bobby budnick

This problem is not limited to just Waterhiro's robots. Today I tried to spawn a T90 with the same series of errors. Still not sure where to go from here. Can anyone help?

I am working on a singleplayer mission set in the future on the huge 51x51km desert map here: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=11674&highlight=DESERT This works fine when you copy the needed Arma 2 and OA dependencies over. Now I want to populate it with very modern and futuristic vehicles. The updated M1A2 TUSK from OA works well enough minus the commander's viewscreen. The Bradley ERA also works well. Unfortunately, the artillery computer on the MLRS and artillery guns is broken. As for view distance, there is some good and some bad with Arma 3. Mostly good. I will break it down now between Arma 2 and Arma 3. These distances are found by experimenting with setviewdistance on Arma 2 and setviewdistance/setobjectviewdistance on Arma 3. Arma 2 - terrain view distance fixed at 15k, object view distance fixed at ~7k Arma 3 - terrain view distance fixed at ~10k, object view distance fixed at 12k. I was able to score a SABOT kill on a light vehicle with my M1A2 at a range of approximately 10.1k! Surely the round's energy had nearly been expended and would have bounced off a tank. So I then wanted some futuristic vehicles to accompany the tanks. The robots District9 and WZR2 from Armaholic do not load at all and show "cannot create entity with abstract type" and then the name of the robot. When I try to spawn one during the mission, I get a similar, shorter error. I don't even know where to start with these because the error is too non-descriptive. I also would like some artillery to take advantage of that long range so I tried the Paladin from Armaholic. It uses complex scripting for the fire control computer and loading system. Unfortunately, it's internal scripting removes it's main gun, and fails to add it back before adding the magazine. I emulated the scripting through triggers and had the exact same problem. I am not seeing any error when the gun fails to be readded to the Paladin. The only error is during firing when the array _weapon is undefined because the gun has not been properly readded to the vehicle. What other 3rd party artillery pieces are out there besides the Paladin? Are there any other futuristic land vehicles that I could use? Did you know about the view distance improvements?

I love this truck. Are the fenders attached to the axles? Otherwise, it would seem that the tires would rub.

Thanks for that. The mine worked so well that I don't need to use a grenade at all. The sound of the explosion is good too.

I am looking to specifically cause a grenade to airburst. I have tried to create and/or setPos another grenade or a "bomb" on or below the grenade spawn area but the grenade(s) do not detonate until they hit the ground. I imagine I could get one to burst by spawning a large object beneath it but I would like a believable script. An artillery airburst is too large and a bullet-based explosion is too weak. Has anyone gotten a grenade to airburst? Thanks.

Mission designers and forum administrators are going to have to do this.

Some facts to start off with: 1. Targeting computer does not seem to work with artillery from Arma 2 2. I have not yet tried the artillery module There are three approaches to scripted artillery as I see it: 1. Spawn shells just above the target (maybe too easy, arty module does this already) 2. Spawn shells at map edge with realistic physics properties (very hard, arty module does this already) 3. AI soldiers operating physical artillery pieces (this is what the thread is focusing on) I have tried the commands listed in the thread title along with doWatch, doTarget, commandTarget, and lookAt. All shots at medium-range (5k) targets are short because the AI appears to not adjust for gravity. I have maxed out the skill level of the soldier that is firing. Are these commands only meant for short range encounters? Thanks.

I stumbled onto this thread with the solution thanks to killerwhale: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?147841-Automatic-mortar-fire commandArtilleryFire is what we were looking for. It works well but you still need to be within the current range limits for the weapons. For the D-30, it is about 5k and the MLRS it is about 12k.

This code is not working to add the A-10's GAU-8 cannon to a soldier or vehicle. There are no errors in arma.rpt. It works in Arma 2. The cannon when mounted to the A-10 does work in Arma 3. removeAllWeapons this; this addMagazine "1350Rnd_30mmAP_A10"; this addWeapon "GAU8"; this selectWeapon "GAU8" I then tried to edit the soft_f.pbo and specifically the hunter HMG's weapon and replaced it with "GAU8". Then I replaced the magazines with "1350Rnd_30mmAP_A10". Now the textures do not load, it's icon does not show up in the editor, and I see "maingun not found while initializing the model..." in the arma.rpt. Every fun thing I have tried so far has been a no-go. Help me with this, Arma 3 is incredibly boring right now.

