Balschoiw

British forces have left Basra and handed over authority to Iraqui forces. Brown insists British pull out from Basra is not a 'defeat' It´s better to move out with your head up high, than being moved out with no head at all.

True. I also ran into that once when trying to remove some moving vehicles that were no longer needed. It ended up with the vehicles removed and the units dropped out of the ghost vehicles and kissing the tarmack

Last time I got a query about this the problem was that DirectX and Direct3D were not working on MACs. I´m not sure about Arma but 3D applications using Direct3D for their output exe´s didn´t work on MACs.

I´d rather say you exposed yourself a bit here. Noone hinders you to create a CTF, DM , whatever. Does Marek say that they will limit Arma to non-CTF gameplay ? It´s up to you to create a CTF or DM if you are so badly after that outdated gamestyle. Only knowledge could be the limit...

It doesn´t work in the init above 50 m´s. Copy this code into the init of your helos or aircrafts: <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] The number at the end defines the height. In this case the helo will start at a height of 200m´s. Alternatively you can directly change the height of the waypoint but I don´t have the code in my head for that right now. Maybe a can bring you some results.

I agree with every single word you posted DaSquade. I feel 100 percent the same.

Damn, they have given up the plan ? Sacre Bleu ! Ontopic: I found this transcript of an interview of Amy Goodman with Gen. Wesley Clark when looking for some background info on the plan. Here are some interesting excerpts: Those who are interested in the complete transscript ( very interesting, not only related to US <-> Iran ) read Gen. Wesley Clark Weighs Presidential Bid: "I Think About It Everyday" This man has a good attitude imo.

Just in case the whole thing explodes in the face of the US once more, G.W. can still claim that he had no intention to attack Iran, but a typo was guilty. Iran, Iraq, they all sound the same If they conducted an operation like that, they will get their asses seriously fried in Iraq instantly

Oh my... While I do understand that people have a right to complain, I do NOT understand what absurd ideas they are offering here. Cool. I´d swear that I have just read that you told someone to "fuck off" before you edited your post and posted the Ghandi Version... You were saying: " people have a right to complain as you have the right to walk around on your knees with your lips puckered . If your happy to be screwed over and not stand up to say something then FO and let ppl who are do." Well, well...

I guess chances are high that values agreed upon by the community actually do make their way into Arma. If those values change the gameplay for the better I am confident that BIS will embedd them. Maybe a dedicated thread about those values, where they can be discussed wouldn´t be a bad idea. If we come to a consensus and agree on the values it could be taken to Suma or Marek. Maybe it would be interesting to know their own opinion on this aswell. If they say "No way, we won´t change any of those values in a patch" we can scrap it , but I think they are open for input, if it makes Arma a better product. BTW, I still have the settings in UserProfile at the default values. Why ? Because I do missions and I have to know how they work on Arma - out of the box. We got the FSM editor, we have the commands to embedd new FSM´s, but still we seem to lack people who are actually able to produce something worthy with the FSM editor. As I said, I tried, but it´s not working as I expected. Maybe a dedicated thread in the editing section could bring people together who are able to create working FSM´s and people who have ideas about needed AI routines. Seriously, I didn´t mean to critize the author (as I already wrote in the last post btw), but imo the approach should be different. In the end those values should be changed via a patch to keep Arma unified and on the same level for all. Else we will end up with with thousands of individual Arma`s and a hard time to produce missions for those thousands of settings and values. That´s what I was trying to say. So how about a discussion about needed FSM´s and values that do improve Arma ? Anyone interested ?

Wicked... Why don´t you just upgrade to 1.08 and choose language from video options ? There´s certainly someone you know who has a broadband connection and let´s you download the patch.

+1 3) firing your mortar from loose ground until the tube pushes itself to a near 90° angle and fries the mortar and the operating crew. (We´ve wondered quite a while what happened to the juveniles operating a mortar in Moga, firing at the airfield. Basically there was just a little crate in the sand, fragments from the grenade everywhere around and 4 juveniles lying around who looked seriously butchered. Another one: Has Arma´s AI found a way into real life ?

