Trapper

You can command them inside of buildings on predefined positions with single move commands for every soldier. They should attack enemies inside the building on the way to that position but all the positions are meant to be an advantage for a battle going on on the outside of a building. Group Link 4 mod features a house search for enemy soldiers based on that positions. At the moment the buildings are too small and empty for interesting game play indoors.

And what about custom islands? Supposed to be real islands? Ok, they're rare. :) IIRC the fake mountains fit for Cherneraus, they are in the north and west only.

That's probably the coaxial MG only Mysteryman. On farther distance the hit point should match with the sights because of the gun's position.

Lal you can test the results of flying low in the editor. Place some enemy vehicles behind hills and fly towards them high and low. I'm sure they won't appear on your radar until you've a direct line of sight, and so will you.

I see a lot of this counterargument here. Mostly from users who've joined the board not long ago, so I believe you won't have played OFP tanks. When you carefully read my suggestions again I want mainly things/the spirit back that were already there in the predecessor OFP. And over this long time I can assure you that the helicopters from day one of ArmA1 and then the new planes afterwards obtained improvements/bugfixes in a big scale compared to OFP. So with this poll I'm presenting to BIS how much the same focus now on tanks and fighting vehicle playability as a whole is or isn't desired by the community today. Because this is a point which isn't done with adding +10 damage points to that gun/hit zone system. Everyone is free to use the dev-heaven issue tracker for detailed small things like that, though such a thing wouldn't improve nothing about what I'm concerned. Regarding "ACE has got/will get it", "Yes, stabilize the turrets" and again "Please don't ask for going even more arcarde!" I've played my example mission Operation Hunter vanilla until I got frustrated by the not stabilized commander periscope on the T72. Then I played it with ACE2 and had much more fun because there it is stabilized. But... because of their research ACE2 completely removed stabilization from the main turret/gunner scope. That's realistic. And it makes the gunner position complicated for players now unless they would add some other views for the gunner, without locked 8x zoom (realistic, too). And this is a point where I want vanilla ArmA2 to stay "arcardish" like OFP. E.g. just keep stabilization here for usability until you've added everything realistically necessary to compensate the lost combat awareness by practice interior views, commander main gun override, easy target information share between commander and gunner. AI or player. Before you've got all that right I prefer an aracarde stabilized main turret and/or dynamic zoom on that tank oldie, or I just won't man it myself.

With "arcardish" I only want to describe the difference between OFP/ArmA tanking and the detailed simulators like Steel Beasts or M1 Tank Platoon. Don't worry I don't want it more arcarde then it ever was in OFP.

Should the poll be garnished the right options are still available: 1. Yes, fix. 2. It doesn't matter for me. 3. No, keep. If somebody is interested, this is the first custom tank platoon mission I've came across since ArmA2 release and it suffers more from the points I've mentioned above than from any own bugs. Try to play it in vanilla ArmA2 as platoon commander without 3rd person view and switching seats much, commander view is ok. It wouldn't be that hard in OFP. Operation Hunter @ OFPEC EDIT: @Flash Thunder I understand but some of your points, even if mentioned often at the moment, are the second step from my point of view. They wouldn't make the tanks more "playable" for humans. You know at the beginning of ArmA1 every OFP player asked for multiple turrets/commander MGs. Today they're added, in a lazy way and their disadvantages for commander seat "playability" still need to be addressed.

Thank you Killswitch! I was still waiting for updating my private server because I relied on the official news and the Biki...

Btw the windows dedicated server 1.05 isn't available still, is it? Could be a reason for the fewer servers.

I can only tell you that I'm on Win7 64bit with an X-fi ExtremeGamer with 2.0 speakers or headphones. CMSS-3D is activated all the time. Driver installation file is SBXF_PCDRV_LB_2_18_0013.exe, probably the one from June 2009. The only issue I have sometimes is the static sound drop. And only when I'm directly below and very close to a helicopter. It's possible that the sound recovers after a short while. Mark, the HiFi sound mod creator, once told me this could be an issue of too complex or loud sound samples, and that ArmA2 features many sound samples for everything not just one engine sound for example. So if every thing else fails you could try if one of the sound mods helps. For now I'm running Sound of War mod. EDIT: I would check the bios first for disabling the onboard sound. This reads like you've only done it in windows.

Is it a mismatched control setup of mine, or are the different views when driving in a tank are bugged? The best example I can remember is the CDF T-72. I'm commander and when I "turn out" I'm in something I would call iron sight perspective behind the MG. But with enough "turn in"/"turn out" actions and a few 3rd/1st person switches that view is replaced when I'm turned out, with a virtual crosshair view which can/has to be zoomed. Also I can activate free look in this view. But I don't know how to get back to the iron sight view. Another one is the AAV commander seat. With enough view switching I'm able to change the periscope optic and "turn out" view for an interior view looking through all the prisms around my head. In this case I can't always switch to any other view. And then there is a tank, probably it's the CDF T-72 again, where the same stress actions brought me to an low quality driver interior view with only one tiny prism and a dark cockpit far in front of me. Though I think I wasn't able to move my head in this interior view.

