Sniperwolf572

Same, mentioned it earlier in the thread:

Indeed.

Having to "ready your weapon" to change from the default cargo state would actually be preferable in my opinion. Imagine the cargo spaces that have the ability to shoot out of the vehicle always being in the "ready" state aiming their weapon. If they're "ready" to shoot at all times, it's going to be impossible to make relaxed, unalerted units in convoys, LB transports, flatbed passengers, etc.

Looks like arma3server.exe might not be up to date with the helicopter changes. Helicopters don't seem to be present when you start a mission. I placed an empty helo and an empty plane in the editor next to each other and launched the mission on the dedi. Only plane was visible. Placing a helo in one of BI Zeus scenarios results in the client crashing. Then i proceeded to launch the dedi with "arma3.exe -server" and all was fine there, both units visible, Zeus not crashing, etc.

I love the fact that gear is now manually controlled in all helicopters across all flight models. Would it be possible to enable taxiing/parking brake for the non-advanced flight model?

He didn't. The moment the loud sound and instacrash-teleport to seafloor happens, that's the bug that can happen to you by just turning on the engine on the ground. Happened to me by just turning on the engine of the Kajman. Scared me shitless. Then I restarted and it didn't do that. It's obvious that he's a kilometer up in the air over ground and then in the next millisecond he's somewhere in the water (probably at [0,0,0]) with an error on his screen.

Add the game to your Steam wishlist. You'll get informed by email if it goes on sale.

That's exactly what's happening right now. You can do all these things. This is one of the reasons why anticheats are necessary. Even MMO's like WoW, which is built so that the server has a lot of authority over you (controls if you can cast spells and abilities) does not control client position/movement but rather receives that information from the client. That's why you could've seen floating dead bodies in cities forming messages. They are not. Units and vehicles in the game have "locality". Even the AI can be either server controlled or client controlled (hence why Headless Client AI is a possibility). If the server influenced your movement, you'd move in the same manner remote units move on your screen, in a stuttery mess. Observe the difference in movement when you fly a helicopter and when you are a passenger in another players helicopter.

It's probably due to the behavior of the zeroing system in Arma combined with suppressors. Zeroing in Arma adjusts the angle of the bullet when it leaves your rifle. Further away you zero your scope, the bigger the angle at which the bullet exits the gun so you can hit exactly where you're aiming. The calculation of that angle is done by the game automatically depending on the range your zeroing is set to and the rifle/bullet parameters. One of these things might be happening: The zeroing algorithm does account for the suppressor multipliers that alter the muzzle velocity, but the bullet simulation itself does not, resulting in the zeroing algorithm calculating a higher angle than necessary. The zeroing algorithm doesn't account for the suppressor multiplier and the suppressor increases the muzzle velocity.

Ropes won't be PhysX ropes, there's an official tweet somewhere stating that. I wonder why they're rolling their own solution for it. Edit: Found it.

You can't compare a old truck carrying unsecured flammable gas cargo and crashing to anything in Arma 3. Maybe the civilian fuel trucks, but I still doubt it.

It's the last slider in the AA & PP tab.

_this select 0 will always be faster due to the fact it's not doing anything else besides getting the 0 indexed element from _this. However BIS_fnc_param has advantages to make your life easier: Default values - Value to be used if a parameter is not defined. Useful for certain defaults and optional parameters. Type checking - Requiring a parameter to be of a certain type(s). In case you need an object but someone passes in an int or a string, an error is shown. Array length checking - If the parameter can take an array, check that it has a required amount of elements. This way, you don't need to write code for these things yourself. More info here and here.

Couple of suggestions for Arsenal: "Clear" button - removes all gear from the unit, useful when you really want to start from scratch without having to go through all the tabs and set them to <Empty>. Current workaround is to make such a loadout and save it so you can load it when you need it. "Presets" button - Ability to load in a loadout based on an already existing editor unit. So you can use it as a starting point if you're already happy with most of the customization on it, but want to change only one or two things. Support for this is already existing as a random existing unit is loaded every time you start the Arsenal. This could be a tree menu like in Zeus that only contains infantry.