This also has been my major gripe with all games that have been released lately in that sector. While the gfx do rock and sometimes leave you standing in some area with your mouth open, the AI doesn´t seem to keep pace with the Gfx. I know it must be harder to program a universal AI for a FPS than to put the Gfx to a latest-fashion-level, but still the AI is the deciding factor when it comes to playability and longtime-motivation. I don´t buy that extended AI calculations and routines do take away too much CPU power or performance. For me that´s just a cheap excuse from software-creators to cover their deficits while creating the AI routines. In fact ArAs is a good example. The AI is unflexible and worthless in a lot of aspects, be it finding their way, flying, maneuvering a vehicle, engaging, using cover, etc. While the Gfx are all nice and dandy the AI kills the experience. I´m not sure if this is a result of the hasty release or not, but what I know is that scripters already extended the AI features alot for Arma as they did for OFP. If you look at Grouplink 2 you can see that there is hardly any significant load added to the CPU, still BIS released ArAs with an AI that can shoot great but the rest is rather desillusional. I guess programming AI routines takes time and effort, while you can´t see it on screenshots published in magazines or gaming-websites. So most of the game - creators decide to concentrate on eye-candy but not a sophisticated AI. Unfortunally. There are exceptions though. Stalker imo has a pretty decent AI. They run for cover, choose different approaches and routes, are somewhat unpredictible in their maneuvers and give you a hard time in firefights on higher difficulty levels. It´s not perfect, but it´s a refreshing change compared to the "standard" AI we´ve been served over the last years. I´d be opting for a better AI anytime. You will forget about the eyecandy when you are tied in challenging firefights with an AI that acts more lifelike than they do today.

The voices have to be embedded different. Add them to the mission description.ext in one of the class of cfgMusic, Sfx, Sounds or EnvSounds. If for some reason accessing the sound files does not work correctly, try changing the \ca\sounds\ to: \sounds\ or for the voices: \voices\ Edit: I´m sending you an example description.ext. It´s too big to post it here Could be worth a try to use PlaySound instead of Say aswell.

You can access the embedded sounds in Arma pbo´s by using something like this in your description.ext: Example for accessing a sound in voice.pbo on the fly. <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">class voice1 { name = "voice1"; sound[] = {"\ca\voice\alan\actions\activatebomb.wss", db+1, 1.0}; titles[] = { 0, }; }; Exception: content of ca.pbo can´t be accesssed on the fly using this method. Also make sure you define the sounds under the right class in description.ext, else they won´t work properly.

Twiddle here, twiddle there... You know what I mean ? All that custom settings you need to have to get the party right, those custom modifications of values... I´m not sure if I´m happy about that, keeping in mind that a changed AI will definately influence the gameplay a lot. Not that such is a bad thing, but from the mission-editor point of view it´s nasty as missions can turn out to be ultrahard after an AI change or ultrasoft. For me the default values should be changed by BIS only to keep some kind of common line for all participants: The gamers The editors The modders The editors simply can´t pack addon after addon with their missions just to change some uservalues. I´m not a fan of such and people who want to keep their Arma install clean are already having a hard time. Remember the fuzz with guns after 1.08. I think if such change of values is agreed upon it should be implemented by BIS with the next patch. This makes things easier for all. What I´d really liked to see are some custom and comprehensive FSM files that can be executed on the fly or distributed via addon. Evasive maneuvers, surpressing, on-the-fly-splitting of groups when under fire, searching for cover, etc... Those are the things that would really change AI. I tried to play around with FSM´s but for me it´s very hard to logically build a new one that actually works. Maybe it would be a nice community project to develope a new set of FSM´s for Arma ? BTW, this is in no way meant to be offensive. I do respect the work that has been put into this and it certainly changes the gameplay for a better one, but still, I´d like to have those values changed by BIS in the next patch, basing their settings on good settings that are agreed upon by the forum members. I see this as a kind of finetuning by BIS with community values that is needed and wanted. Cheers !

Great ! I´ll download the bigger version later on but now let´s have a look... Thx ! Edit: Ugh !

