don't work?

Looks like it. I'll check if there's a ticket.

Ruthberg, on here: http://ace3mod.com/wiki/feature/windeflection.html

it is said that this works in conjuction with Advanced Ballistics.

But here: http://ace3mod.com/wiki/missionmaker/modules.html#1.19-wind-deflection

It is said that if advanced ballistics is enabled, then Wind Deflection will exit.

Which one is correct?

Thanks for posting, I think it's fixed now. Let me know how you like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will ACE3 ever give us the possibility to use mortars in the same way as in ACE2? By that I mean the whole loading system, sighting procedure using map tools etc? I know that a range table and map tools have already been added, however will you guys do anything more to make it even more complicated/realistic?

Yes, it will.

---------- Post added at 17:16 ---------- Previous post was at 17:15 ----------

Any way to drag AI bodies?

Pack them into a body bag. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any ETA for AI to begin to heal themselves and other teammates?

Edited by AntonioAJC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, it will.

---------- Post added at 17:16 ---------- Previous post was at 17:15 ----------

Pack them into a body bag. :D

I am so happy to hear that. A more advanced and hands-on artillery system is something I have been missing in Arma 3 for quite some time now. I am therefore thrilled to hear that this will be implemented into ACE3.

However, if I might ask, do you know how this will be done? Will there for instance be added new kinds of artillery pieces such as the M119?

I also want to thank each and every member who has been working on this project so far. I don't think I have been this thrilled over an Arma 3 mod before. All I can say is keep up the good work!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am looking to find how to add a medical facility to a mission. I use Stratis and have not placed any buildings myself but want one of the existing buildings to be my medical facility. I have the module that is supposed to be synced to the building but it can't be synced to objects that I have not placed. I'm just using the editor and do minimal scripting.

How am I supposed to do??

In agm I used an area marker and a trigger named to medevac and the medical module automatically recognized it.

So i TOO am wondering this with or without...i used to have the CSE ones setup...but i never felt like they worked.....i would like to know how to get this going....properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am so happy to hear that. A more advanced and hands-on artillery system is something I have been missing in Arma 3 for quite some time now. I am therefore thrilled to hear that this will be implemented into ACE3.

However, if I might ask, do you know how this will be done? Will there for instance be added new kinds of artillery pieces such as the M119?

I also want to thank each and every member who has been working on this project so far. I don't think I have been this thrilled over an Arma 3 mod before. All I can say is keep up the good work!

AFAIK, it will be similar to how it worked in ACE2, there is already MK6 Module in the game, but right now it only disables the Artillery Computer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am unable to carry wounded/unconscious but I'm unable to drag them. Will I be forced to put unconscious AI in a body bag to move them?

Edited by piggypotpie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AFAIK, it will be similar to how it worked in ACE2, there is already MK6 Module in the game, but right now it only disables the Artillery Computer.

The core of the ACE2 mortar system is already in ACE3 imo, the usage of range tables, changing of elevation, different charges, usage of map tools instead of arty computers...

There are only a few things left, such as prepping actual shells to have different fuzes/charges/ordnance instead of action menu/PgUp&PgDwn.

Kind regards,

Sanchez

Edited by PhonicStudios

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am probably the only one that thinks that way, but I find the renaming of the vehicles to "realistic" names to be superficial and actually wrong. I'm the first to admit that I find the names "Slammer" and "Scorcher" to be pretty horrible names, and yeah the Slammer is called "Merkava" in reality, but I find this wrong in this context. IF the United States Army would adopt the Merkava as their Main Battle Tank, they would very likely rename the unit to something else (Most likely the name of a general, like most of the other US tanks).

For example, the US has adopted the FN Minimi as the M249, and the HK416 as the M27 IAR; the SCAR-H is called Mk17. The LAV-25 is basically the Piranha I APC. It's commonplace to adapt the designation of units to the nomenclature of the country adopting them, and none of the vehicles and weapons in Arma 3 are currently in use by the respective countries (excepth for the KH 2002).

On top of that, the MH-9 isn't an MH-6, it doesn't even look like an MH-6. The Wipeout (another horrible name) isn't an A-10. The only real point of argue is the Comanche (I never understood why it was renamed to Blackfoot in the first place).

I do assume I can just delete the appropriate pbo (As far as I can see it shouldn't have any adverse effects) but that is not a good solution since all references to the names in the briefing/radio messages would be wrong.

Bottom line, I would like to ask you to reconsider this decision. IMO it makes little to no sense.

Couple of things:

1. The Merkava does not belong to the US ingame, it belongs to the more generic NATO faction.

2. Feel free to make a pull request to change the name of the (A|M)H-(6|9).

3. If you do not like a feature, feel free to remove the PBO or maintain a fork, but do not ask us to remove them for everyone.

I agree with this, although for a different reason. I run a game with 5-7 other players who have all been playing Arma 3 almost since release, and with the 'realistic names' from AGM on, I had to interrupt their comms about 3-4 times per game to respond to a "what the the hell is X? I'm just looking for Y" questions. Just had them delete the PBO after a couple games of that. Consistency is an important thing IMO, the same reason everyone doesn't switch over from 'qwerty' keyboards to 'dovorak' or something that might be a little bit more efficient, but not worth the price of learning it all over again.

But Alwarren is also correct, in that these are all meant to be at least semi-fictional weapons and vehicles, and trying to force realistic names onto them doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me.

As said above, remove the PBO.

Awesome work guys! Used to play with AGM a while back, this seems even better.

