Balschoiw

That´s not really polluting the environment. Apart from that I don´t see how this should be happening at all, neither have I ever read about such. I guess electricity cables on masts can do such, but they are everywhere and masts for cellphones do such by the nature of their emissions but linking this up to wind-turbines is dubious imo. Cough, cars kill birds in large numbers, so do aeroplanes, so does smoke pollution by fossil fuel, so do pestizides, so do herbizides...I guess the kill-ratio of windfarms is somehow neglectable in that context. They are already working on that issues and I am pretty confident that there will be much more silent mills in the near future as it was with helicopter blades and such. Now that´s what I call a real deficit.... Sorry, but did you get that the alternatives are much more harming the environment ? Almost every piece of land where humans settled on has been constantly changed by humans, or do you think major cities have been here by default ? Skyscrapers, electricity wires, rails, bridges, houses, roads, agricultural fields, even grown woods....all that doesn´t ring the alarm bells in you ? Well, maybe it´s because you are used to them. Take your time to get used to windmills. You will have to as fossile fuel is running out. And I certainly prefer to look at a windmill than to look at a dirty coal power plant. Sure, I have one on the roof of my second house. In germany there was/is the 100.000 roofs program. Government finacially supports the useage of solar panels on rooftops and guarantees a certain price for the electricity sold by owners of such installations. There are a lot of downsides though. The electricity can´t be stored, the efficiency of the panels degrades over time, the room you need to get serious output is not enough even if every roof in germany had one, the remains of the panels are toxic... By the way, the costs you calculated are a bit off. Have you kept in mind that you need house installations changed, special electricity modules and a converter plus new cables to deliver your energy ? For a 36 panel installation like I have you have to pay about 45.000 Euro. This is meant for a 4 people household with overproduction going to electricity supplier. On a sidenote: What do you want to do with the batteries you mention ?

To your surprise there are already large fields working in the north sea. There are already islands that are totally independant of regular energy sources because of that and Denmark in the long run will have 50 % of it´s energy provided by offshore fields. Freakwaves or Megawaves as you call them are unlikely in that region and building the fields about 20 km´s from the shore in deep water does actually make things easier and more safe than building them on land or near the shore where waves build up as the water is meeting ground, while in deep water high waves are much more unlikely. Additionally there are already concepts for floating wind turbines that are almost immune to waves and as a benefit do orientate themselves towards the wind. Today Denmark is already producing 25-30 % of their electricity with Wind turbines, which is quite a number imo. I do not really go ok with the poll selections though as only a combination of renewable energy creation will be the deal and every country has a different setting, so there is no real "way" applyable to every country. Photovoltaic is a nice gadget but by now the efficency of the modules is rather low, still the effort is what counts. Seriously, we have no problems accepting 10.000´s of polluting flights with aeroplanes, but we object to windfarms that do not pollute at all. Humans are weird. Fossile fuel is limited and running out oneday. Additionally fossile fuel pollutes. It pollutes when it is raised, it pollutes when it is used and it pollutes when it is burned. Nuclear energy is no problem-solver aswell. It´s just too expensive and unreliable. Additionally the remains of nuclear fuel will be there and active for thousands of years. The final storage of the remains is a huge problem and the power plants are not safe at all as we´ve seen in numerous incidents. I don´t trust the nuclear lobby anymore. There were too many coverups and accidents already that in some parts changed the face of the earth already. Wiki page with lots of info and ressources on renewable energy sources.

Thx for answering, but I know about the building Pos already. It doesn´t really help me though as I want to have guards patrolling on rooftops and such. What came to my mind aswell is the Arma specific movement pattern for AI infantry units. I guess their waypoint precision has been toned down by default in their config, so they sometimes have problems to go to a spot. Is this right ? What I basically want to achieve is that I can use waypoints with a hight coordinate that I can alter to my liking. Right now the infantry troops will always try to get to the waypoint on ground level. This means they fall of the roof. Another use of this would be to have units patrol several floors and use stairways to get there. I don´t want to be limited to predefined building positions as they are to unflexible for my goals.

No. People should actually wait with their complaints until the patch is there and they are still not satisfied. From recent patches we know that a lot more stuff was added with the changelog when the patch in question got released.

It looks naked

Apart from that, who says that the list on the page is complete ? ..or do you own a crystal ball sluggCDN ?

Hey king, wrong island. It´s Pulau Ubin

New info on new BIS webpage on content of QG: New QG subpage here.

Just a quick question: Will there be a mission editor coming with it ?

No, you will have to create an addon for that.

Slightly related. I am looking for a way to have units walk around in buildings. I have no problem positioning them but I´m looking for the code to alter a waypoints hight to make the unit move to the waypoint on a certain hight or level in the building. SetWpPos is said to work with a 3D array, but what syntax does it have in combination with an additional hight coordinate ?

Let me guess... Joining the japanese on Sentoga, watching pink dolphins, reenacting the battle of singapore in the old bunks, enjoying the meals in the street kitchens, watching Singapore´s beauties in the MRT, AND shopping, shopping, shopping. I wished I was there....

My thoughts aswell. I am an offender aswell Warning, contains disturbing image... Seriously, if you surf the web (which is indeed a reason to get fired ) during your worktime you should be smart enough to disable the sig´s if the y do so much harm. Initially I though this thread would get locked by a thinking Mod as it has nothing to do with Arma->General at all. It wouldn´t even make enough story for Off-Topic imo.

