terox

Microphone is only required if you wish to talk

You dont actually need it, but not having it will enhance your gaming experience and not having it will have two side effects. a) You wont be involved in the comms on teamspeak so wont know why we are doing certain things b) It will make it harder for your Group leader/Mission commander because he will then have to repeat the important messages over voip. As Teamspeak it free, fairly easy to set up and used by a lot of clans and public servers, it is highly recommended that you have it installed anyway if you intend to play ArmA2 multiplayer, regardless of what server you are playing on. The Zeus Community Manual.pdf (Click on link) will guide you through setting this up. Dont worry about the ACRE section, you wont be needing it tonight If you have any other queries don't hesitate to drop onto our TS server this afternoon Don't worry if you do not have a microphone. You will need @Zcommon, especially the Hazarkot valley island, you could also grab it from ArmAholics if the Yoma repository is down Look forward to seeing you and anyone else who wants to drop by. :)

We will be playing VANILLA on Sunday 15th April ACRE Not Required BAF Missions tonight @ZCommon not required but we would like you on teamspeak, see first post

Thanks m8

I take it the RscListNBox allows me to create a table within a dialog, however there is very little info on how to use this specific class of resource Could somebody if possible point me to an addon or script that uses it or alternatively Explain how I dynamically define additional columns, rows and how I call and then edit data for a given row/column cell Many thanks in advance for any help offered.

We have just installed the I44 Mod onto the server, if you are wanting a coop game on Sunday evening, feel free to drop by All the information you need is listed on the initial post on this thread

Hi, thanks for the scripts Is there a variable I can use for the following condition "All the players are awaiting revive" So that I can use it to end a mission if there is no one available to revive This is taking into consideration "R3F_REV_CFG_autoriser_reapparaitre_camp = FALSE;"

Will do, when I have a stable package ready I will start a new thread

I've been looking at the Zeus ACE AI and the BIS version. I am aware that mission makers had issues with, in particular the Find Cover.pbo The package I uploaded was void of the behavioural scripts, however I can edit the addon, including all the "Behaviour" scripts to offer the complete package. However, I need some feedback on the following questions. 1) Should I start a new thread, so that I can control the initial post and therefore am able to edit the download links and information on the header post. 2) In addition, to prevent confusion, should I rename the addon to "Zeu_AImodified" so that a clear distinction is made from Prot's outstanding work and the small modifications that I can perform on his original work. 3) How would you prefer to control whether Zeus_AI is run in the mission (Option A or B) Option A) By default Zeus AI is run on all units, with the ability to switch off Zeus AI for specific groups or units using an array in the Init.sqf or a setvariable on individual units Option b) By default Zeus AI is not run on any units or groups, and you have to add each unit or group to an array in the init.sqf or setvariable in the units init field There is a "setVariable ["zeu_AIBypass", true];" which is currently commented out, this was used in an earlier version to disable specific units from using zeu_AI behavioural scripts

I only uploaded the UNOFFICIAL pack to run on a server for those who play coop and are having issues with the 1.6 patch. In that scenario keys are not required.

We ran the same BAF mission on Zeus (Running under CWR Mod) that CIA had issues with and did not get any error messages, so it may just have been a quirk caused by a players incorrectly installed MOD ---------- Post added at 15:46 ---------- Previous post was at 15:43 ---------- This is all to do with the weapon configs, stating what size bursts to use at what ranges etc. Ofcourse if they are less accurate they will use more ammo. This shouldnt be an issue for enemy AI, if its an issue for friendly AI, simply have a resupply stage in the mission, or if that is too cumbersome and slow, or create a resupply trigger area which will rearm them

I have been away from running zeus for 10 months and only just recently took up the reigns. During my absence Protegimus went M.I.A and the admins decided to stop running Zeus AI because in their opinion, the advanced development that Protegimus was doing was adversely effecting their missions and gameplay, specifically the find cover issue and some other AI supporting AI elements. The current Unnofficial release is pure config All the scripting elements have been removed because they do affect (For us anyway) the AI behaviour in a negative manner So all the "Find cover" issues and any other behavioural elements that were controlled by scripts are no longer present. What you have is a set of configs that effect Engagement ranges (Prots original values)) Weapon dispersion (Prots original values)) AI ability to see, hear or be seen and heard by other AI (Prots original values)) AI Skills, specifically Accuracy: Tweaked by me for 1.6 patch compatability I have neither the time or inclination to tweak these values further or develop this addon further unless there is an important enough issue that needs addressing We will also start playing ACE again soon, so I may put together a package for that too. (No promises) As for any compatability with ASR_AI. I haven't tested it with them nor will I be. I only uploaded this package to help out those who liked using zeus ai but were having the same issues we were. As for the query about PrecisionFriendly/Enemy, this is no longer in use since the 1,6 patch, and according to Dev Heaven, is not likely to be re-introduced NB>> CIA server are reporting issues with the Dispersion.pbo when running a BAF mission, for a quick fix, simply remove the "zeu_OA_c_wep_dispersion.pbo"

