PFC Mongoose

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (jacobaby @ April 02 2003,02:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You can drag a GROUP line from a trigger to a group leader. Try it, it will open up a world of possibility to you  TJ<span id='postcolor'> ARGH, I didn't know it was a GROUP line, I thought it was a Synchronize line (which obviously doesn't work) Thanks TJ, I knew I was missiong something minor, just couldn't think of what.

Can't wait till the bugs are fixed and the variant is done. o_o Wild Weasellllll~~~~~~~~~

Edit: First off, I should mention I'm not using a script for this. </Edit> This is sort of similar to a problem I'm having. I have a sqaud of tanks, and a bunch of infantry. Â They're supposed to come up to a river crossing together, using synched waypoints, then the tanks are supposed to cross, with the infantry following close behind (but not passing them, it's important the tanks arrive first, or it screws my plans up). However, the infantry move faster than the tanks, and always cross first. So, I made a Trigger set to West Present (I couldn't think of how to set having the specific squad present in the Conditions line), synched it to the tank squad's waypoint set halfway across the river, and put On Activation: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">rivercross1 = true<span id='postcolor'> Then I set the infantry's waypoints across the river to Condition: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">rivercross1<span id='postcolor'> I wanted to put rivercross1 = true, but that's appearently bad syntax. But, it doesn't matter, since it doesn't work. So, I tried setting the infantry's waypoints BEFORE they cross the river to Condition: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">rivercross1<span id='postcolor'> but not only doesn't it work, but now the tanks wait for the infantry to cross the river befor crossing. I realised then I have no idea how this is supposed to work. Also, while I'm at it; say a unit has two waypoints, "1" and "2". Â If I set the speed of waypoint "1" to full, and "2" to normal, does that mean the unit will move full speed TO wp 1, and then move normal speed to wp 2, or does it mean the unit will move to wp 1, THEN move full speed to wp 2, then move normal speed to whatever waypoint after? Thanks in advance - Mongoose

Grah, I can't connect to ofp.info.

Now the question is, will Syria send combatants? If they do, things might get even uglier than they are now. Not to sound panicky, but if Syria sends combatants to help Saddam, this might escalate into a World War. BIG @#$%ing 'uh oh' time.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 01 2003,19:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A little humor for Warin and our Canadian brethren: The Canadians have pledged to help America with the war against Iraq. They have pledged two of their biggest battle ships, 6000 ground troops and six fighter jets. Unfortunately, after the exchange rate conversion, we end up with two canoes, one Mountie, and some flying squirrels.<span id='postcolor'> That's almost as bad as </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Prime Minister Jean Chretien announced today he would lend 6 of Canada's Sea King Helicoptors to Coalitions forces in Iraq. President Bush was shocked that Chretien would so openly aid Iraqi PResident Saddam Hussein.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, it's kind of tricky, and it depends on the person. For example, I always get insenced when I hear about violent video games causing things like school shootings and such. When I was in high school, I liked to think coming home and fragging terrorists and bombing outposts and occupied cities is what kept me from hauling off and decking people who pissed me off, and such. More on subject, I generally think of killing - and in a grander (as in larger, not better ) sense, war - as a last resort, I love playing OpFlash; the bigger the battle, the better. However, if I were to join the military, and were in a fighting unit (highly unlikely, the latter, not the former), I would be LOATHE to open up on people, and I'm sure seeing death and carnage up close would @#$% me up really bad.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ April 01 2003,18:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"(I'm sure someone else will argue that the Iraqis are fighting entirely for self-defence, but IMO, that's a very different situation)" Yes, it is a very different situation: The iraqis dont have a choice. They live there.<span id='postcolor'> Of course the Iraqis have a choice. they can always surrender. As long as they haven't been using 'dirty' tactics, even if they've fired upon U.S. troops, if they lay down their arms, and lay prone, they will probably betaken as P.O.W.s. Like Rumsfeld said "Some will surrender right away, some will fight a bit and then surrender, and some will fight to the death.". I don't think he meant "We'll kill every single one of those bastards, if they drop their gun and don't move, that just makes out job easier." Now you'll say the Americans can also chooe to surrender, and some have, but if you're in the back of an AAV, and you suddenly decide "Hey, we're getting slaughtered, I think I'll surrender" while your friends are getting shot up around you by people dressed as civilians, what are you going o do, jump out and drop your gun? Maybe. It is possible. It's also possible you'll get blown to kibble by an RPG trying to take out that AAV you just jumped out of.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 01 2003,17:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 01 2003,17:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ludovico Technique @ April 01 2003,17:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Personally I'm pretty disgusted by the whole business of the US marines shooting civilians, but I understand how they could make that mistake.<span id='postcolor'> Then you should express your disgust towards the Iraqis for making everyone of their own people suspicious of being the next bomb laden martyr.<span id='postcolor'> Oh, so now it's the Iraqi's fault that US troops kill civilians. How low can you sink Avon? Really how low? Are you willing to extend it to palestinian suicide bombers? Saying that it's the only thing they can do in their situation. That it's all actually Israel's fault that Israeli civilians die?<span id='postcolor'> Equating the American actions with the Palestinian Suicide Bombings doesn't make much sense to me, personally. The Palestinian Suicide Bombings are much closer to Iraq's tactics, nonuniformed combatants attacking (in Iraq's case, ad 'in' or 'near' before the next statement) civilian targets, and thus endangering them. If the Iraqis make attacks dressed as civilians, and use civilians as spotters for RPGs, then they are just as responsible for civilian casualties as the Americans who pull the trigger; but in many cases will at least have th justification of self-defence (I'm sure someone else will argue that the Iraqis are fighting entirely for self-defence, but IMO, that's a very different situation).

