Edge

Hello, and thank you for the valuable input! Of course we are aware of the possibility of vote rigging, and we are working on a technical solution which would hopefully prevent it. Please cross your fingers! The reason why we want to have finalists in one category selected by the community is that we want everyone (and not just contestants) to have chance to add their bit to this community event, we regard this as part of fun. :) Of course, the selection of finalists by us vs. community would differ a lot, but we trust you! :) We hope you guys will give your "likes", "points" or "votes" (or whatever we will settle for) to the quality missions and campaigns - the community has IMHO seen enough to be able to judge this. It is obvious that missions entering the contest earlier will have chance to get more votes, but we honestly could not think of anything feasible which would counter this. I can imagine us keeping few wild-cards for the SPM entries we would like, but that would obviously require change in the rules (which is something I don't wish to do too often).

Well said, and exactly the attitude I would expect from the Arma mod-maker. :) Let's hope that the development will take this direction. It gives the endless content to the Arma community, not to BI! ;) Regarding your interpretation of the idea behind the "Make Arma Not War" contest, let me explain few things: The contest is here for the community (you included), not for BI. Yes, it may yield some content which would be worth publishing, but it would be mainly to the benefit of such content's authors. Also, I think that if there would appear a modification with potential for the commercial succes, it would be also because we at Bohemia keep putting a huge (and largely unnoticed) effort into keeping Arma modifiable. :)

You've got PM. :) @Sudden: You're welcome, looking forward to hear some classy Russian radio chatter in A3!

Just for your information, the music from Arma series has been released as part of the Arma Licensed Data Pack, so there is a possibility of using all the older tracks in Arma 3: ALDP_CWC_PBOs_APL-SA\Music.pbo ALDP_A2_PBOs_part2_APL-SA\music.pbo ALDP_A2OA_PBOs_APL-SA\music_e.pbo ALDP_A2OADLC_PBOs_APL\OA_BAF\data_baf.pbo ALDP_A2OADLC_PBOs_APL-SA\OA_PMC\music_pmc.pbo Of course, seeing the dedicated music packs for Arma again would be awesome (in case of taking part in the contest, please submit to the Addon category)! :) Anyone remembering Cassandra G's tracks done for Ballistics' Tonal pack or tracks the FDF Mod got from Airut?

The terrains which are not part of a total modification are regarded to fall in the Addon category. More in the subject in the already mentioned Q&A thread.

I see no problem in this. The intention behind "no addons" is to save the MANW team from loading tons of different addons each time they would need to check and rate a contest entry; if the mission would not require the addon to run and only show its imagery, it's fine. As you say, it would be good to obtain permissions to avoid quarrels over the prize money. :)

Hello, sorry for leaving this unattended for a while! I am no Big Boss, but let's hope I'll be of some use here: Currently we regard terrains as fitting into the Addon category. We also realize the importance of terrain addons, but few months back when we worked on the rules, there were no tools and just one or two attempts to make an Arma 3 terrain so we did not establish a special category. However, as the new terrains are looming out, people are using the Arma data packages and there can even be an A3-compatible tool for making maps available, we can think of establishing the Terrain category or additional prize. No promises though! :)

Good point Mr Amway (and rest of the guys in this thread), your advises were taken seriously! Hopefully the little update of the rules (removing certain fishy words from the Contest Rules and limitation of the non-exclusive license to our actions in relation to the Make Arma Not War contest) will stop discouraging people from participating. :) I will probably repeat myself a bit (see http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?171645-Mission-license&p=2614578&viewfull=1#post2614578), but nobody should be concerned that BI would take their work and sell or reverse-engineer it without the author's permission. In case we would want to publish an addon, it would have to be based on the agreement with its author. Sorry for late reply, January was a bit busy for me. :)

Yes, of course. There is no limit, and the already existing content can take part in the contest. We have rephrased these parts of the Contest Rules, and hopefully we made it right now. :) The intention is to give us Bohemians freedom to e.g. show your contest entry as part of promoting the contest, but just this. BI will certainly NOT re-release and sell your mission without a contract with you, or reverse-engineer it in order to improve our products. You remain the author of your mission (of course within the limits of Arma 3 EULA, and with Intellectual Property rights to your work).

I don't think the participation in a contest should be regarded as a commercial activity, but it would be probably wise to ask the author of the sound effects and check the detailed text of the license. What kind of CC license is used in your case? Just for information, if BI would plan to publish such addon, we would look closely into the use of 3rd-party works and assist in solving any possible IP issues. :)

Of course you can. The radio protocols from Arma 2 were released as part of the ALDP_A2_PBOs_part1_APL-SA package (dubbing.pbo). If you release the Russian protocol based on these data, just please don't forget to do so under APL-SA. :) Good luck!

It is not a matter of difficulty, we just don't wish to discuss the internal details of development. From what has been already said, everyone can assume that new terrain tool is much closer than decades away - Shelestov, you don't need to fear. :) @IceBreakr: You're welcome!

