shadow

Tom Clancy is my only favourite author. All the books I have read have been anything but dull. Rest in peace, Tom.

The updated addon config you sent me solved the issue, Massi. Thanks ;)

This is reproducable by taking a new blank mission, add two units (1 player & 1 playable) and export as mpmission. So deffo a addon config issue. I'm not good with addon configs so I can only guess. Maybe missing addon dependencies defines in the addon?

Unfortunately, this addon doesnt work on dedicated servers. 2013/09/15, 13:29:09 Warning Message: You cannot play/edit this mission; it is dependent on downloadable content that has been deleted. mas_weapons_m4 2013/09/15, 13:29:09 Warning Message: You cannot play/edit this mission; it is dependent on downloadable content that has been deleted. mas_weapons_pack This happens when adding a Delta Ghost (Recon) Teamleader(L). Have not tried with any other units. Weapons Pack work fine on dedi server.

Can you post a sample? I'm also unable to get this script to work with any independent group. // OA PMC faction (broken) if (_faction == "PMC_BAF") then { _unit setVariable ["infantry", ["PMC_VIP_Bodyguard","PMC_Field_Security_Patrol","PMC_Field_Security_Team","PMC_Security_Detail","PMC_Security_Specialists","PMC_Field_Support_Team","PMC_Team_Sword"], true]; _unit setVariable ["vehicle", ["PMC_Patrol"], true]; _unit setVariable ["lightarmor", ["PMC_Tactical_Patrol"], true]; _unit setVariable ["armor", ["PMC_Armored_Patrol"], true]; _unit setVariable ["air", [], true]; }; // OA BAF faction (broken) if (_faction == "BIS_BAF_MTP") then { _unit setVariable ["infantry", ["BAF_Fireteam_MTP"], true]; _unit setVariable ["vehicle", ["BAF_MSection","BAF_MTeam","BAF_MPatrol"], true]; _unit setVariable ["lightarmor", ["BAF_MechAT","BAF_MechSec"], true]; _unit setVariable ["armor", ["BAF_WPlatoon"], true]; _unit setVariable ["air", [], true]; }; // A2 GUE faction (broken) if (_faction == "GUE") then { _unit setVariable ["infantry", ["GUE_InfSquad","GUE_InfSquad_Assault","GUE_InfSquad_Weapons","GUE_InfTeam_1","GUE_InfTeam_2","GUE_InfTeam_AT","GUE_GrpInf_TeamAA","GUE_GrpInf_TeamSniper","GUE_MilitiaSquad"], true]; _unit setVariable ["vehicle", ["GUE_MotInfSection","GUE_MotInfSquad"], true]; _unit setVariable ["lightarmor", ["GUE_MechInfSection","GUE_MechInfSquad"], true]; _unit setVariable ["armor", ["GUE_TankSection"], true]; _unit setVariable ["air", [], true]; }; // OA Takistani Locals faction (broken) if (_faction == "BIS_TK_GUE") then { _unit setVariable ["infantry", ["TK_GUE_Group", "TK_GUE_GroupWeapons", "TK_GUE_Patrol", "TK_GUE_ATTeam", "TK_GUE_AATeam"], true]; _unit setVariable ["vehicle", [], true]; _unit setVariable ["lightarmor", ["TK_GUE_Technicals", "TK_GUE_MotorizedGroup", "TK_GUE_MotorizedPatrol", "TK_GUE_MechanizedPatrol", "TK_GUE_MechanizedGroup"], true]; _unit setVariable ["armor", ["TK_GUE_T55Section", "TK_GUE_T34Platoon"], true]; _unit setVariable ["air", [], true]; }; // A2 UNO faction (broken) if (_faction == "BIS_UN") then { _unit setVariable ["infantry", ["UN_Patrol"], true]; _unit setVariable ["vehicle", ["UN_MotorizedPatrol"], true]; _unit setVariable ["lightarmor", ["UN_MechanizedPatrolBMP2","UN_MechanizedPatrolM113"], true]; _unit setVariable ["armor", [], true]; _unit setVariable ["air", [], true]; };

Thanks, just what I needed to know. I read through the entire manual but I could not see anything relating to tasks at all. I think some info giving the user more control over task generating would be good. I.e. "how limit amount of tasks", "how to generate new tasks on the fly", "how to specify type of tasks to be generated". One last question: are the start-up text (sidechat) from all the modules or is there a single switch to turn it off?

I've disabled rmm_tasks so no more convoy tasks. How do I disable the capture base tasks? I just want to try out MSO but with my own missions.

So far 91 confirmed killed in both areas. 84 people at Utøya and 7 at the PM's office. :( The Norwegian justice system needs revising. Its not designed for this. :mad:

I updated the good ol' squad.xml to support individual avatars on a website. The layout is also changed so its more a single column page with the members under the squad section instead of side by side. The theme can be edited in the stylesheet. The avatars are defined within <avatar></avatar> in squad.xml for each member. Download here

Its always been like that. If you think this file will give your members individual squadlogos you'll be disappointed. This file gives you individual avatars for displaying on a web site. It doesnt change anything for whats displayed in-game.