You're welcome. Thanks for confirming that it's a bug. :)

Does anyone have any idea why the controls within RscControlsGroup seem to vertically overflow the RscControlsGroup causing it to become scrollable the more you move a control away from the 0,0 point vertically? To explain better, it's as if the vertical offset above the control is also added to the bottom of the control, causing the control group to act as if the occupied space within it is: vertical offset + control height + vertical offset To illustrate: I've reduced the code for my dialog to the bare minimum to reproduce this, and it looks like this: #include "ui_defines.hpp" #include "ui_parents.hpp" class TestDialog { idd = -1; movingEnable = 0; enableSimulation = 1; objects[] = {}; // Background Controls class ControlsBackground {}; // Foreground Controls class Controls { class TEN_Controls : RscControlsGroup { idc = -1; x = 36.5 * GUI_GRID_W + GUI_GRID_X; y = 13 * GUI_GRID_H + GUI_GRID_Y; w = 32 * GUI_GRID_W; h = 22.5 * GUI_GRID_H; class Controls { class TEN_Deploy : RscButton { idc = -1; text = "Prepare"; x = 0.5 * GUI_GRID_W; y = 19.5 * GUI_GRID_H; w = 31 * GUI_GRID_W; h = 2.5 * GUI_GRID_H; }; }; }; }; }; I'm aware that I can prevent scrolling and hide the scrollbars, but this removes the flexibility of the control group to automatically become scrollable if/when it overflows. What am I doing wrong here? Or is it an inherent issue/bug with the ControlsGroup type?

That accurately describes quite a lot of Arma functionality. :p

I interrupt this fatigue and sway circlejerk for a quick plea. On behalf of my sanity, 159 upboats for this issue and countless stillborn features, I come here to lobby for some attention and addressing of this ticket in some way. Thank you, you may now resume your scheduled programming.

Yep, I'm aware of that issue, wrote the FT ticket myself while the game was in Beta and I wasn't aware of the dev-heaven tickets. :( Hopefully they'll deal with it soon enough. Thanks anyway and keep up the good work. :)

I'm amazed by the animation quality, great work Toadie! :) Just a heads up, when HLC Core is loaded. BI's P07 pistol can't be added via script, this makes that handgun non-selectable in the Virtual Arsenal. It seems like an extra, empty "hgun_P07_F" class ends up in the root of the config outside CfgWeapons and that's what's messing it up.

Thanks for this, a centralized keybinding menu in an addon that majority of people have installed one way or another is a great feature. Although I have a question. Would it be possible support for mouse buttons, mouse wheel and keyboard+mouse combos? This is a godsend for my addons (at least until BI graces us with their own solution) which would allow me to implement certain additional features without worrying about taking up a large amount of "Use Action XX" binds. That said, I wouldn't be too happy with removing the option of using mouse keys for the actions in my addons, and one outright doesn't work too well without the mouse wheel. Are there plans to implement this? Is it even possible/practical to implement with the current state of the game?

There are no PhysX or physics on the skirts of the slammer, and there is no way to make a part of a model affected by any kind of physics. On slammer it's just an rotation animation that I believe takes the vehicle bank as the source. This is wrong because the slats aren't affected when any kind of sideways or vertical force is applied to it.

I'd say, right now as it is, Workshop for addons is useless for anything serious and it's not even too user friendly. Launcher isn't at the level it needs to be and the integration with the game isn't at the point where it's distinctly better than community provided solutions. Mission integration on the other hand is pretty great. Subscribe, content available right away in the game, play.

Agreed, my main gripe here was that people were somehow equating Workshop to "easy theft". My point was that everything is a potential theft target, no matter where it is. I fully understand that the key issues with Workshop implementation are: 1.) Rights between Valve and the creator 2.) Takedown and enforcement of author rights in regards to the Workshop Did I miss anything?

While, yes, this will make it much harder to crack open pbo's (BI uses .ebo for the DLC's which seems to be exactly what you're asking for), but in the end the game still requires assets to be loaded and understandable for the engine. For persistent people, things can still be ripped out of the game by force while it's running. For example, that special tool for ripping out models/textures which I'm not going to name and within the BI community, binarization used to a method of "protection" until people made tools to bypass that. That method is called obfuscation, and in a very basic way it can look like this. While yes, it makes it harder, it does not necessarily make it impossible. After all, you're still writing code that needs to work. :) Unfortunately, security of things like this is sadly a difficult topic with very little bulletproof solutions. As long as the games run on computers you don't trust, there's not much else to be done besides making it take more effort and time, which certain people will not be willing to commit.