I got this to work using the mod method. The problem was that cpbo does not seem to add in a "prefix" to the pbo when you pbo it back up. But BinPBO does add the "prefix". It was not correct though, and I had to change it to "a3\soft_f" using the program PBOmanager for everything to work right. This method works fine now.

Hello everyone I am looking for addon artillery for Arma 2. This is mainly so I can see if they will work in Arma 3 with it's increased maximum view distance. I have only found the Paladin on Armaholic so far but I figured there would be more than that available. Specifically, I was interested in the Soviet D-20 155mm howitzer. The gun has sights for semi-direct fire which is the Soviet standard doctrine apparently, and a sight for indirect fire. Also, the explosion has a very large kill radius unlike the default artillery. Any addon artillery you can find would be appreciated though. Thanks.

The a10.pbo and air_e.pbo from Arma 2.

I have added it myself and it works on the A-10 itself in Arma 3.

To start off with, everything is being run locally on one computer through radio triggers. I have added the artillery module to the map, followed by a virtual artillery module that is synced to it. The virtual artillery module is named BATTERY_1. The target is named TARGET_1. I then initialize the template TEMPLATE_1 = ["IMMEDIATE", "HE", "0", "15"]; I then store the target position TARGET_POSITION_1 = getPosASL TARGET_1; I then execute the fire mission [bATTERY_1, TARGET_POSITION_1, TEMPLATE_1] call BIS_ARTY_F_ExecuteTemplateMission; and nothing happens. Nothing is logged in the arma.rpt. ARTY_CHECK = [bATTERY_1, TEMPLATE_1] call BIS_ARTY_F_Available; returns "any". Where should I go from here? Is the artillery module known to be working?

No one is at fault here. People are just bitter about game developers being stuck in the past is all. Some us of have been running 64 bit systems for a decade.

I can spawn the Arma 2 stuff right from the editor. The other 3 vehicles don't work properly even when spawned manually.

How would he know? The game is closed source. We are entirely dependent on the developers to do this for us. Show us the code and maybe we could figure it out in time.

This is one of those rare times I wish the practical needs trumped realism. I am poor and cannot afford to live in a house with a large yard. So any time I play Arma everyone within a 1 mile radius hears the gunshots. It has to be that loud or else you won't hear footsteps. It's not just about other people either. The sound of gunfire is annoying and jarring to me personally.

The OP is totally correct. Vehicle interiors are atrocious in this game and were in the previous games. Don't even get me started on the non-existent instrumentation.

I am for 64-bit support as well. There are (were) also some performance increases particularly in actual AMD CPUs in 64 bit games, despite them often having increased visuals for the 64 bit version. Far Cry 64 bit not only looked better, but played faster as well. The same was true for Unreal Tournament 2004 64 bit. This is just a conspiracy theory, but I think Intel pays Microsoft to make it more difficult for developers to port to 64-bit because of the advantage that AMD CPUs will have. After all, AMD created the 64-bit extensions and Intel ripped them off. Perhaps the cheap Intel "clone" of x86-64 does not work as well as on true AMD CPUs?

Your object view distance recommendation should be changed back to the max of 5000. In this game, realistic weapons can actually travel that far and do harm to you. No one should have to suffer being a bad player because they have a bad computer. With your settings, people can be hit by a normal infantryman from the "fog" and not be able to shoot back. If a system has trouble with that setting, they should start reducing all other settings including the object quality and render resolution. When the object view distance is turned that high, object quality can make a big difference.

A lot of that can be fixed by different mission and server setup. 1. Only playing coop missions will take care of much of the "teamkiller" type 2. Long travel distances with difficult settings so the "kiddies" get bored quickly 3. Disabling any kind of scoring will keep the teenage "pwner" croud out - great you shot someone now get a job 4. Active moderation, scripted punishment zones, cleaning up mission security holes, and monitoring client side scripting will tone down the "hacker" type So there you have it. The four most annoying types of people largely removed from your server. I have hope for pubs because I don't want to play with the same nasal sounding wannabe warriors everytime I play Arma and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Zooming is noticeably much better. Great job.

See the "tab locking" thread. Vehicles in this Alpha and in the previous Arma games do not even have working avionics and targeting systems. I think we are a long way away from this.

This brings up an interesting debate and question on the nature of these games. Arma will allow you to set it to as hard as possible or as easy as possible. Personally, I have been choosing neither lately more than anything. I just wander around driving boats or vehicles and imagining what it would be like if more games adopted the kind of realism that Arma has.