suchey

you can get the object that triggered a trigger by doing this: trigman=list <triggername> select 0 trigman would then be assigned as the player that triggered <triggername>

think hes referring to setting this... bridgeDestroyed = false; ..somewhere at the beginning of the mission.

excellent...I look forward to seeing what you come up with...I am also working on this issue and will post anything solution that I might come up with. Thanks!

your probably right placebo...Im sure that even the slightest mention of BIS being involved would bring about quite a few of the more 'challenged' players requesting technical support, etc for it from BIS

you may also wish to use a program similar to this: http://winsoft.net.au/~stephen/serverdoc/ that will enable the server to restart on its own in the event of a crash or when the server is restarted.

respawning vehicles kills the feel of the game in my oppinion. Everyone wants vehicles, but they also want the freedom to be able to run to the side of a hill and blast away carelessly until they are destroyed without having to worry about how the game is going to progres without that heavy armor. In my oppinion, respawning vehicles does a good deal to destroy the atmosphere of the game. It caters to the run-and gun style of play and lowers the need to use tactics and budget your equipment carefully. As mentioned above, it propogates the use of vehicles in the game in a fashion which is more suitable to quake and other run and gun type games. Of course this all only my oppinion, Im sure there are plenty of people that prefer vehicle respawn...but for me, the adrenaline rush of running back to a repair truck under heavy fire in the hope that you can salvage your heavy armor before it gets toasted or the satisfaction of destroying the enemies attack chopper knowing that it will not be in the air agian in 5 minutes is part of the fun of OFP.

dedicated server memory leak is back...memory is not reclaimed when server empties and just keeps climbing until there is a crash. Should we still send the same server debug files to bis and if so what email address do we use?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Suma @ July 18 2002,22:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Here is the answer on behalf of BIS: NO, we do not have the time/resources to pull it off. If you want Codemasters to answer, I think you have to send them an e-mail with this question, as I doubt they are reading this forum regulary. I see that doing this would be beneficial for OFP multiplayer and if serveral major server admins would be able to agree on some standard addon pack, it would be really nice for users.<span id='postcolor'> If BIS is not available to actually do the leg work on this idea, perhaps they could give loan their 'stamp of approval'. One of the major issues with creating this pack is wide spread approval and availability. Should this idea ever become implimented I think having the 'BIS stamp of approval' would be a HUGE help in wide acceptability of the pack. Adding the pack to the downloads section of the official site (perhpas labeling it unofficial add on pack#1, etc), for example, would ensure that all players would be able to access the pack readily while touting the 'approved by BIS' would help to ensure that players finding it on other fan sites would be more apt to accept it as a 'standard'. I dont know the legal ramifications of this, but BIS would 'endorsing' rather than creating the pack themselves.

hmmm...sounds like the trigger is being executed without activation. What are the perameters you are using for your trigger?

Does anyone have a solution for using camcreate of an object in multiplay and ensuring that the object is properly created across all clients...I am currently having an issue with the camcreate working sporadically on the client side...for example...some players report the object as being properly created while others do not. Thanks in advance for any help on this subject.

I read in a different post that if you set the unit to NOT be 'in formation' that the turrets will not do that...but I havent tested it myself and Im not sure if this will help or not...

ok...another question...everything works except that other players cant see the created weapon on the ground...if I use the script in a multiplayer mission, only I can see the weapon laying on the ground...anyone have any insight into this problem?

OK...heres what I found so far...it seems that if you use some varieties of handgun mags that they create an emtpy model of the gun itself (havent tested this completely yet)...using other types of ammo will create on of the 'packs' as mentioned above. For direct/exact placement of the weapon on the ground, you can use the setpos command AFTER first placing and filling the WeaponFiller item...EXACT placement of the item does not work using the coordinates durring creation of the weapon/mag on the ground. For example...if you use: grnd = "WeaponHolder" createVehicle getpos player grnd addMagazineCargo ["M16",5] an equipment pack will spawn but it will not be at the exact location of the player...however...if you immediately follow the above commands with this: grnd setpos getpos player the equipment pack will appear directly at the players feet. Hope you find this useful! Thanks to all the folks that provided info on this thread so far.

In resistance when you drop a single pistol clip it shows a model of a 'pack' of some sort. However, when you try to drop a magazine using the method described above it will simply drop an empty(no ammo) instance of the actual gun model. Is there a way to get the packs to show up using the method above or another?

yes....or you could specify co-ordinates there as well. However, it seems that so far the dropped weapon model is not an exact location in relation to the co-ordinates...this is to say that it will not appear in the exact location that you place the 'weaponholder'. Perhaps Im doing something wrong, but it always seems to appear to the left or to the right of the spot which the holder is placed.

you will need to set the variable first (posibly by a trigger using something like a1=true the 'false' part of your script could read something like this: ?(a1 != true):goto "Here" the != means 'not equal' so if a1 was equal to anything other than true

Thanks...I got it working as well...it seems the weapon was getting partially burried by the new bumpy terrain...I moved to flat ground and it worked fine.