There's the possibility that I've lost all of my former mission editing experience and I'm pretty frustrated by failing in the editor now. So please don't take this rant too seriously and pick out the constructive parts you like. It's not that I don't respect your addon. :) I've installed GL4 because I was told how easy it is to get some action in the editor. And then I remembered GL2 which was available as pure script resource for OFP - which was later on included in ECP and setup to run for all sides in any mission played with active ECP mod IIRC. 1. The Documentation is a mess. readme.txt., readme.pdf, features.pdf. I understand the overall idea but why is the group spawn documentation placed in the listing features.pdf when it belongs to the other documentations in the readme.pdf? Those big watermarks really help to find the right one of the two documents when both are loaded, still they make it hard to read the text. They should more transparent. Anyhow I prefer to open only one document at a time not multiple ones and to use the search function. 2. I see that you're trying to make mission editing more easy for everybody with adding Modules/syncing to the editor instead of complicated script calls. And it works great, I've placed everything like documented and only the attackers needed one seek&destroy waypoint. Everything else to create nice firefight was done by GL4. But that's a nightmare for me as a former experienced OFP scripter. It's like making a website with a WYSIWYG kit instead of writing/copying the code myself like I was used to from scripts like GL2. The downsides I reckon: Servers and players will have to install the GL4 addon to play missions created with the GL4-System module. No addon free mp missions with your AI scripts only. The whole Group Link 4 Enemy A.I. Enhancement is setup to effect all units of a side when initialized and not recommend for using on friendly A.I. groups because it can only handle one enemy the documentation states. Nice for setting up the average coop scenario "we against the world" but pretty limiting for all other scenarios including friendly ai squads. 3. When reading ECP I was expecting the GL4 scripts would be loaded for all groups and sides in any mission I play. Because it was like that with GL2 and all the other AI features ECP included. Also that removed the requirement to add additional addons to a mission when editing. Load the game with ECP to edit a mission did mean enhancements present. Load the same mission without ECP: Enhancements gone mission playable without. PS: I know it's documented that here it's not like this. The appearing resource tags are just implying for me. Probably I would like to see: - An additional release of the Group Link 4 sqs and sqf files for mission editors who would like to make addon free missions with an uptodate follower of GL2 scripts. - A coming up to my ECP like expectations and let all AI enhancements be automatically running in any mission I play while using GL4 SFX. Requiring your GL4 scripts being able to handle multiple opposing sides simultaneously. Users should be able to deactivate every single AI feature from the GL4_Local.sqf.

1. Press Tab to cycle through all radar targets. 2. It's probably always aimed by the copilot, not sure. Issue radio command 2-0: NO TARGET.

Probably ESRB rated is the American publisher/version and and PEGI rated is the UK/European version from publisher 505. You could search the boards if it does make a difference but I don't know about any.

Info age is supposed to work as present intelligence of the opposing AI force. It simulates the the situation at mission start up that every ai unit of the opposing site starts with the silent report "ENEMY UNIT, x METERS, THERE" of set age. Unless you've placed units with guard waypoints or AI improvement scripts they shouldn't do much about it. Maybe they would spot them a little bit easier when contact is imminent in the first few minutes of the mission. Also I've never tried this with extended map info activated - it's possible that the player will be shown the small icon of the unit on the briefing map. Skill slider. Back in the days of OFP that was easy, it did effect the unit ai completely from 0 to 1. Effecting spotting, speed, aim. Since ArmA1 that value defined by the mission designer will be reckoned up with the difficulty setting in the player profile options in some way. So you can try to set up unexperienced enemies for atmosphere but every player on high difficulty will still experience them as hot shots.

Don't be afraid that it says Operation Flashpoint, it's the same with ArmA2. http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Modfolders You can also try to search for custom launcher software so you won't have to create shortcuts for your modfolders. And in case you don't know where to find unit/objects addons later on: For sure they'll only be visible in the mission editor unit lists.

Because in someway the campaign wasn't created by BIS or at least by the guys working on the engine code. Author Gaia seems to have joined BIS some time ago but was known to me as a community member making the same kind of great missions before. So he worked in his profession around the bugs we all know and overtook the coders in their bugfixing attempts. Honestly we shouldn't complain what part of the game develops when it doesn't slow down the other areas. I just hope Gaia won't be influenced in his work. Campaign quality and promptness of the hotfix are an example to follow.

Merry Christmas and thank you for the island. I don't want to be a prick but when looking at this screen the trees look way too much like autumn while cropping that wheat should have to been done in late summer. Would be great if you adapt the flora to be more coherent, especially towards summer for a nice difference to Chernarus.

True, thank you. :) Seems like the first entry is absolutely useless and should be patched away. I've set it unmapped and was still able to switch targets in AH64 and M1A1. It's bad to frighten players with the thought that their preferred input device isn't supported.

This credits trick is one of the best ever as it's origin isn't obvious at first... ;)

I don't really know if this happened only after 1.05 but I can't map a button on my gamepad to "next target" (default key TAB). It'll be recognized and listed but doesn't do anything in game while TAB will select a radar target when flying a chopper.

I don't want to deny the quality of the campaign and it's publication with an official patch. It does deserve it. But when praising this great campaign you should be aware that it was made by the (former?) community member Gaia who already shined in OFP with his campaign project WTWE in same quality. And if you should bother to install OFP again to play it, make sure to try the mission Three Kings by Jezuro, too.

TexView 2 should be able to convert other formats to the required .paa http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/BI_Tools_2

:o looks like I'm not up to date.

I've played Trapdoor yesterday and I like the heart of the mission. You've created a pretty intense fight in the village. I've also noticed that many of the scrolls need work. Overview, briefing, ticking off waypoints and objective, no cut scenes, no dialogs. Deduced from your join date, I would like to tell you about my favorite editing site ofpec.com. It's got many tutorials and a board where you can ask for serious beta testing of your missions. I think you've reached a point in mission editing to from which on you're able to care about those established scrolls.