stburr91

Johnny does it again. I really like the effects of this, it really does make the awesome napalm strikes in SOG PF even better.

I don't think that would even be possible, the Dayz SA engine isn't developed enough to support much of what's in SOGPF. A better idea would be for BI to allow Savage Games Design to create a DLC for Arma 4 right away, so we could have a Vietnam DLC within a few years of A4 releasing. Or possibly have Savage Games Design develop their own standalone Vietnam game on the Enfusion engine.

I saw that you posted this on the Savage Games forums, I would suggest that you search that forum because those topics have been discussed there already. You can customize the munitions in the editor by double clicking on the aircraft, and using the pylons setting. To access the napalm, and other munitions, use the scroll wheel, and click on "manual fire".

The simplest way is to set the group's speed to limited, set the pilot's behaviour to careless, and disable his autocombat. I've used this myself, and I know it works well. Put this into the pilot's init.

BI didn't hang CSLA out to dry, and it isn't fair to say that they did. This project was being developed for years before becoming a CDLC project, and years after, they were also given another 6-7 additional months to fix the project. We're all on the outside looking in, so there is no way for us to know the details of what was going on inside the development of this project, but I just don't see how BI hung CSLA out to dry, there appears to have been ample time to bring this project to completion, and meet the expected quality control standards. I don't know what incentive BI would have to force this project to release before it was ready, so I can only assume that CSLA was given the time needed, but failed to bring the project up to the proper standards. Last time I check, 76% of the reviews were negative., that ain't a minority, not by a long shot. I don't know where, or when you went to school, but when I was in school, 24% wasn't even close to a passing grade.

While I personally play SP, and would have liked to have seen a really cool SP campaign, I understand the devs decision to make it coop. As the devs have stated, it is impossible to create an authentic SOG campaign for SP, friendly AI teammates would never work well in these types of missions. They had a vision of what kind of gameplay they wanted to deliver, so they choose authentic SOG gameplay over being SP friendly. So while SP players don't get a great experience, coop players had a very unique, and authentic SOG mission experience, They truly created something special, yeah it suchs that everyone didn't get to partake in it, but that's not the fault of the CDLC devs, it's the limitations of the game engine. I mentioned MCC because it's a very easy way to spawn whatever someones wants without knowledge of scripting. Also, is the console even available in the campaign?

You don't have to wait 300 seconds, you can "withstand" after like 30 seconds or something. To be fair, the devs were very upfront that the campaign was designed for coop, and wasn't really meant for SP. For anyone that wants an easy way to add AI teammates in the campaign, just use the MCC mod, it allows you to add any AI that you want.

I would say that is likely because Arma 4 is almost certainly going to be multi-platform, so they will have to simplify the UI. Didn't they also say the the scroll wheel actions will be going away? There was some good news revealed yesterday, there won't be aliens in the next Arma. 👍

There was nothing rushed about this, the CDLC was first under development for years as a mod, then years as a CDLC, and another 6-7 months longer after BI told them to fix it after canceling the release last year. CLSA had ample time to complete this project, they simply failed to deliver a quality product. BI knew the state of this project, and released it anyway, so they deserve criticism as much as CLSA does. BI stated there would be strict quality control in place to ensure that the CDLCs would be of a high quality, BI failed in that regard. BI appeared to just say F it, and released the CDLC, whether it was because they know CLSA was never going to fix the problems, or because they have their own game they will be announcing this year, I don't know, but I guess we'll find out later this year. BI themselves have provided screenshots of a eastern European terrain that looks to be set in the cold war era. BI has also confirmed that they do have a game that is in development that is on the new Enfusion engine. A leak earlier this year showed pictures of cold war era military assets, and an eastern European terrain that looks identical to the pics of the terrain BI posted themselves. It seems almost certain that BI does have a cold war era game in development that will be on the Enfusion engine.

I highly doubt that you will have to worry about Arma 4 being released too soon. LoL I think it's a safe bet that Arma 4 is still 3-4 years away. If, and notice I said if, there is an announcement next week of a new Arma game on the Enfusion engine, it's almost certainly not going to be Arma 4.

The code posted by Rydygier will spawn the smoke at the position of a map marker named "m1". Did you place a map marker named "m1"?

Yes, this is a very easy way to create a large smoke pillar. smoke = createVehicle ['test_EmptyObjectForSmoke',getpos nameofyourpositionhere,[],0,'can_collide'];

Well, not matter what, the Arma franchise is going to change, it has to, it is woefully outdated, and cannot survive into the future without evolving. How much of the old core Arma experience they can retain, we'll just have to wait, and see to find out. One of the CEOs of BI said that they want to get the Enfusion engine into the hands of the community as soon as possible, so the we can become familiar with it, and learn the scripting/modding, which is imperative to keeping the community engaged with the franchise. While I believe that BI sees Reforger as an opportunity to generate revenue, I also believe that generating revenue may not be the primary goal. The cost of developing a new game engine, as well as the cost of not having new games because of a lack of a new game engine, is enormous for BI. How much money Reforger generates is secondary to their most important goal, finishing the development of the Enfusion engine.

There's no doubt there are plenty of old Arma players that still wax nostalgic about the good old days of OFP, but as I've said, after all the cold war era content that's been released recently, I wouldn't think BI would set the next Arma game in that era. Also, I wouldn't assume the (apparent) success of S.O.G. PF will carry over to Iron Curtain, the general interest in the Vietnam war is much greater than some fictional cold war story. Heck, I have some doubts about how well the CDLC Iron Curtain will sell, as I've said, the cold war era (especially in Europe) has already been done to death in Arma.

I'm also someone who isn't interested in a cold war European theater game, it would seem like a step backwards for the series. I think BI themselves are the ones wearing the rose-colored glasses, and are clearly as obsessed with the cold war era set in Europe, as they are with bullpup rifles (seriously what the heck is with all the bullpup rifles in Arma 3). One would think after Dayz, Contact, GM, and Iron Curtain, BI wouldn't make a new Arma game set in the cold war, and especially not in Europe, because its now been done to death. As far a rumor's of limitation in the Enfusion engine, I think that's the point of Arma Reforger, to have a game that will be a multi-year open beta to finish the development of the Enfusion engine. So while I expect that Arma Reforger will release with limited content, and functionality, it will be developed over 2-4 years to prepare for Arma 4. With that said, I believe Arma 4 is still 4-6 years away.