Hello, terrain makers! It has been already mentioned here that we want to release the new tool as soon as possible, and I can assure you the Arma 3 team is working on overcoming the obstacles standing between you and the terrain tool. Neither whinning about BI's lack of effort nor sending me demanding PMs will speed up the process. :) We appreciate every community-made addon, we realize the importance of good tools and we keep working on giving them to you, even if it is sometimes not as smooth as everybody would wish for. Please be patient, I hope you will soon have a new tool to complain about. ;)

The Arma 1 Sample Data package does not contain them, as it is just re-release of the old package with new licenses. However, the Arma Licensed Data Pack does contain the Queen's Gambit PBOs. Is there something specific you look for? ---------- Post added at 10:00 ---------- Previous post was at 09:49 ---------- If you use data from Voice.pbo in your missions, please use the APL-SA, as this PBO has been released under this license (check the diagram for license selection: http://www.bistudio.com/images/licence_chart.jpg). I recommend to state (e.g. in readme) that your mission is released under APL-SA (ShareAlike, NonCommercial, ArmaOnly requirements) and credit the original voiceover data (Attribution requirement). If you use the data from PBOs released under APL, you have more options (see the diagram), but in any case, you need to fulfill the license's requirements: Attribution, NonCommercial, ArmaOnly.

Of course you can! ALDP packages serve only as a kind of repository indicating wich data BI released and under which license. We did it like this as it was more feasible method of releasing game data compared to releasing e.g. gigabytes of unbinarized textures. Everyone is free to open the PBOs and use any data provided he respects the licenses under which they were released (so please be careful with attribution, non-commercial, Arma-Only and in case of APL-SA, also Share Alike).

We can only accept the missions which do not require any third-party addons (e.g. vehicles or weapons). There are technical / organization reasons for that, and also the concern about disputes among participants. However, we accept if specific addons required for gameplay are delivered as part of the mission or campaign package, so there is no extra addon installation. If you are using someone else's work (e.g. a script snippet), he is becoming a co-author of your work and should be handled like that. Attribution of a "freeware" scripts or common snipets is IMHO a minimum, but I recommend to get consent of such co-author and agree on terms with him. EDIT: Little update: We have allowed the usage of CBA based on the public demand, and only because it offers some extended functionality we would like to be used by the contestants. You can add as much violence as possible, and if you put it in the right context / setting, you may even qualify for the Health Care In Danger Special Award. And yes, we are playing on the famous phrase. :)

Hello, thanks for the questions and for the positive feedback! I will gather these and as well as those which are reaching us through other channels, and try to come up with the answers ASAP.

As mentioned already by Kerc Kasha, this is a standard clause, and it should allow us to e.g. publish screenshot or video showing a participant's work without making separate agreements, and it is useful to have this possibility for any competing entry. We would we against ourselves if we would attempt to do some dirty tricks. :) I realize the Rules text in Lawyerish might appear a bit scary or complicated (and I am sure I will have to consult our legal assistance often to provide accurate answer to the questions which will appear on the forums), but it has to be like that. I would like to make clear that we have to respect everyone's intellectual property, and everyone remains the author of their submissions to the contest and as such is free to do whatever they want with their addons, even during the contest.

Congratulations, this looks very nice! Can't wait for some missions. :)

Great to see our Estonian friends found the cache! :) I hope they will share some photos and stories on the forums soon, as they had wonderful time exploring the "Chernarus RL Edition".

Perhaps I should clarify the statement about the good old Flashpoint. :) I meant mostly the controls and certain aspects of graphics, while I regard the campaign as something we should at least study. I have started playing the campaign recently, because it is simply a masterpiece: interesting missions, several twists of the plot, and particularly the smoothness with which the new features are gradually offered - as such, it is great example from which would like to draw inspiration. However, after the years of improvements of controls and interfaces, and especially after what I experience when playing Arma 3 on daily basis, Flashpoint handles simply horribly. We, as devs, need to analyze our mistakes and plan to improve the product for you, and I think it is better to be honest than muse about the good old days. Of course, this does not concern just Flashpoint, but also the Arma games. There are many things which may seem fine to the player, but which makes us feel that we should have done them better or different. Perhaps the fact that I am only indirectly involved in the campaign development will slightly raise your hopes for its quality. :)

Hello, the gear system is not THAT elaborate. In Arma 3, you would be able to change your uniform (with certain limitations to sides), "vest" (= load bearing equipment sets) and headgear items. This may not sem as too much, but it is just enough to provide you with freedom of choise regarding the character customization and controllable interfaces.

They are part of the normal movement animations. No jumping, just falling. :)

Yes, exactly. The map size is roughly 30^2 km, the area of the firm ground is around 300 sq. km, as the map has been sized down a little bit compared to its real-life counterpart.

Hi, let me cast some light on the suspicious choices of optics on L85A2. As we don't have that many acquaintances in British Armed Forces, we often had to make compromises (which is also the case of vehicles). Regarding the Eotech holosight, we obtained some pictures showing L85A2 with these sights (however, I have to admit the photos might have depicted some unique setups), and we agreed on it as on a good representation for an assault rifle with a collimator sight. We chose SUSAT because we simply liked the idea of bringing it to the game. We felt that providing different optics would be refreshing compared to reusing the same ACOG optics again. AN/PEQ-2s were used as the default laser pointers in order to save some research and development time. The other types look almost the same to a common user, so we decided to re-use the existing data in this case and focus on something more substantial (like making the obsolete SUSAT optics ;) ). While I understand the concerns regarding the DLC's accuracy, I have to say that it is more important for the BAF DLC team to deliver the bug-free product with interesting campaign and missions than a super-accurate addon which would only enrich the mission editor. I am sure the compromises we made in the realism won't harm the experience from the playable content. @Blackhawk: Yes, there are British voice actors. We even managed to get Geordie and Scottish accents. :)