Nuclear missiles with warheads are prohibited to be transported at the pylons in the US afaik. The standard approach would be to separate the warheads and have them transported in special vehicles and with very special security preparations. The last time hot nukes were transported assembled over the US was in the late 60´s. What worries me most is the fact that for 13 hours noone missed the nukes and noone knew where the nukes have gone to. They don´t carry a kiloton payload of nuclear explosives. The Fuel used for RTG satellites is quite different than the stuff used in nukes. Pu-238 emits radiation mainly in the form of alpha particles, which have a very low penetrating power. Only lightweight shielding is necessary because alpha particles cannot penetrate a sheet of paper. Apart from that there are strict security preparations done. The fuel capsules are designed and tested for worst case scenarios.

Why worry about nukes in the making in Iran, if you can have so much fun with domestic nukes ? B-52 carrying nukes mistakenly overflies U.S. In combination with the intellectual capabilities of Bushy this would make me kind of worried... Bush shows gift of gaffe at APEC summit Did they have troubles with his remote control again ?

Heya ! I wondered if you could make this one a sticky as it´s already filling up with good suggestions and could be of use for BIS and future Arma versions: Editor suggestions thread

Apart from not really understanding what you want to achieve with the post here as you do not ask editing questions and people will most likely not download an unfinished intro with addons only to give you some feedback, I can give you some hints on your post: use disableAI "Autotarget" in the init of units. This section of the forums is not meant to be a presentation place for unfinshed missions or intros. If you want to have feedback, it will be better to either post it in "User missions" or over at OFPEC in their beta-section, while reading the requirenments first could help.

That´s a very complex plan. Not. You already have one unstable country down there. Do you want to create another one ? Let me give you a hint: Disabling Iran´s military will open the doors for terrorists to Iran aswell. Not speaking of interests other countries around could have in Iran´s ressources... I wonder why a dumbass plan like that even has supporters. You don´t have to be a rocket scientist to understand that one thing leads to another. We all know how good the US are at making up reasons for anything of their interest and we all know how good they are at planning military strikes and estimating the outcome. What is this gonna be ? A "victory" for the lame duck ? Seriously guys, think, then post. If there´s something YOU should have learned by now it is that nationbuilding is dependant on rebuilding and improving the quality of life for the civillians. Happy civillians don´t blow you up. The US failed terribly in rebuilding Iraq. They created armageddon-country for the iraqui civillians. Checking some numbers on the "progress" of rebuilding should give you a clue. I don´t buy the argument that the obstacles are too high to achieve anything. It has been shown numerous times that rebuilding works and that rebuilding a countries infrastructure is VITAL for the acceptance of foreign troops on their soil. Just check Afghanistan. Every company in the US had it´s share and took the money from the Pentagon money-bowl but none of them delivered what they promised. They all made a big buck, they even used Iraq´s own money to finance the corruption and fill their pockets, but it seems that there was no existant control on the moneyflow and the outcome. The almighty Pentagon took control of the rebuilding while the UN has decades of experience in this and offered their help, but G.W. decided that the UN are bad and the money is in the right hands with the US... Go figure. Mission accomplished.

Suggestion: Weather change for now has to be done with setovercast manually by trigger or script. The weather section misses a dropdown menu that does the following: - offers a timer to determine the length of initial weather phase - a second field for length of transition from one "weather" to another - transition states should be: instant, regular, extended, where istant would switch the weather instantly (cutscenes), regular would be a predefined time that does a smooth change (e.g. 3 minutes) , extended would unlock a user input field where the mission creator can edit the time value to his liking.

Definately good news. Welcome back Placebo ! Hope you have your legs ready and waxed

Your labtop isn´t meeting the minimal requirenments for Arma. That´s why it goes frenzy. Requirenments:

Suggestion: Extend the waypoint submenu with a field: Name Let us have a name field for the waypoints to make it easier to work with them from scripts. If we can have dedicated names for waypoints it would be easier to control them by script. This includes moving the WP, assigning the WP, deleting it or whatever. in my opinion it would speed up the scripting process if the WP´s had dedicated names.

Suggestion: Have a drop-down selector in waypoint submenu to determine the height of a waypoint. Options in dropdown: - default - custom "Default" should be selected by default. When selecting "custom" an input-field next to the selector should be activated that lets the user enter the desired height of the waypoint. The range should not be limited to positive values only, but should allow us to use negative values aswell to have waypoints below sealevel for possible upcoming submerged units like divers, submarines, etc. This is not only usefull for air-maneuvers but also for possible upcomming submerged units and their movement below sealevel.

Just tested and it works with the following line in the init of helo: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">this setpos [ getPos this select 0, getPos this select 1, 200]; this flyinheight 200 Helo will be spawned at 200 and keep the height. But be aware that waypoints have their own Z (height) default setting, so if you want to have it really work you have to use setwppos with a 3D array to alter the height of the waypoints. The Biki says that setwppos only accepts 2D coordinates but that´s not true for Arma. Another approach would be to use GameLogics instead of regular waypoints. Place a GameLogic where you want to have your first waypoint, name it way1 and in it´s init use this code: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">this setpos [ getPos this select 0, getPos this select 1, 200]; This will take the virtual waypoint up to a height of 200 m´s Now in your init of the helo use this code: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">this setpos [ getPos this select 0, getPos this select 1, 200]; this flyinheight 200; h1 doMove getpos way1 This will send the helo (name h1) to the virtual waypoint at once. If you want to have more waypoints (fake GameLogic waypoints) place a trigger around the gamelogic have it activated by the helo and in it´s OnActivation use a code like: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">h1 doMove getpos way2 This will send the helo to the Gamelogic way2 once the helo is near way1 (first virtual waypoint).

Don´t want to sound picky, but he actually never said that. The correct translation would have been: "This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."