st!gar

No, if I make a text-document and save it as "init.sqf", it does not change filetype. It's still a Notepad-document, even though i's named "init.sqf". Am I doing something wrong? :confused:

Well, the game already spawns you with a random skin, so perhaps in the future, a patch could make it possible to spawn randomly with one of several female skins? There could be less chance of spawning the player as female than as male, and so we could still have a semi-realistic much lower number of women in, for example the USMC, than men. This way, women perhaps wouldn't feel so underrepresentated anymore, and at the same time, realism buffs wouldn't have to run around with a 50% female USMC-force, either.

Suh-weet!

Can I use that command to have any soldier fire his weapon at the point of my choosing?

My thoughts exactly. Apparently they didn't when they made OFP: Resistance...

Well, you can already kill female civillians, so I don't see why having female soldiers should be the thing to spark a morality-debate...

You really don't play all that many games, do you? :confused: Sure, I think it's about time for BI to add female soldiers. But just for the record, I would like to add that if you can't possibly feel comfortable playing the game unless the main character is the same gender as yourself, it does say a thing or two about you as well... But, hey. It's a principle. I get it.

Awww, fuck it. That's a huge turn-off right there. :mad_o:

Nope. It won't.

Thanks for the info. :)

...What kind of help?

I was contemplating making a whole new thread about this, but figured it'd make more sense to post my question here. We've seen lots of videos about the AI maneuvering and fighting in villages, cities and such, which is cool, but as far as AI-reports are concerned, it seems comments regarding AI behaviour anywhere else is a little lacking, if you know what I mean... My point is; the AI being good at maneuvering through urban areas is all fine and dandy, but seeing as we have a detailed 225 km2 -map with hills, a coastline and 100km2 of forests, I can't imagine spending all my time running around in people's gardens, to put it that way. So at this point I'm actually the most interested in learning how the AI reacts in natural terrain in general. On this forum, I've heard people say, for example, that when the AI fights in forests, it gets confused pretty easily, what with all the trees and availiable places of cover. I've even heard that the AI won't even use the lean-function when hiding behind a tree. And sure enough, in fabrizioT's video that's practically five minutes of AIs running around in woodland terrain, I've never once seen a soldier moving himself behind a tree trunk and actually lean out from it. Just positioning themselves somewhere behind-and-next to it and laying down or crouching, really... :raisebrow: And what exactly does the AI do if it's attacked in relatively open terrain with more scarce vegetation? --- In short; with all the exposure on the AI's urban behaviour, I'm just a little worried that the AI's combat abilities in other terrain has been given less of a priority than urban AI... :confused:

Aah. By choosing which side the Resistance -faction is friendly to, like in OFP and ArmA 1, I assume? But then what happens if the Resistance side - I assume that's NAPA - is set to be friendly to everyone? :confused:

About the AI issues regarding sppressive fire, have any of you tried using the Suppressive Fire -module in the Editor? If so, what happens then?

Quick question: On the default settings, before the player modifies it, the ACM spawns patrols from all five factions, right? Are those factions all fighting each other, (USMC vs Russia vs NAPA vs CDF vs ChDKZ vs USMC, for example.), or are some of them allied to each other? USMC+CDF and Russia+ChDKZ, for example?

I think that was kind of the point I was going for... Aah...

Wait... you actually create troops in the campaign?! :eek: Like, Command & Conquer-style? If so, that's a little... um... :raisebrow: I mean, I know you can do it in Warfare, but that's a non-canon, standalone Multiplayer-thingy that doesn't try to be realistic in the traditional sense... I can't imagine it fitting very well into campaign mode, seeing as it - as I understood it - tries to take a more down-to-Earth, realistic approach...

Hell, I'm buying both games. :)

Well, I don't really feel like I need lots and lots of control over everything it does. That's kind of the whole point. But the few, incredibly basic things I want to be able to control, I want to be able to do on the spot. Things like which factions and where they spawn. Maybe - maybe at times the density level. But that's all. If I have some very specific ideas and needs lots of control over what's going on, I'd probably not use the ACM in the first place. I just want to be able to dump it into the editor, tinker with the values and press "Preview". Not be dependant on copying an init.sqf into the mission folder every time I want to use it in a mission. That's pretty much where I stand. It's not like I'm in any way opposed to doing it your way, I had just hoped it would be a simpler, more user-friendly way to do it. :) If I hadn't known about this forum, for example, I would be pretty much boned. I can imagine myself randomly trying the ACM in the Editor, realising that it's cool, but also that I don't want every battle to be a batshit insane chaos; spawning absolutely every faction at once in a giant, largely unrealistic six-way mêlée, the way the ACM supposedly works un-edited. So I'd try to modify the GL on the spot, but seeing as I'd have no idea how to do it, I wouldn't ever in practice actually find any use for the ACM. And that would be too bad.

