RangerX3X

Armaholic mirror: - Stone Bell Version: 1.2 Final Required Addons: None Mission Description: American forces have advanced up the coast and taken the town of Berezino and appear to be holding for the evening. Russian and Resistance forces are poised to strike back and remove the Americans from Berezino before they have an opportunity to entrench their position. Features: The player is part of a two platoon assault: One Resistance platoon and one Russian platoon, each supported by a platoon of armor (T72's & T90's) and organic mortar units. All three sides have their own mortar units which will engage known targets within the operations area (thanks to Mr. Murray for his arty script for Arma 1 which I modified to accomplish this). ChangeLog: Version 1.0 Working intro Working outro Working briefing Version 1.1 Added task complete to end trigger Modified the intro to show Russian presence (fadesound bug in Arma 2 not yet resolved) Completely rewrote briefing using the A2B Editor Added intel pic Modified retreat waypoints to "careless" Reduced retreat and seized triggers from 1000M to 500M Enlarged player occupy trigger from 100M to 500M Removed eject scrript from mission folder as it was not used in the mission Changed the weather to poor/rain conditions to help the AI along Added AH1Z support tied to condition WSQD1 Added two AA soldiers to each platoon replacing two snipers to deal with A10 threat Version 1.2 Added initIntro.sqf to reduce chances of AI speaking to each other in the intro (thanks h- @ ofpec.com) Adjust intro time stamp to 17:30 to logically coincide with the intelligence pic taken at 18:05 and the mission starting point of 18:35 Added initOutro.sqf Completed simple outro sequence

Has anyone noticed that when using -showScriptErrors in your shortcut with the beta patch that you receive errors that you didn't get at all under 1.05.62017 for stuff that works and has worked for ages?

I hope they fix this because it blows chunks not being able to run a truly dynamic mission. We should be able to slap some groups on the map link them up with the modules and give the player/commander complete freedom on how to move his units. The use of waypoints in the editor completely smash the dynamic control potential of the module.

The debriefing sequence shows the objectives in reverse order of the briefing. This is simply silly and never was a problem in OFP or Arma I. Preferably I would have BI scrap this entire new briefing system and go back to what had worked for over eight years across two games and three expansion packs and countless patches. What was seriously wrong with Objective 1 being obj1??? Now we have Objective 1 being "tskObj0" or what-not. It is a simple request - have the debriefing objectives show in the exact same order as the briefing objectives (you had no problem doing that for the past eight years).:mad:

Don't feel bad dude, it doesn't work for me either and I have followed the Wiki exactly and it never works. When you approach the UAV terminal, there is no action available. And the icon in the Wiki page are wrong - (1) is not a blue flag in the editor, it is the UAV module icon. Doesn't work - I'd like someone who claims it does post a link to a simple mission that does it by the Wiki instructions.

I want the objectives to be in the following order: 1 Destroy Ammo Truck 2 Destroy Fuel Truck Fine & Dandy until the debriefing screen when they are listed in the reverse order; Fuel Truck then Ammo Truck. If I create them in reverse order they appear in the debriefing correctly as Ammo Truck then Fuel Truck, but during the mission in the task screen they appear as Fuel Truck then Ammo Truck. I hate to ask, but is this a technical limitation of Arma 2 that it cannot properly sequence tasks among several screens??? This was never a problem in Arma I. Here is the OFPEC link discussing it which contains more details. Well it turns out this is most likely a bug in Arma 2. Sucks because the briefing system was not broke and didn't need "fixed". The original briefing system worked fine for over 8 years across two games, three expansion packs and countless patches. Ain't broke, don't fix it.

Doesn't change the fact that there is a bug in the sample mission for para which is the only thing I am referring to.

Sorry if this was posted earlier (20 + pages in this thread), however when trying to run the sample para mission the game crashes due to an out of memory issue. For some reason the plane in the mission editor shows as the BE when you mouse over the plane icon, but if you double-click on it the "plane" is actually a Ka-50 helicopter unit. Change it to the Be and the mission plays fine.

