baddo

I'll throw you some hints as to where to look for some resources. - http://community.bistudio.com/ Â Just follow the links from the frontpage... - http://www.ofpec.com/ Â Look at the Editors Depot - Tutorials - Addon Editing, Â also the forum at that website. Don't mind if some stuff is for OFP, just read it. - This forum and its search functionality.

Just unplug network cables Well it's not that simple as you isolate yourself then. I would be surprised if the USA would not practise similar kind of warfare. I just don't believe they are so clean as they try to imply. This only proves that we need to keep alternatives available. In WW II some Nordic country used "running men" to arrange communication between military units as they lacked better means at that battle (very victorious battle btw). Carrier pigeons. Bottles into the ocean with a message inside. Bonfires. Now try to hack those! Edit: A detail, the Germans used hawks against carrier pigeons in WW II. Don't know about the effectiveness of that... I mean how many pigeons can a hawk eat per day?

Well that is a problem. As I said, I would trust only BIS and no one else. Well, maybe a publisher could be considered also as a reliable source. But as I said, the checking of the ID's should not be in the hands of the community! It should be done by BIS so that no users need to know anything about it. I think a security model in which a user (server admin perhaps) is assuming he knows what is legitimate and what is not, is very dangerous. It can lead to lynching of innocent people.

It's true there should be some reconsideration of how the ArmA scripting engine allows the commands to be executed. In multiplayer I think one model could be to force an authorization from the server to be granted for a command originating from a client before it is executed. Server configuration file, or a mission initialisation file, could then even have some sort of list like: allowFromClients [ Â Â setPos, Â Â blah, Â Â bleh, ]; and rest of the commands would not be allowed to have any effect over network. Also a client which is using non-allowed commands could be just thrown out of the multiplayer session right on the moment when the server notices a non-allowed command coming from that client. If that list were in a server configuration file, all missions played on that server would then have to comply with the rules set by the server. This would mean mission authors would have some extra burden on their shoulders, to make sure their mission is playable on a given server. I don't know if this is a good thing or not. Then it would be more in control of the server admins/mission authors over exactly what can happen in the missions played on the server. There is the "technical facts" side of this which can make it hard for BIS to improve the situation. We users can suggest all things but what is technically possible or feasible, is up to the developers to find out and say. Like too much network traffic caused or something else.

You must go to http://www.ofpec.com/ and read everything there. Also if you have Operation Flashpoint then it is not a bad idea at all to make an island for that game first. The process is not as heavy as making islands for Armed Assault.

I would not trust anyone else than BIS for telling what kind of ID is legal and what is not. It is questionable how much info BIS should give about that to the public. You should have no problems if you bought the game. How do servers detect players with illegal versions of the game, or players who bought the game but want to change their identity in an attempt to cheat, is the key question. I think that should be arranged by BIS so that even server admins will not know the details of how it works.

Well then you should not call it a 'cdkey' if it is not that.

Well take a look at what the American car manufacturers predicted in the 1950's how the cars would look like in 50 years time! Oh they were so wrong. We are still not flying our cars.

Nutty_101, one question. I took a look at the website linked to in your signature. Then I looked at http://dsts-docs.livecar.net/index.html?player_class.htm Now, what exactly does this mean: What do you mean with numeric cdkey? Especially, what kind of relation it has to the alphanumeric "game code" which was needed from the back of the ArmA manual when we installed ArmA? Please clarify. A legitimate concern is that community efforts to improve anti-cheating and anti-piracy measures go too far and give people information we, honest law-abiding citizens, do not want them to have.

I hope you didn't mix me into that group  I'm exactly in the opposite group, saying you won't get anywhere near "real physics" in a video game for practical reasons. Froggyluv, yes yes, that's what I was saying. Don't try to deny what I said when we actually agree  I gotta raise one point which froggyluv actually reminded me of. The animations. One thing which disturbs me in ArmA is the weird, robotic looking animations. For example there is a cutscene which plays when you are in the main menu of the game. The cutscene shows a soldier's head from close. The soldier turns his head to left, and then back. The turning of the head doesn't get any more robotic than that. The head moves strictly along one axis only, as it looks to me. Very, very un-natural looking head-turn animation. How would I start to fix this? I would insert some random "swaying" into the movement, making the character have "micro-movements" in addition to the movements it has now. The head turn for example looks like it is a mechanical device controlled by some strict limiters in both ends, which stop the mechanical movement precisely. Just that there are no such strict, sudden limiters in a human body. I would also try to add so-called "damping" and "spring" factors to the animations. This probably means that the character body should be somehow simulated jointly by a physics system and the animation system. The physics system would add "spring" and "damping" effects to the animations somehow, and make them random in some limits, so that the system reduces the robotic look of the animations even more. Luckily it's a programmers headache, not mine, to think how such a system would be implemented.

building you'll get some link as an early Christmas present: http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=56593 This is a very basic question and next time search before making a new thread. We don't need zillions of threads about the same question. Just a friendly advice nothing more.

