Defunkt

This is exactly right. I'd quite like to buy it, I'm interested in the genre and the money is small compared to what I have invested in a PC that will play it, but I refuse to reward a company that has been dishonest in its marketing and has short-changed PC gamers.

There probably is a clever way without the loop but (until I learn that) I'd probably try: {if (Name _x == "Big Daddy") exitwith {_name = VehicleVarName _x;);} foreach AllUnits;

It's a very beautiful model in motion, really impressive. Is there any hope that you or someone you nominate will complete the configuration? With the HandleDamage event we can now model any penetration system we want.

Agreed, they missed a huge opportunity by not investing more in some mainstream missions themselves.

That's the kicker, I could live without mod tools but as I have little or no interest in SP (all AI is dumb IMO) there's no longer any reason to even take an interest in the title.

One of the benefits with this game is that it hands so much capability to the mission designers. Double-edged sword.

EDIT: What he said.

It's an odd language and took a while to get my head around (that and locality) but I am developing a respect for its apparent speed and consistency. Just a couple of questions for more experienced heads; 1. Is it possible to build the mission PBO from a batch file? Mission PBO's don't appear to have a $PREFIX$ but as far as I can see you can't use BinPBO to build one without. 2. What is the difference between implicitly private variables (AFAIK anything prefixed with an underscore) and the explicit declaration with private[...]? Thanks. Any advice appreciated.

I'd suggest the first to post after each new patch adds a "Build XXXX.XXX Posted - Please report on this release only from here down." It's good to be able to read the entire history in a single thread IMO.

Thanks, much clearer. Would I be right in assuming this is unique to call and that spawn and execvm run in their own context?

If I think your mission is crap will you mind if I call it crap?

Okay, so private within the current block. Thanks. How about (of course I could always just try this when I get back to my desktop )... _a = "outer"; routine = { _a = "inner"; diag_log _a; }; call routine; diag_log _a; ...?

Cheers, I actually found BinPBO works fine. I think because I'd previously only used it for addons I assumed it always creates a $PREFIX$ but I now think it only does so if there's a config.cpp in the root (or something like that). I'm confused about scope then. If I use (for instance) _counter in several procedures am I to assume from what you've said that they will conflict unless explicitly declared as private[...]?

I may have missed a more recent announcement but assuming I haven't, how do you plan to get models in game without tools?

None too original I guess but I'd look to real-world hot spots like Somalia... ..or Gaza:

For the umpteenth time, don't expect significant engine changes! Great find, thanks to those who posted - can't wait.

Where would that leave people who like playing Domination (for just one example)? I'd take the PR game over Domination any day myself but the point remains, BIS have created a sandbox with which you can create either game mode. Rather than waste time saying they should instead have made the one you like, get your hands dirty and try making it yourself. I somehow don't think the point was that it could fit inside his tank but rather that he had access to one at all - presumably just found lying in an ammo crate somewhere. I hardly think it vital that BIS create different allowed-inside weapon lists for each vehicle. Ultimately all games rely on approximation and abstraction, man-portable is sufficient as he could presumably always stow it on the outside of his vehicle.

You're not listening. BI don't see it as their role, they empower mission makers to make anything, it's the mission makers you should be ranting at. But there I would agree, just dropping a few crates at spawn is a lazy and sub-standard loadout management cop-out.

Hang on, unless they actually broke into your house and removed said work-in-progress from your harddrive isn't this ultimately something you've given out? So maybe it's them you should be ranting at privately rather than here publicly. Which for me also raises the question, why give incomplete work to anybody? I could answer than but I won't other than to say that if people would just sit on things they're progressing until they're close to release then there'd be a lot less of this sort of drama going on.

Thank you.

LOL, yeah I think by 'better' he must mean easier, best snippet (from your link): :bounce3:

Obviously very happy with whatever you decide but I'm not sure I'd agree that exercising judgement based on the intel you have is necessarily "gaming the game". ---------- Post added at 10:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:46 PM ---------- Actually, thinking a little more about the real-world pros and cons of ECM I'd like to change my voteto 3 please. Ideally that option would actually be; 3 - You can detect them and lock on them at longer than normal range, but missiles fired against them will have their accuracy seriously decreased.

Add a gamelogic to mark an epicentre and in its init place... Sleep 1.0; {DeleteCollection _x} foreach (NearestObjects [this, [], 50]) - ((GetPos this) NearObjects 50); ...to remove everything in a 50m radius. As posted by F2k_Sel.

Small possible refinement, how about rather than making ECM ineffective if not on at the time of launch it instead takes maybe 5 seconds to 'power-up/enable' so you can use it in response to a warning provided you can buy yourself enough time through evasion. I'm all for anything that allows people to influence their own fortunes.

vote 1