It won't help, it might remove artifacts for a while but it will lock up. Only nvidia could fix the problem, but they aren't fixing anything. Hmm... I don't think we've determined with absolute proof that this is a Nvidia issue. I and some others only have this lock up with ArmA and no other game. Yes, it is in arma only, I had it in ArmA only and everyone having nvidia card has it in arma only. nVidia doesn't care about some no-name game like ArmA, so it is like this. Everoyne I know having this lockup in arma only, have gotten rid of the problem when changing to a radeon, including myself. It is a definite problem in nvidia drivers. It is an ArmA 1.14 problem. Period. "In terms of stability, performance and gameplay, ARMA is now a distinctly superior game to the initial release. " (Marek Spanel, Bohemia Interactive). Hogwash. I can run the same mission 10 times in 1.08 with NO freezes or crashes. In 1.14 that mission (as well as others that I use binocs or scopes alot) causes the game to freeze or crash after a period of time 4 times or more out of 10. Blame nvidia all you want. Won't do a damn bit of good because they are not going to fix something that is not their problem. Face it: BI is done with ArmA I and we just have to eat it. Blame bis all you want. The problem lies in nvidia drivers. Or how would you explain that ArmA no more crashes, not even a single crash, with HD48xx cards, when it did crash like you mentioned with nvidia cards? Even when the other hardware is exactly same, but when the GPU is changed to an AMD one, the problem just disappears. If the problem is because of bis, how the hell does it work 100% stable with ati cards, but not nvidia? HOW? Simple - nvidia drivers are buggy as hell. Quite obvious you are an ATI Fan Boy and nothing more. 100% stable with ATI cards? LMFAO you dolt. Same nvidia driver same mission same rig: 1.08=No crashes. 1.14=Crash-O-Matic. Go away you ATI troll.

I feel your pain. Trying to work around anticipated AI pathing in the mission editor really weighs this game down like an anchor. Funny how AI pathing - especially convoys - has been horrible since OFP hit the streets. Though try as they may, the developers have never resolved this. ArmA/OFP could be much more rich and rewarding than it is if they would find the issue and finally fix it.

It won't help, it might remove artifacts for a while but it will lock up. Only nvidia could fix the problem, but they aren't fixing anything. Hmm... I don't think we've determined with absolute proof that this is a Nvidia issue. I and some others only have this lock up with ArmA and no other game. Yes, it is in arma only, I had it in ArmA only and everyone having nvidia card has it in arma only. nVidia doesn't care about some no-name game like ArmA, so it is like this. Everoyne I know having this lockup in arma only, have gotten rid of the problem when changing to a radeon, including myself. It is a definite problem in nvidia drivers. It is an ArmA 1.14 problem. Period. "In terms of stability, performance and gameplay, ARMA is now a distinctly superior game to the initial release. " (Marek Spanel, Bohemia Interactive). Hogwash. I can run the same mission 10 times in 1.08 with NO freezes or crashes. In 1.14 that mission (as well as others that I use binocs or scopes alot) causes the game to freeze or crash after a period of time 4 times or more out of 10. Blame nvidia all you want. Won't do a damn bit of good because they are not going to fix something that is not their problem. Face it: BI is done with ArmA I and we just have to eat it.

1.08 and all other games (including Crysis) not a single problem on default settings. 1.14 the games freezes and crashes. Sure, it is the video card. Dope.

Sorry mate - If I can play the game just fine at 1.08 and no crashes and patch to 1.14 and crash with the same graphics settins why should I have to downgrade my setting to compensate for a problematic patch released by a developer? If Arma2 is truly the clone it is looking to be, I refuse to by it if it means I have to invest in another video card just to run the games "default" settings without crashing. It is the new patch, not peoples machines.