I beat Montignac Must Fall with half my squad left.. it annoyed me, though, because my leader hung back, and I was supposed to follow this Sergeant. After he died, I had to wait in PRovins for almost 10 minutes for my leader to catch up. There were four of us left at the end of the mission, but then After Montignac starts, and I'm alone. After Montignac drove me nuts. If I got right, even if I kill the first guy in the woods, the second one always hits me before I can get a bead on him. Eventually I realised just to head left, at the start, instead of right, and found a route devoid of enemies. Which is good, because I'm HORRIBLE at fighting in the woods, just HORRIBLE.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ April 01 2003,05:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So true. But it was only $70 (CDN) and I make more than that in a day's work anyway. Â <span id='postcolor'> And here I can't find work at all. <not serious> Get Cancer! </not serious>

Ah, thanks for posting that, Denoir. I don't really like reading about grizly death, but it was very informative about what the city fighting is like, and how on-edge the troops are. Avon: I STILL get Gateway Timeouts, can't connect to it at all. DNS lookup error, or something. WhoCares/Denoir: I still can't find that chart; though I believe it said during the ffrist war, the Iraq military had about 1 million men, and the Coalition had around 300,000. It said in this conflict that the Iraq Military was down to about 350,000, and the Coalition had deployed about 275,000. IT didn't say anything about how many tropps IRaq actually had in Kuwzait, or anything, though. Based just on the chart, it appeared the Coalition was far less outnumbered than they were, but I can see now how that isn't really in context.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 01 2003,05:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There is 10-20 times more of them, they have the support/can coherce the local population. It's their terrain. They don't have long supply lines to worry about, they're in their home country where they have food and water storages. The situation is not comparable.<span id='postcolor'> 10-20 times more? I wish CNN kept all of their old graphs up. They had a graph a few weeks ago that showed a rough comparison of Coalitoon/Iraqi forces in the first Gulf War, compared to in the present encounter. According to that graph, the Coalition was much, much more heavily outnumbered in the first conflict. Trying desperately to find the graph, apologies...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (interstat @ April 01 2003,00:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Check this article out, sort of gives a good feeling for the warfare going on over in Iraq: warfare <span id='postcolor'> I get solid Gateway Timeouts every time I try to view it.

I'm working on a Vietnam mission for 1.46, but at every junction in the road, there's a new peoblem. I've tried to look up solutions, but none of the usual fixes seem to work. I think what I need is some advanced scripting, but even after reading a couple of fine tutorials, including Devilchasers, I'm grasping the basics of scripting, but what I need right now seems fairly advanced, and specialized, and I'm not sure how to go about it. Overview.) There's an American camp in the woods north if Ia Trang, and the Americans haven't had any trouble, so they are all fairly casual at this point. Most of them are sitting around campfires, the commander and a few others arein a hut looking over a map, and a few men are on guard. The main river crossing is being watched, so the americans think they are safe, but little tdo they realise the VC are planning to cross the river at several points in small transport boats for a multi-pronged attack on the secluded camp. 1.) The first problem I have is getting people to sit around the campfires. I got one small group of 4 to do it, just using this setbehaviour "safe"; and this switchmove "effectstandsitdown" But even a group of six, spaced farther apart, refused to do it. Even if I set the above commands along with doStop this on each unit, most of them would get up and start wandering aimlessly. I have no idea how to prevent this. 2.) Similar to this, the sentries on either side of the door of the hut constantly felt the need to desert their posts and wander aimlessly. I manged to stop them with doStop this, but then they turn and face the hut, making them look like pretty foolish sentries. Neither Hold, nor Sentry would root them in place, only doStop. Similarily, the group inside the hut would always feel the need to turn and walk THROUGH THE WALL OF THE HUT, which none of them were particularily near, and standin in the field, when I just wanted them to stand around the map, facing it as if looking at it. doStop got them not to move, but again, they alway turn and face north. 3.) I have a sqaud of Viet Cong on the opposite shore of the river near a VC boat I d/led. The idea is that they board the boat, it crosses the river, drops them off, and waits. They then pick through the forest, attack the American camp, and when losses mount, retreat to the boat to cross back ot the far shore and safety. However; and this might be a problem with the boat AI itself, the damned thing won't cross the river. Even after the squad is inside, it turns as if to move (it starts facing west, and is supposed to move north to cross the river), but turns east, instead of north, and sops. It isn't that it can't move, as I have taken control of the boat driver and done the crossing manually, it just won't do it. Perhaps the water is too shallow and it gets confused. So, I was wondering if anyone knew of any solutions, scripts availiable that might help me out, or if anyone can come up with some snippets to help. If it helps, I can e-mail you or send over IRC or ICQ what I have done so far, in case I'm doing something horribly wrong. I have the SEB 'Nam Pack V1 (I'm running OpFlash 1.46) and the VC boat; which I can include with the mission in a zip file. Once this is done, I still need casualty checking COUNT UNIT scripts for the VC boats for any VC units forced to retreat, and for the American Helicopters, for any American units forced to retreat. I'm sorry to ask for so much, but it has the potential to be a wicked mission, and I'd really like to finish it. Thank you very much. - Mongoose