Well you can fake physics in games, but don't call it "physically correct". It is far from that, was my message. Especially if you try to fake dynamic destruction, you are not going to be able to fake it well-enough to rightfully call it "correct", it's practically impossible to achieve in games. It might be good-enough to fool people who play games, and that is what matters for game developers. But the word "correct" should not be used then. As an example, look at the relatively simple vehicle destruction model in place in ArmA. Now try to think how you could make it "correct". That requires some serious Engineering work. Start by studying Strength of Materials and Dynamics, and you'll soon understand you won't get your game simulation no where near how such real objects break. I am maybe nitpicking a little bit here If the game developers are able to make people think something is "realistic", then that is good-enough for them of course. Just that I wouldn't call it "correct" as it definitely won't be that. I won't talk about this anymore in this thread

Speaking of "physically correct" sounds exactly like totally impossible to achieve, such words should be dropped. I take it that didn't come from BIS' mouth, they should never state such things and I don't believe they did. In games physics are big faking (dedicated physics processors don't remove that) and that is not changing anytime soon. Even in scientific/engineering tools physics/deformation/stress simulations and results are not "physically correct". And those tools can take quite a while to calculate even a small simulation. That's why realistically deforming/breaking materials will not appear into computer games, faking it to some level is possible of course, but the word "realistically" should not be used when it in fact is faking.

You can look how it is done in a simple function groupInVehicle, which is available for download from http://www.ofpec.com/ and I also copy&paste it below. <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">// ****************************************************************************************** // groupInVehicle.sqf // There are two possible ways how to use this function: // #1: You pass only group to the function. In this case, the function returns true if all // group members are in any vehicle, false if at least 1 member is not in any vehicle. // Â Â The vehicle isn't necessarily the same vehicle for all. // #2: You pass group and vehicle to the function. In this case, all group members // need to be in the vehicle passed to the function for true to be returned, // otherwise the function returns false. // USAGE: // init: groupInVehicle = preprocessFile "groupInVehicle.sqf" // calling #1: [<group>] call groupInVehicle // calling #2: [<group>, <vehicle>] call groupInVehicle // returns: <boolean> // example #1: // if ( [grpWest1] call groupInVehicle ) then { hint "All are in vehicles!" } // example #2: // if ( [grpWest1, truck] call groupInVehicle ) then { hint "All are in truck!" } // Credits: bardosy, bedges, THobson (inspired by their forum posts) // Baddo 2005 // You can contact me through www.ofpec.com // ****************************************************************************************** private "_grpInVehicle"; _grpInVehicle = true; if ( count _this > 1 ) then { if ( {vehicle _x != _this select 1} count units (_this select 0) > 0 Â ) then { _grpInVehicle = false; }; } else { if ( {_x == vehicle _x} count units (_this select 0) > 0 ) then { _grpInVehicle = false; }; }; _grpInVehicle Just save the function into your mission directory and use it. Look from Biki for more instructions about using functions. If your units do not form a group then I am sure you are able to adjust this to your situation. I recommend to always check the functions/scripts available at http://www.ofpec.com/ as there can already be what you need.

Discussions are the thing, not the signatures. So just disable them. Disable also avatars. You'll notice that it's much nicer to read the threads that way.

Sorry for this question but are you sure you didn't get anything extracted? The console window which pops up is cpbo's only 'interface'. I want to make sure you are not expecting anything else to appear as an interface.

Dear Black Sphere. If what I see U.S.A. do internally and globally is wrong in my opinion, I will make a comment about it, as I have done here many times. Please notice that this applies not only to U.S.A. And other people can do the same for me and my country. Things are so that I can have very little influence regarding what happens in U.S.A. or what U.S.A. does globally. It is the responsibility of the people of the U.S.A. to keep an eye on what their country is doing, both inside and outside their borders. Same applies to Iran of course. What I can do is to make comments about what is happening in the U.S.A. and what the U.S.A. is doing globally. I feel it is not only a right, but a responsibility too, to comment on things that are wrong in one's opinion. I give that right, and that responsibility, to every other person too, no matter their nationality, race or whatever. Sad will be the day when no one comments. As a student I always wanted others to critisize my work, as I saw great benefits from receiving criticism. Best teamwork happened when people were brave-enough to politely critisize each other's work. It's no different with nations as I see it. For example, all Iranians are more than welcome to tell their opinions here, as far as I am concerned. As much as are all Americans. To me their personal opinions have as much value as mine. But it must be said, every one of those individuals have responsibilities too, as I do, regarding what happens in their country and what kind of foreign politics their country is doing. Best Wishes, Baddo.