I have XP SP3 with a 8800 GTS and the same thing happens to me only after patching to 1.14. I never had this issue with 1.08 or any of the beta patches, just 1.14. It happens whenever you are viewing something through either binos, sniper scope or Javelin scope. Frustrating as hell because the game runs fine with 1.08. All drivers are up to date on my system.

Is a developer to follow this template: The Ten Commandments of Gaming All come with the caveat "under no circumstance"; 1) Thou shall not require the CD/DVD to be in the drive to play the game. 2) Thou shall not employ copy protection. 3) Thou shall not embed in-game advertising. 4) Thou shall not use the community to beta test your product at $49.99. 5) Thou shall not release any product missing specific marketing claims. 6) Thou shall not require the latest video card and whack drivers to run graphics that look no better than HL1. 7) Thou shall not port. 8) Thou shall not release any SP mission that does not end properly. 9) Thou shall not release any MP mode that does not end properly. 10) Thou shall not be in need of a day of release patch. Is this cost prohibitive for a game market that may tolerate a $59.99 price tag for a PC game CE hyped to the max? Or would such development costs lead to a price point on street date well in excess of $100.00? Would you buy it at that price?

This is not an ArmA bash thread; it is posted in the Off Topic section as it relates in a generic fashion to any game/any delveloper/any publisher. I pick the correct forums to bash ArmA specifically in.

I don't go onto ArmA MP hardly ever and watching just a few of those pretty much writes this game off for me other than SP mission creation. BIS cultivated their flagship OFP through many patches and much support. I understand they are working on 1.9, but for me a 1.9 ArmA will never compare to a 1.96 OFP.

I have a love/hate relationship with ArmA. I love the graphics compared to OFP as they are a great improvement, but the taxing demand that they place on system hardware seems over the top and largely un-optimized. I love the fact that they kept the fully integrated in-game mission editor intact; this alone has kept me playing OFP to this day (having never completed any of the three campaigns…lol). What I hate about ArmA: 1.) AI just stands and looks at the enemy in front of them in clear view if not within their detection range (which is ridiculously short). 2.) Enemy AI that is ungrouped does not react to sounds/engagement that any sane loon would take cover for. 3.) Enemy AI can see through hills and terrain if you are within the ridiculously short detection range as mentioned above and engage you. This makes tactical use of terrain features completely pointless. 4.) Rocks on the big island that are the size of a football and can complete stop an M1 MBT in its tracks – literally. Designing a tank mission in the desert area of the map might as well be likely trying to script a route through a minefield. 5.) BI really whored the community with vehicle modeling. At least in OFP they modeled the interior of certain vehicle positions such as the gunner slot. They didn’t even make the effort this go around. 6.) Having just tried the Finnish Defense Forces sound mod for ArmA, I just realized how freaking horrible the overall sounds of the game were (especially the insane sound of armored vehicles starting and moving). Living in the US I have a hard time selling ArmA and OFP to squad mates. It should be the be-all end-all combat combined arms simulator. While I understand certain concessions must be made, the overall product is a disappointment. I am not buying into Queens Gambit, and I am not getting ArmA II. In fact, I am probably going back to OFP as it is the Devil I Know. Boo BIS for this crud.