I tried the method mentioned above, but I must be doing something wrong...I am using the following lines: _grnd = "SecondaryWeaponHolder" createVehicle [_xposm, _yposm, 0] _grnd addWeaponCargo ["LAWLauncher", 1] _xposm and _yposm are both defined earlier in my script. What am I doing wrong here. Thanks in advance for any help!

In resistance, when a crate is spilled little "pack" type models are dispersed onto the ground...is there a way to create these objects in a mission??? Thanks in advance for any help.

there is a program named 'oggdrop' its super easy to use and free...I cant quite remember where I got it but Im sure a search in google would turn it up quickly. ALl you hav to do with 'oggdrop' is open it, drag your wav file over the top of it, and it makes an ogg version of your sound. Hope this helps

he didnt go wrong...that snippet looks correct...it must be in a different area of the code that is affecting the crate in some manner...

agreed...the load times are already a bit long...now with the introduced need for missions to be downloaded every time they are played the load times are even longer...this makes the dial up users an even bigger liability on servers than they already are. I thought Kegetys idea was good. On the other hand...I really had no issues with the old way. In most cases it is desirable for the mission to be overwritten. This ensured that you always had the most recent version of a mission or at least the version that your favorite server was running. Overall I think its easier for a single user to download a mission from somewhere that they may have overwritten than it is to expect a majority of players to hunt down ALL of the missions used on a server. If a mission desiger loses work due to a mission overwrite then thats just poor planning on the mission designers part. Its seems like putting the cart before the horse to enforce constant downloading on a majority of users and extending load times across all online servers for the lack of common sense or proper planning on the part of a mission designer. Just my 2 cents.

russin...Ill be sure to ask Mal next time I see him...so far I have just left the config as it was in 1.49 and it seems to be working ok. I do, however, wonder if there are any additional parameters that could be utilized or possibly old ones which arent needed for sockets. Regarding the cheat thing...dont believe what you hear. We have run into a couple of people in the past using the ammo thing, but thats about it...there are always going to be people that have to justify their own lack of ability by accusations. Dont listen to it. Let people talk...its just more fun when you wipe the floor with them that way. Hope to see ya on the server soon!

...something else I forgot to mention...the ammo crate problem...happens frequently...when someone drops inventory into an overstuffed ammo crate, or an ammo crate is destryed, the contents spill out onto the ground in the form of a 'pack-like' model (looks like an alice pack or something)...however, there are usually a whole lot of these...so when they appear on the ground, they up the object count of the mission to a HUGE degree...for example, playing a mission which usually runs at a decent fps (45) on our server last night and something happened which caused multiple crates to 'spill'...after that the server ran at 9fps and was unplayable for all of us in the game. I understand that this has alot to do with the mission design and that mission editors should be careful not to overstuff crates, however, there is really no way of controlling what a player drops into that crate. So it would theoretically be possible to reproduce this error on ALOT of missions by trying to load up vehicles, crates, etc etc with ammo/weapons. Once the vehicle or crate 'spills' the object count increases ALOT and the processor usage of the server goes to hell. As much as I like the idea of not having 'bottomless' crates, I like the idea of being able to play a multiplay-mission at a reasonable fps on the server more. Perhaps there is some sort of workaround which can be added, but aside from making extra weapons simply vanish, I can think of no good way to accomidate this. The only thing I can think of is if BIS added a new model to represent 'spilled' equipment such as a single model of a pile of rifles/equipment/packs, or something which would hold the values of the spilled equipment. The multiple pack models that are being used now have a tendancy to kill game play on mission when they 'spill'.

We have been running OFP: Resistance for about a week now...this is a list of problems we have seen so far. -Memory leak again? It seems as though the memory leak may be back somwhat as it was in some earlier versions. The server does not seem to release memory sometimes. After the server has been full and then empties out, the memory usage remains at over 275meg rather than decreasing to lower ammounts as it did in past versions. -Kicking players. We have run into this on a few occasions...when a player is kicked from the server, they sometimes remain attached to chat somehow. Heres how it goes down. A player is kicked from the server...it ususally takes quite a bit for the #kick command to work...after about 30-40 seconds, the <player has been kicked> message appears and the player appears to be gone from the server, however, the player is still able to talk to the server via the chat function...evidently, it still appears to them as if they are connected. They are able to send chat messages to the server, but they cannot see text messages from the server other than their own. This usually seems to happen when a player is reporting a ZERO ping before being kicked off. -Server reported as full when its not. This has only happened once. The server is set for a max of 14 players. Game reported our server as having 14 of 14 players when trying to connect directly using the IP address even when only 11 players were connected. The in-game browser correctly reported the number of players as 11, but would still not allow anyone to connect and sent back a server full message when someone attempted to join. -Locking players acts weird sometimes. This has happened a couple of times. As an admin, when I try to drag a players name into a spot it then locks that player down, but I am unable to select any other player after than point. When I try to click on another name and drag them into a spot it moves the first player I selected. Even after the use of a #reassign command I am stuck moving the smae player around and am unable to select another...even myself. Just a few items I have noticed so far. Any other servers, or multiplayer people noticed anything else I missed? Thanks in advance!