Uh-huh... :raisebrow: But then, if you want to use the actual GL itself rather than having to go through making a whole init.sqf file about it, you must write something else?

Manzilla wrote: But then petteerr wrote: ...So then what Manzilla posted wasn't correct, after all, or...? :confused:

Okay, stupid question: It's the ["USMC"] part of [["USMC"], BIS_ACM] call BIS_ACM_setFactionsFunc that makes US forces spawn, right? So if I want the ACM to make me a battle with the USMC against Russia, I'll type: [["USMC"], BIS_ACM] call BIS_ACM_setFactionsFunc;[["Russia"], BIS_ACM] call BIS_ACM_setFactionsFunc;[/i] ...Or something, right? :raisebrow:

Okay, stupid question: It's the ["USMC"] part of the code that makes the USMC spawn, right? So if I want the ACM to make me a battle with the USMC against Russians, I'll type: [["USMC"], BIS_ACM] call BIS_ACM_setFactionsFunc; ; [["Russia"], BIS_ACM] call BIS_ACM_setFactionsFunc; ...Or something, right?

Warning! Long post ahead. :butbut: My problem exactly. I was really happy when I heard about the ACM, but then I look at DnA's post and get instantly disheartened. :( --- Some guy: -"Hey, DnA, how does the player choose which factions and units are to appear, and where?" DnA: -"Oh, pffft. That's easy. All you have to do, is this:" *Writes down a mile long list of nigh unintelligable gooble-gooble-goo moon language techno gibberish that makes absolutely no sense to anyone not completely into coding, with sentences consisting of words you've never even heard before, with all sorts of commas, brackets and general punctuation in places they seemingly have no buissness being.* "... And then, all you have to do is write this down into the init-field of the Game Logic, although sometimes you are supposed write it into the init-field of the group leader, although sometimes you're not supposed to write it anywhere, but scream it out loud at your monitor while you're playing. If it still doesn't work, just do this: *Writes down another mile-long list of even more technobabble.* "...Then, manually make a file, paste it into the mission folder, add the text I wrote, and start the game, hoping for the best. If that still doesn't work, give up, turn off the computer and sink discretely back into the comfort of a deep alcoholic slumber. Alternatively, go back to playing the first Spyro the Dragon on your little brother's old Playstation 1, preferably while crying. Sure is nice the devs decided to make the Editor more user-friendly this time around, eh? :)" --- Yeah, yeah, alright. Let me just explain that in OFP and ArmA 1, I had a fairly good grasp on how to script commands in the init-fields of the soldiers and vehicles, and have them do stuff. I could, for example, write "This SetBehaviour 'Combat'; this SetCombatMode 'Red'; This SetFormation 'Line'.", and know that when I pressed "Preview", the squad(s) in question would approach their designated objective in a spread-out line formation, set to engage at will, and seek cover as they'd see fit. I could tell vehicles to drop people off, and have them get in. I could change the weapons and equipment the soldiers would start with; that sort of thing. And while it was pretty easy once you had learned how the scripting-system worked, I honestly thought it was complicated enough as it was. I had hoped the "new" Game Logic system would work something like this. I actually believe I could have coped with that. But apparently, it's something even weirder? :confused: Granted; maybe, like the devs say, the new system turns out to be really simple and immediately obvious once I actually get the game, around the 19th or so. But as of right now, I don't even know what the command interface of a Game Logic looks like. Could someone please be charitable and make a screenshot showing what the menu screen that appears once you have selected a GL looks like? Or does it look just like that of any other object, with nothing but a line in the middle that you're supposed to write the whole script on? Sorry for this long-winded and whiny post. I'm just a little tired and confused right now...

Wait, the AI doesn't know how to drag wounded soldiers into cover? Awww, shit. That's a huge disappointment right there. :(