Taurus 20 Posted November 9, 2008 2 hrs trying each suggestion when searching the topic on these boards. I have one empty tank with x% Probability of Presence Then obviously its crew should only appear if the Tank exist. In the crews Condition of Presence I've tried with: not(isNil "MyTank") not(IsNull MyTank) MyTank isKindOf "TANK" MyTank != objNull (count crew MyTank) == 0 Call {_T=False; If !IsNull MyTank Then {_T=True}; _T} None of them works... When a trigger checks the same things it returns true on everything if the tank "spawned" When its not, some of the are BOOL, Scalar lolerz As we expect. I also recreated the units in case there's some "that item was placed first" thing going on. Is this because the Condition of Presence is checked before the units are placed? How odd that now might sound. but hey... its... well... To work around this I have two options? 1: Write some script which deletes the crew 2: Messin' about with adding a Tank and make the crew disembark? #2 works fine, but I don't want to do it that way. Help please. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted November 9, 2008 Not sure how you are doing it but I think you could group the empty tank to a trigger and say if not present then Deletevehicle and just list the crew. Make sure the trigger takes up the entire map though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
squeeze 22 Posted November 9, 2008 its real hard to understand what you what to achive but if you want a empty tank with a crew only made if the tank is made then why not make eg: BLUFOR tank (which has crew) and put in the init line something like (driver this) setpos position player to make the tank empty and you have your crew. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Taurus 20 Posted November 9, 2008 Thanks for your inputs. I basically want the Condition of Presence to work as it should? I know several ways how to get around this, as #2 in my list for example. But, how is Condition of Presence meant to be used if another object presence can't be checked? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
squeeze 22 Posted November 9, 2008 I think i know your problem, since you have the line ! isnull mytank in the init of a unit and if you check your mission.sqm you'll find this unit is listed before the tank then is will always be null because the game engine reads the mission.sqm from top to bottom. this is why scripts are better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Taurus 20 Posted November 10, 2008 I think i know your problem,since you have the line ! isnull mytank in the init of a unit and if you check your mission.sqm you'll find this unit is listed before the tank then is will always be null because the game engine reads the mission.sqm from top to bottom. This is just hilarious. this is why scripts are better. Note: For you who care to read the wall of text below, do read it and do not skim through it. I'm growing more and more tired with having to script everything. Its not that I can not do scripts that solves my problems, its just that I don't want to, I want to be in the editor most of the time, and doing scripts for the advanced things, more on this later. I wouldn't mind doing this if the learning curve of every command and what they're used to is pretty high. now compared to when we sat with OFP we have the wiki ofc, but some of the examples there are easily compared with the Java SDK doc. Then comes the thing with "locality" I just found out that putting rearm scripts in the init-line doesn't work in MP as it seems the server is in command 3-5 seconds before the client joins the game, and do mind that the client isn't a JIP. Having a "local player" if not kick out from the script results in the joining player doesn't get any weapons. If you remove that check the game CTD's when more troops join with a "join" wp to the players group "join and lead" wp. But thats just me not being able to sort those things out in a "back and forth" time of ~6 years. Another thing is that I managed to persuade some of my friends to buy Arma, but if they want to make their own missions and I'll have to tell them its a 20:80 relation of "Spending time in the editor : Scripting" I guess they get scared off doing their own missions. As ArmA doesn't ship with alot of re-playable coop missions a need for us "users" i.e. the community to make their own missions is needed. We're not many that plays, only like 4-5 and the missions aren't sized for that. I spent 12 hours this weekend to make a simple mission work as I wanted, the biggest part of that time was spent on the "Condition of presence" thing mentioned here, and having empty BMP's which the crew should mount and having a group of infantry board, then unload it somewhere. Now empty vehicles doesn't seem to work with "Transport unload" Having random placements of the "Transport Unload" wp makes the "Get out" waypoint of the infantry too far away at times so the "Synchronized" wp will not kick in. This is when the BMP has crew to begin with and an infantry group enters it. What I did was to place a BMP and attach it to the infantry and use "load" and "Unload" waypoints, but that didn't work out well at random occasions, read on below. And the obvious thing would be to put a "OPFOR" BMP but... The darned driver wouldn't shut the engine off, its not possible via scripts either, he just turns it back on, same thing goes with helicopters. Also, the "get out" wp, lawl! 80% of the times the driver ditches the BMP into some building or somewhere where the crew can't get out, or the crew when they get out of the BMP is getting stuck in a bus-stop building or just grabs a pixel to hold on to on the BMP, if you look at them they resembles a dying fish. Or, the BMP bumps into something and turns upside down. rearm scripts, respawns and such are "advanced" features. But the things in the editor as "condition of presence" and etc should atleast be manageable without scripting. Then it seems we need to script helicopter pilots, the community has "hot fixed" the AI, the community has.. etc etc... Sorry for this semi-rant but. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites