roguetrooper

That's the way it used to work. 1800 setovercast 1; formerly changed the weather within 30 minutes to heavily clouded. Really don't know why this has been abolished. If it's a bug it's high time now to fix it.

Why is setovercast still not working? This is really some kind of joke. Instead of tweaking uniform patches and colors, this seems to be more important...

What a bullshit (not your answer, but the way it works). So it is impossible now to offer weather options in the lobby to select the start weather of the map? They should at least implement a new command then setovercastnow This should be really reworked! Any dev around here reading this? For everybody again: an instant weather change (zero time) is needed to be able to select the weather in the lobby (and for intros/cutscenes/outros that are meant to have another weather than the gameplay one minute before/after).

Bandoliers should be backpacks, not vests. So they could be combined with body (armor) vests.

Maybe the belts (rangemaster and scout belts) should be wearable both in the vest and backpack slot. In Arma the accessibility does not play a role (you can grab something out of a backpack on your back as quick as something out the front of a vest or a belt). At least for the look it would be great to be able to combine a scout belt with a body vest.

I know, there are more urgent issues to solve at this point of time. Mods aren't a real alternative (x players owning the game ---> x+1 incompatible game versions out there). The very question/request. It would be great to have some exotic weapons (in terms of the point of time the game is situated). Such as Lee Enfield (could be copied from A2), Kar98 or Mosin Nagant. I.e. non-automatic weapons since more automatic weapons basically just would be existing weapons with another texture.

1. This. 2. This. 3. The point with "doesn't belong to the story" (this and other topics) is nonsense. They don't have to appear in official missions. No mapper needs to implement them in their maps. Nobody is forced to play on maps with such non-story things. Having such items in the vanilla game doesn't affect anybody who does not want to have to do anything with it. I suggested the Lee Enfield since most likely (?) it only has to be copy-and-pasted by BIS. 4. Currently there are only three types of (non-hand)-guns in Arma III: 1 assault rifle, 1 heavy MG and 1 sniper rifle. There ARE some variants, but what is it? Basically just different 3D models or a different texture. What is the difference between a vanilla MX (or however they are called) and a modded M4A1? Basically nothing. Same handling, game experience and field of use. You know what I mean. I don't request cross/bows, laser guns or Napoleonic rifles. But there should be more than three types of vanilla guns in an infantry-focussed AAA simulator. Like Celery said, vanillawise you can hardly produce scenarios that aren't professional army vs. professional army (in terms of weapons).

I have a weapon crate that is script-filled with 30Rnd_65x39_case_mag. In editor mode there is no error message, but in MP and SP there is a confirm-error-message at map startup that this is an unknown class name. What's going on there? (I use latest dev build, no mods.)

Coulum, you are lying down. Try it STANDING. (Btw, have the laser designator and the binoculars/rangefinder the same sway?)

When you have to stand (looking out of a window or over a 'high' obstacle), it is almost impossible to determine the distance of a small target that is several hundred metres away (i.e. focus the aimpoint of the range finder on the target). The sway for binoculars should be drastically reduced or removed at all.

Make a trial with these conditions: * across the whole isle (from outmost NW to SE or NE to SW) * never fly higher than 50m (trigger condition: ((getpos (vehicle player)) select 2) > 50) - activation: player setdamage 1.0) :)

Currently each faction can wear their native uniforms only. Somewhere I read one reason might be the Geneva Conventions. In fact you can create west units fighting for east etc (grouping a civilian with that side and give him the uniform of another). However, it would be good to have a command to allow non-native uniforms for all factions/sides. Such as east allowuniform [west,true];

Will every unit end up with the same skill or will every unit have a different skill when you execute {_x setSkill ["aimingAccuracy", 0.1 + (random 0.9)]} forEach allUnits; ? I wanted to find out by myself by this testing code, but there is an error message "missing ;" _idx = -1; _list = [0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0]; {_idx = _idx+1; _list (select _idx) = (random 1);} forEach _list; hint str _list; So what happens to each element in an forEach-array when you involve randomness? Will every soldier have the same skill?

When I add a west uniform to an east unit by script, the unit remains naked in editor, SP and MP. Civilians (faction, not side) can wear anything. But it would be useless anyway when the effect is only local.

Just found out: adding this setdamage 1; this setdamage 0; this setdamage 1; to the init-line produces an already burnt out vehicle (destroyed, blackened, without any fire).

For some time I can hear the reload sound (single shot sniper rifles) in MP of other players who are several hundred meters away. Is it a bug of patch 1.59 full?

In Arma 2 little objects like Coke tins (editor placed or spawned) were invincible obstacles for the AI, at least for infantry. So I'm not sure if the realistically AI detects a danger or just a "big" obstacle in their way.

enableSentences has do be executed only once (in a trigger or somewhere). This disables both the voices and the written text for the player (I'm 100% sure about that since I use it do dis/enable the player radio as a radio trigger in all my maps). Maybe it only comes into effect half a second after the map has started.

Thanks to everybody. I've been looking for so long how to check (by script, not by trigger) for the existence of an object without generating an error message. Larrow's solution is just perfect. Thank you.

Example: A multiplayer game with three playable soldiers: p1, p2 and p3. p1 is not present (not as a player and not as AI) There is a script with if (player == p1) then { code1 }; if (player == p2) then { code2 }; if (player == p3) then { code3 }; As soon as a non-existing object appears in a script, you have the black error message. Even for if (isNull p1) then { }; Why does a command that is meant to check the existence of an object return an error-message when the object is not existing? So is there a way to avoid error messages caused by non-existing objects?? Edit: There is no error message when you use if (isNil "p1") then { hint "p1 does not exist" }; if !(isNil "p1") then { hint "p1 exists" }; The problem is that it still returns "existing" when the objects gets deleted (object, vehicle or non-playable unit) :-/

The mortar sound (to be found in trigger sounds - played at the trigger's location) is missing. Strange, that they did not take over that "important" sound from A2 into IF, whereas birds and that useless stuff is all there. Hopefully the next patch will add that sound (the whistling while the grenade is still in the air).

No. First the primary ammo (10 mags), then the primary weapon. Order is: primary ammo -> primary weapon -> pistol ammo -> pistol -> unit selectweapon (primaryweapon unit) Lol, I found out, this bug only appears when I add a pistol (with proper ammo).

A trigger with: * condition: (getdammage containername) > 0.5 * activation: containername setdamage 1.0 (getdammage needs double m) Or a smaller value than 0.5 when you want it to be easier destroyed (small charge, handgrenade, rifle bullets).

You can also add a trigger: * repeated * condition: (rating player) < 0 * activation: player addrating (abs(rating player)+1000) Or anything else that constantly keeps (rating player) above 0...

Is the init-line executed by JIP-clients? What, if a soldier starts with less than 100% health (by setdammage, not slider), gets healed during gameplay and then a JIP-client executes the init-line "again"?