Ugh, 33 MB to download. Can you split the addon so that we can download the scripts separate ? I´m on a slow I-net connection

Link fixed It´s Asian Times btw

I don´t see any reason why there shouldn´t be an "Arma scriptbase - only post working and finished scripts here" section somwhere in the forums. Imo it would be a good thing as some scripts simply go unnoticed for editors when placed in the addons section. At least that was the case for me. For sure OFPEC still can use them aswell in their depot and I don´t see a problem to have a permanent ressource and location for the scripts. This is what the OFPEC is for me. An alltime ressource. But I aswell appreciate the platform here on the forums, as there is much more discussion going on about scripts and their editing. More input -> better feedback I do not think that the Biki is the right place. For me it´s a bit clumsy to work with and sometimes the results of searches are more than unsatisfying. At least that´s my opinion.

One thing I´m really looking forward to are diver units & arma and a nice island with reefs plus some ai fishies and some naval vessels we can sink This is somewhat a start

That´s not quite accurate. The UN is operating in Iraq with 95 men in Baghdad right now. The problem with the UN in Iraq is that neither the US nor the Iraqui forces are willing to protect UN installations and personel. Right now there are plans to build a new UN office, heavily fortified and protected against bombers and mortar fire. Unless there is some kind of security at least in the capital, noone will support a UN mission there. The US and Iraq are not able to achieve even this goal, not even speaking of the rest of the country, so sending UN troops there right now would only result in even more bloodshed. There are US calls for UN measures, but for me this just looks like a cheap way to get their asses out and put blame on the UN once again, if Iraq collapses. Btw, I still think that iraq will collapse in the longrun as there are already big players on the scene who are operating for their goals in Iraq. 1. Iran is aiding Shia´s (understandable as Shia´s form the majority of Iran´s population) 2. Saudi Arabia is aiding the Sunnis (as do the US forces) 3. Turkey is very, very cautious about the Kurds in the north who have announced plans for a separate kurdish state. Take this, add the total chaos US created, look at the inoperational Iraq government, take into account that the US are already shifting the blame for their failed war on the Iraquis themselves and are now searching for volunteers (UN) to deal with the remains of a country that has been taken to it´s status quo by them and nobody else, and you will see that the US call for UN participation is nothing else than a cheap trick to get the responsibilty of their back. Military involvement of the UN in Iraq is very unlikely though as the war in Iraq was not ratified by the UN, quite the opposite. Even Iraq´s government is not so happy about a larger role for the UN as it would weaken their own position and could end in a loss of power for them if the UN agrees on a transitional government emplaced by the UN to stop further agitation from governmental rows. Ironically the Pentagon excluded the UN from rebuilding Iraq back in the good ol days of "who wants a chunk of Iraq". Now they come running... With the drawback of british troops from Basra the UN also had to shut down their operations there as noone was left to provide security for the UN personel. In Baghdad the UN is limited to the Green Zone for reasons we all know. There is a very bitter taste that is still hunting the UN when it comes to Iraq. They agreed to help the US with preparing elections, coordinating them and getting the constitution done. This made the UN a US tool in Average Iraqui´s eyes and therefore a worthy target. This resulted in the 2003 UN bombing that killed U.N. envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello and 21 other U.N. workers who were serving in Iraq, supporting a U.S. military mission the organization had opposed. If there is a role for the UN in Iraq, it´s the humanitarian aspects of this gone-wrong liberation. I guess I´m not leaning myself out of the window if I say that there will be no military UN contingent enforcing UN decisions in Iraq. It´s up to the US to do this, not anyone else. The war got started without UN approval, pulling the UN into this mess now might look handy for G.W but is just another cheap try to put blame for the mess on others. There are no objections to have the UN as a negotiator and mediator between the Iraq fractions, the occupiers and the the neighbouring countries but first it has to be made sure that a UN mission in Iraq is completely secured by the US and Iraq. If there is no security, there can´t be civil UN operations. Quite interesting: Escalation in Iraq by numbers Covers a lot of solid numbers and gives a good portrait of the situation in Iraq.

For me it´s perfect. I already have the second generation of this "trackball" with mouse-features. It´s easy to clean, fast and reliable while using minimal space.

Logitech Marble Mouse. I´m a left-handed mouse-hater

Enough said...