On the other hand, it was any better for the Greeks by all those recent fires they had and almost non existent reaction/help from their government? If the country have a presidental or parliamental system does not deteminates its competence and efficiency, only to whom the power of ruling is given. About internal matter or global matter. Unfortunately for the rest of the World, for example who is the President of the U.S. is very important as such a big and powerful country like U.S. can quickly cause a lot of irreversible damage World-wide, as has been proven. I think it is primarily the responsibility of the people of the U.S. to do something about their systems (political, "homeland" security, military for starters), which affect not only them but the rest of the World too! As I said I think most people in the U.S. are not paying attention so it doesn't look good. The political lead seems to be able to do whatever they like, and even does not have to care about U.S. legislation. Giving them more power does not make problems go away. A quote from a friend fits perfectly here: It is an exaggeration maybe, but exaggeration is effective to make a point. There is something certainly not right in the U.S. if people start to make these kinds of statements. Your comment about the grey matter and the TV show Jerry Springer is insulting. I wonder why you have to use that kind of tone in a discussion. About competence and efficiency regarding natural disasters etc. I do not think it is the President of a country who should have to be counted on in events like natural disasters. I see this similarly in my country. I do not want to end up in a situation where a President is needed to put some speed into rescue work. If a President (or parliament) is needed for that, then the whole system is incompetent and inefficient already and should be re-thought from the scratch.

I think you should not worry about that, Victor. Just look what comes and take it if you like what you see. Let them have their own headaches Â

I think the American people has already given up on a lot of things. That's why I have on some occasions hinted that 'freedom' and 'democracy' are really not the kind of values U.S.A. is truly giving to its own citizens. 'Ostensible freedom' and 'ostensible democracy' is what is given to them more and more everyday. The word 'terrorism' is being used by the ones in power to make them even more powerful and you even less powerful. Even attempts to improve the fight against natural disasters happening in the U.S.A. are actually turned against the citizens of the U.S.A. by giving even more power to the President and taking it away from others. Ask yourself a question, is that really going to help you if a hurricane comes and wipes your town away? Ask yourself another question, how has the President used the rights that were given to him? U.S. Presidential elections can easily be turned into a joke, as was seen a couple of years ago. Some people called it 'illegal' and a 'coup' and I think there must be some truth in those claims. I have to say at one point of my life I even considered getting a job from the U.S.A. and living their for some time. I have seriously started to doubt if that's a good idea at all, after seeing how the people in the U.S.A. are treated by their own government. And after seeing what kind of image the U.S.A. is building for itself globally. I'd not feel safe at all if I had a U.S. passport and had to travel around the World. It's up to the people of the U.S. to do something about it. Big problem is as I believe, most U.S. citizens are not paying attention. Disclaimer: My views are based on the information that has been brought to me by various medias.

The problem with cpbo has been discussed before. Do a search for 'cpbo' starting from the start of this year and you should find a fix or two. Try to get rid of previous pbo file associations in Windows registry (regedit from command prompt for example) which some other programs could have made. Then run cpbo.exe and let it associate the pbo files with itself. Or try File Explorer/Tools/Options/File Types and check what it says for pbo, if anything.

You have quite a short amount of time for creating missions. I recommend you take existing CTF missions and adjust them to your liking, or use them as they are. For spawning vehicles, familiarize yourself with the createVehicle scripting command. Spawn one vehicle in mission start. Check from time to time if it is still usable or has been abandoned for long-enough time. If not usable, spawn a new one and delete the old wreck. If abandoned but usable, just setPos the vehicle to where you want.

But when i put this in my ArmA vehicle config and set everything to true then after the vehicle was destroyed all units are thrown out of the vehicle and drop to the ground. You said you set everything to true. What do you mean with this. What is everything. Let's make the most obvious assumption that you mean you set the ejectDead... variables to true in your config file. When the name of the variables are ejectDeadGunner and so on. If you don't want to eject the units, then these variables should be set to false, not to true. Just logical thinking, I've not done configs like these and have no idea if this actually helps you. I just saw a logic problem in what you said.

Go to http://www.kegetys.net/arma/ and download ArmA tools package.

Well it would be amazing if Pentagon would not have had this kind of plans a long time ago already. Knowing how well Iran and USA have gotten along with each other. I have to say I am not surprised if a war against Iran is started. But I think nothing good will come out of it, the least for the Americans. How much do the people of the USA support these kinds of wars is a good question and would need to be answered by themselfs, soon. I hope they pay attention, its their people, tax money and reputation after all. The Bush Administration most likely hopes the people of the U.S. won't be paying attention.