However I have a small problem, what I want to do is remove the medic restriction on things like epinephrine and blood, to allow all soldiers the ability to bring another soldier out of unconsciousness. The reason for this is that my friends and I almost always play coop missions where the medic class is absent/there's not enough people to fill it, yet we want to use the medical system (basic for now).

What should also be said is that we host this on a player computer (that is, not a dedicated server) and I can't seem to find any way to make it so that everyone can use epinephrine and blood. Is it even possible (I'm thinking it should be)?

Set the Medic Level to 0 (Disabled) in the Medical Module.

i don't wanna bother you too much, just please think about implementing range cards (like the ones from ACE2). we need them for any practical marksmanship. otherwise, it's a guess work (and no, lasing target and dialing in the ballistic calculator doesn't work for any practical situation where we have few seconds to shoot). thanks and sorry if this has been already planned.

You could make your own ones...

TBH, I would rather see this feature removed completely or made optional. For one thing, it can be mission-breaking if you can simply climb over obstacles that you are not supposed to climb over. Also, it is way too easy and fast to climb through a window into a building, since it doesn't take loadout into account. Finally, you can easily climb onto objects that do not have a proper geometry mesh and go into the magic floating animation.

I really do not see the benefit of this option, or the horrible-looking vault animation, and would really like to see this become at least optional.

Is there a location to report bugs to? I noticed that explosive charges attached to vehicles do not move with the vehicle if they are on a remote machine.

Again, just because you do not like them doesn't mean that we will remove them for everyone.

Edited by KoffeinFlummi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Set the Medic Level to 0 (Disabled) in the Medical Module.
In the PBO or the editor? In the editor it would only affect a specific mission, right?

What I would ideally want is to have it work on every mission (except if its overridden of course), but I'm unsure if that's possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. The Merkava does not belong to the US ingame, it belongs to the more generic NATO faction.

Last time I checked, Israel was not a part of NATO, nor was any other Hebrew-speaking country. And while the faction is generically called NATO, the context makes it pretty clear that the tanks are US tanks, as their designation M4A1 is a US designation and the US are the only one with a mandate in the area (the Brits are no longer present). But in either case, neither the British nor the Americans would call the tank a Merkava.

2. Feel free to make a pull request to change the name of the (A|M)H-(6|9).

3. If you do not like a feature, feel free to remove the PBO or maintain a fork, but do not ask us to remove them for everyone.

I didn't ask you to do anything. I tried to argue a point which I think is something to be considered. You don't share my opinion, that's fine. It was my opinion that removing these names would be an improvement.

As for removing the pbo, I already said that it creates ambiguity.

Again, just because you do not like them doesn't mean that we will remove them for everyone.

*sigh* Why so aggressive? I pointed out that there is a serious issue with people floating in mid-air through the use of this. If you want to keep the feature, that's fine. I was merely voicing my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Last time I checked, Israel was not a part of NATO, nor was any other Hebrew-speaking country. And while the faction is generically called NATO, the context makes it pretty clear that the tanks are US tanks, as their designation M4A1 is a US designation and the US are the only one with a mandate in the area (the Brits are no longer present). But in either case, neither the British nor the Americans would call the tank a Merkava.

In the ingame manual, it says that the Merkava tank NATO uses is a licensed one that's being mass produced in Central Europe. Honestly, I say that the creators of the mod should leave the name as they themselves have put it. There's no need to keep the fictional names (Except for people that are used to the old names), and if somebody doesn't like the names, they might as well remove the PBO which is ace_realisticnames.pbo

This is why I love ACE and AGM that was before it. It's modular. If you don't like a feature (Deafness and goggles changing the screen's tint for me) just remove the PBO.

Edited by AntonioAJC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really guys, Alwarren was providing feedback. Feedback is not something that suddenly become pointless when a feature can be removed by deleting a certain PBO. his (good) arguments were directed at the mod's developers in an attempt to convince them. That's legit. That's helping. That's what forums are for.

I don't see why he should be bashed in this way by a developer by writing such a pissed off toned post. That was uncalled for.

Edited by Variable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really guys, Alwarren was providing feedback. Feedback is not something that suddenly become pointless when a feature can be removed by deleting a certain PBO. his (good) arguments were directed at the mod's developers in an attempt to convince them. That's legit. That's helping. That's what forums are for.

I don't see why he should be bashed in this way by a developer by writing such a pissed off toned post. That was uncalled for.

He wrote that he would rather not have these features, so I told him that he can remove them if he wants. No one is being bashed, and no one is pissed off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where can I find the ACE functions? I looked in the function viewer but they don't show up.

Could anyone help me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he's more saying he doesn't see the sense of them being in the mod at all, which I agree with. Who does it benefit and how?

You can remove the PBOs, but it's unwieldy with lots of players, there's always 1-2 who don't do it right or forget to after updating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think he's more saying he doesn't see the sense of them being in the mod at all, which I agree with. Who does it benefit and how?

You can remove the PBOs, but it's unwieldy with lots of players, there's always 1-2 who don't do it right or forget to after updating.

Yeah but a "Squad Server" could just have a Servermods Mod folder setup, and have the PBOs pulled out and thats how you download it to play on the Server. As for the one or two players that cant function... well tough shit.:yay:

The cool part about ACE3 is the modular concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there any reason they can't be seen in the function viewer? It's kind of cumbersome to go through the folders if you don't know which folder to look in.

Yes, because we do not use the BI function framework as it performs poorly and is not flexible for us. We may expand proxies to the BI function framework someday, but not while we are heavily developing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×