Nah, I have nothing against German, I'm just a unilingual bastard. Also, I'm mianly just griping because nobody told me if it was v1.75+ only or not

<ignorance> BAH. GERMAN. Back in MY day, we didn't HAVE German. We had ROCKS! </ignorance>

I help'd! Well, theyretically, if when a unit was shot at, it switched into setbehaviour "combat", then it could be done. If he wanted to detect that a unit was prone because it was being fired on, or something blew up, or there was shooting going on nearby, he could use 'knowsabout'.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Die Alive @ Mar. 31 2003,19:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">lol Here's a thumbs up to you those anti war protestors. -=Die Alive=-<span id='postcolor'> You're telling the Anti-War protesters that you're ready for take-off?

From the wording of his question, I assume he wants something that checks to see if a unit is prone. I dunno how to do it as a script, but as triggers, I think it would look something like Condition: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">unitname setpos "down"<span id='postcolor'> On Activation: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">unitnameprone = true<span id='postcolor'> Then have whatever you want to base the unit being prone on to </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">unitnameprone = true<span id='postcolor'>

All the sentires, and each member of the command squad (the same command squad I asked for help on getting to the evac point with the chopper) are individuals. I actually didn't try putting a "move" WP right on top of them, I only tried "hold" and "sentry". I haven't even gotten to placing the 'alarm' trigger yet; that got held up by the VC boat antics. Though, I made a version where the VC start in the woods on the American side of the river. Staged a few attacks, and it looks like I'll have to up the number of VC, and set some random American patrols in the woods to slow their advance. As it is now, the VC come in from the sides, and an NVA squad hits from the rear. The NVA do some damage with an RPG, but get hosed, and the Americans easily mop up the poor VCs. I'll have to up their skill and rank a bit, it seems. I'll keep playing with it; though from how it looks now, the sheer amount of scripting and layered and interlocking triggers is going to make this a slow mission to complete. Thanks, though; at least you guys have given me a place to start from.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ Mar. 31 2003,04:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There are a few extremists out there of course, I was trying to find a pic of a protesters poster that said "I support our troops shooting their officers". Â I'd like to have a few words with the person holding that sign. <span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The anti-war site Indybay.org features this photo of anti-war protesters in San Francisco on March 13, 2003.<span id='postcolor'>

Wow, cool. I forgot about that. I need to test it, but I'm fairly certain that will work! Thanks, man! Well, that's one down...

That's what hurt Battleifield 1942 for me. Yes, the vehicles are balanced, but the effect is almost the opposite of what I think Leone intended. A light tank is a light tank, a fighter is a fighter.. there are some expections, but everything is balanced too well. I really agree with Sigma-6 on this. If we can get the realism down, then you'll have to use in game factors (numbers, positioning, ambushes, logistics) to balance encounters, not just 'I have 6 tanks, and you have 6 tanks, and they're basically the same, so let's FIGHT!'

F - (101?) Wild Weasel, aslo for Vietnam hijinks. I've noticed it's very, very difficult to do Air-to-Air engagements in OpFlash... is this just a 1.46 thing they fixed in newer versions? Basically, the speed of the aircraft (F-14s, F-16s, Fulcrums) and the weak tracking ability of air to ari missiles makes it very difficult. Of course, maybe it's the AI, since I basically only play single player...