I have retail A2/OA , Sprocket BAF, Steam A2, Steam OA and Steam BAF installed. Steam PMC automatically installed to retail A2/OA when I clicked "play" in Steam PMC, then launched the retail A2/OA. So yes, Steam PMC should work fine with retail OA.

That would be the De Lisle

Thats correct. Role of thumb is for every inch you add 100 f/ps. But .45 is not commonly used in SMGs and rifles. I can only think of UMP45, UMC45 and the old Thompson. I'm sure there are more but still the .45ACP is mostly used in handguns only. Just to show that a supressed .45 still has some kick here's my MK23 w/B&T Impulse II-A supressor and lasersight from Laserdevices. (Sorry if speed is slow). The clip was recorded using a Samsung S8000 Jet.

The heavier the bullet the more propellant is needed to push it to achieve equal velocity. That is why a heavier bullet is used in subsonic ammo for recoil-operated weapons. In effect the recoil is close to identical in the two examples I posted earlier. I tried it with a USP9SD I borrowed. Personally I prefer .45 with a supressor (same ammo regardless if I'm using a supressor or not). 230gr, 920f/ps with the 6" barrel of the MK23.

Not really. Normally subsonic loads uses a heavier bullet. Normally you would use a 147gr (grain) bullet for subsonic 9x19 and use 115-124gr bullets for supersonic loads. This is generally not an issue with .45ACP or larger. Force=(weight*velocity)/1000 Lets compare a 147gr subsonic bullet travelling at 950f/ps to a 115gr supersonic bullet travelling at 1200 f/ps (typical result with a 5" handgun). (147*950)/1000= 139.65 (115*1200)/1000= 138 In this scenario the subsonic load is travelling with a stronger force.

I'm running Win7 x64 and ArmA2/OA off the same OCZ Vertex 2 100GB drive. The old storage solution was 4*250GB Sata2 drives in RAID-5 on a Adaptec 2420SA controller. Now I no longer see texture loading and no intermittent pauses during gameplay. Framerate is more stable when moving very fast (choppers/planes) because of this but it wont be higher without replacing CPU/GPU. I bought the SSD primarily for the OS, not a game. Win7 benefits lots from running off a SSD, ArmA2 benefits quite a bit but I wouldnt buy a SSD for the game alone.

How about hiding duplicate vehicles too? AH-64D (US) & (USMC) M1A2 TUSK (US) & (USMC) etc In most cases they are identical but in some the A2 units do not support new features such as FLIR. Better hide the old ones.

I think its important to point out that we are currently not using any addon-packs for ArmA2 (yet). A training mission is allmost complete and we have begun churning out new missions (summer holidays=unforseen delays).

Rename arma2.exe to arma.exe untill Nvidia properly supports Arma2 in a driver-update. However, this can create unforseen memory-related crashes and is unsupported by BIS.

I see my specs are similar to several others here, yet I'm not seeing this degraded performance (as long as I run the game as arma.exe). Specs: i7 920 (HT on), Asus P6T WS PRO, 6GB RAM, GTX295 (v186.18 WHQL), Vista x64. Settings: Resolution and fillrate opt.: 1680x1050 Texture det.: high Video mem.: very high AF.: very high AA.: disabled Terrain det.: normal Objects det.: very high Shadow det.: normal Post effects.: high Visibility: 3400 FPS on the intro (carrier): 80-115 (some times down to 65). General framerate during "Into the storm": 30-45. I'd say this is very playable. Have you checked that all drivers (video-drivers in particular) are updated? In Vista, have you disabled the sidepanel?

Old thread is too long to search in. Old thread (for reference)

As long as Arma doesnt use more RAM than what you currently have in XP x86 there is no benefit in switching to a x64 OS. Keep in mind a x64 OS need more RAM to perform the same operations as a x86 OS. 3GB RAM in a x86 OS gets you further than 4GB in x64. If you're going x64 go with more than 4GB RAM. I dont believe I've seen Arma allocate more than 1.2GB RAM so dont go x64 because of Arma alone. You'll be disappointed if you expect a magical performance increase. GTA4 on the other hand has no problem eating 4.5GB of RAM plus a gig of VRAM. So I guess the future is x64 simply because of RAM requirements. As for comparing Vista to Win7, there is hardly a difference between the two regarding gaming. I used to think Vista was bad for me too... untill I started using it on a new machine (i7-920, 6GB RAM, GTX295). I wouldnt use XP x64 today simply because driver-support for Vista x64 has surpassed XP x64.

The bar scales to 200 meters but should scale to 60 meters because thats the same as 200 feet which is how it works in real Apaches.

Is the US one in meters? I just wasnt sure since we choose to use feet and inches instead of the much simpler metric system. No, they use feet. That bar tops at 200 feet in the real Apache. In this addon the bar tops at 200 meters. I'm guessing it was simply an oversight. 200 feet equals roughly 60 meters.

Very nice addon. I see alot of potential in this Minor flaw about the IHADSS. The altimeter bar on the right should go from 0 to 60 meters (200ft), not 0 to 200 meters. The purpose is to give the pilot a quick impression of his altitude during low-level flight. Any chance we get to set the monocle colour all the way down to 0%?