I can add custom kits to units via the initialization field with no issue using a script in the mission folder and be able to play the kit in the editor. If I export it to SP missions, the kit is there. But if I add either a briefing file or a description extension file (regardless if weapon selection is a feature of that file), it overrides the unit initialization field script and starts the unit with the default kit for that soldier type. Sample script: ; **************************************************************** ; Custom unit script for Armed Assault ; Created with ArmA Edit - Version 1.1.5000 ; HELP: Run this script from the INITIALIZATION box of the unit. ; CODE: [this] exec "UNIT_479.sqs" ; **************************************************************** ; Get the unit parameter given _unit = _this select 0 ; Strip the units current gear removeAllWeapons _unit ; Add the new gear to the unit _unit addMagazine "30Rnd_556x45_G36" _unit addMagazine "30Rnd_556x45_G36" _unit addMagazine "30Rnd_556x45_G36" _unit addMagazine "30Rnd_556x45_G36" _unit addMagazine "30Rnd_556x45_G36" _unit addWeapon "G36K" _unit selectWeapon "G36K" _unit addMagazine "M136" _unit addWeapon "M136" _unit addMagazine "15Rnd_9x19_M9SD" _unit addMagazine "15Rnd_9x19_M9SD" _unit addMagazine "15Rnd_9x19_M9SD" _unit addMagazine "15Rnd_9x19_M9SD" _unit addMagazine "15Rnd_9x19_M9SD" _unit addWeapon "M9SD" _unit addMagazine "HandGrenadeTimed" _unit addMagazine "HandGrenadeTimed" _unit addMagazine "HandGrenadeTimed" _unit addMagazine "HandGrenadeTimed" _unit addMagazine "HandGrenadeTimed" _unit addWeapon "Binocular" _unit addWeapon "NVGoggles" Exit Using [this] exec "UNIT_479.sqs" in the unit initialization field allows the kit to be used in the editor just fine. But adding just these scripts, either or both, and exporting it to SP mission overrides the weapon script: /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// // Armed Assault Description File // Created with ArmA Edit - Version 1.1.5000 /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// showCompass = 1; showGPS = 1; showWatch = 1; <html> <!---------------------------------------------------------> <!-- Briefing file for Armed Assault           --> <!-- Created with ArmA Edit - Version 1.1.5000      --> <!--                           --> <!-- DO NOT edit this file manually to guarantee it can  --> <!-- be re-opened by the Briefing Wizard. Click the    --> <!-- "Edit Briefing" button on the toolbar to edit.    --> <!---------------------------------------------------------> <body> <!-- [bRIEFING_WIZARD_30] --> <!----------------------------------------------------> <!-- Plans                      --> <!----------------------------------------------------> <p><a name="plan"></a> <!-- [PLAN] --> Test <!-- [END] --> </p><hr> <!----------------------------------------------------> <!-- Notes (in handwriting)             --> <!----------------------------------------------------> <h6><a name="main"></a> <!-- [NOTES] --> <!-- [END] --> </h6><hr> <!----------------------------------------------------> <!-- Objectives                   --> <!----------------------------------------------------> <!----------------------------------------------------> <!-- Debriefing                   --> <!----------------------------------------------------> </body> </html> Any ideas?

This worked: I created an sqs file named Init with the following contents: ; **************************************************************** ; Initialization script for Armed Assault ; This is a special INIT script file that runs before the ; mission briefing is displayed. ; **************************************************************** [Player] exec "Team_Leader.sqs" exit The player starts with the custom kit and it shows as the custom kit in the gear selection before the mission starts.

I am creating a mission where I want a spec op to blow something up to complete an objective using their satchel charges. I also want to create an environment where the player cannot be detected by the AI else the mission fails. I've tried several things, but in the end, it seems that no matter where the enemy is they know I destroyed the target (an empty truck) and the mission fails. I am pretty sure this has something to do with the "satchel charge radar" I've heard about, but I really don't want my spec op taking out the target from a distance with either laser or AT - it completely breaks the immersion of the mission. Any suggestions?

Ummm...does anyone else experience inconsistent results with using getdammage? It works, but not all the time and when it should.

I have two triggers in a mission. One has the condition: getdammage helo2 >= 0.35, and works as expected. The other trigger has the condition: getdammage helo1 >= 0.35 and getdammage helo2 >= 0.35, which does not work as expected. I tried replacing the "and" with "&&" which does not work either. Any suggestions?

Thanks for the reply, but that was not my issue. My issue is that I am a dumbass. The trigger had a timeout of 80 seconds that I completely forgot about. getdammage helo2 >= 0.5 and getdammage helo3 >= 0.5 Works perfectly fine...

Bump - anyone?