It should do that nicely

Not tested The ammo, weapon dispersion configs are for Vanilla equipment only, so if ACE classes inherits without altering the values then yes it will effect it

To help those out that used Zeus AI, I have added a post to Prot's thread with an unofficial modified version which resolves some of the issues with the 1.6 patch http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?89970-Zeus-AI-Combat-Skills&p=2102099#post2102099

Protegimus has been MIA for months now. So am hoping this little news post doesn't tread on anybody's toes or offend anyone. I have modified an unnoficial version of Prot's AI which we are currently running on the Zeus server (Serverside only at present) It seems to be stable and removes the laser accuracy of the AI since the 1.60 patch We are seeing Innacurate engagements at 400m + in daylight, with good sustained firefights at 300m, becoming lethal at ranges of less than 200m and AI is detecting us at night without NVG's at 50m if running, yet allowing stealth approach Included in the download package is the test mission I used, which allows parameter selection for testing under the following conditions. Ranges: 100, 200, 300 and 400m Daytime: Sunrise, Midday, Sunset, Midnight AI Skill : 0.25, 0.5, 0.6, 0.75, 1 Equip with Night Vision: Yes, No The current config values were tested on a dedicated VANILLA server with the following settings: skillFriendly=0.98; skillEnemy=0.98; I also recommend unit AI skill in the mission editor to be set somewhere between 0.5 and 1 If you want to tweak your own version, I suggest using the test mission included in the download package and only edit the zeu_cfg_core_ai_skills.pbo The current settings for this particular config are as follows class CfgAiSkill { aimingAccuracy[] = {0, 0.2, 1, 0.39}; // aimingAccuracy[] = {0, 0.1275, 1, 0.38}; // nice firefight // aimingAccuracy[] = {0, 0.1275, 1, 0.3}; // not too accurate at skill 1 at 100m // aimingAccuracy[] = {0, 0.1275, 1, 0.165}; // Too low // aimingAccuracy[] = {0, 0.1275, 1, 0.465}; // Original settings aimingShake[] = {0, 0.2, 1, 0.5}; aimingSpeed[] = {0, 0.25, 1, 0.8}; endurance[] = {0, 0.2, 1, 1}; spotDistance[] = {0, 0.85, 1, 1}; spotTime[] = {0, 0.1, 1, 0.7}; // spotTime[] = {0, 0.1, 1, 0.595}; Too slow courage[] = {0, 0.45, 1, 1}; reloadSpeed[] = {0, 0.1, 1, 0.7}; commanding[] = {0, 0.5, 1, 1}; general[] = {0, 1, 1, 1}; }; As you are now aware, since 1.6 the following server settings are no longer used precisionFriendly precisionEnemy You can download this unnoficial version from zeus_Ai_Modified.zip This can be run serverside only, also clientside if you wish, but its untested clientside Please DO NOT DISTRIBUTE Credits to: Mike for initially creating a modified package WheresMyRabbit for helping testing the config tweaks

Fusion playing coops? Well there's a turn up for the books :-) As Mondkalb said you need to promote this a bit more, You could approach the lilkes of Armaholics or .info and ask them to promote this when you are a closer to launching.

To bump this and help Lightspeed. Once we have seen a test mission, we will very likely put a team forward, Preferred size of mission, a squad or 2 fireteams with a support team would be ideal for us

There is a command called "missionStart" http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/missionStart If memory serves me correctly, I think there was an issue with this when running the command from a linux server, so this may only work on a windows server. But basically you could public variable some of the elements that this array contains along with a string and have the client end mission dialogue output these values onscreen (for the screenshot) If you were to do this using a server side addon, (We do something similar to inject our teamspeak details to every mission briefing automatically) then you can use this to state the date, time and place where the mission was played which would be a more automated way to police the end results

Here's a thought on how you could issue the missions. lets say there are 5 missions in total to be played by each team. The server that hosts the missions, only holds the 1 mission in its mpmissions list while each team has played it, then it is removed and replaced with the next mission. The server is passworded, the password is changed for each mission. It is unlikely that competing teams will inform the other teams of important information, because that would be counter productive and teams wouldn't be able to grab hold of the mission because it will be protected on a passworded server. The team would be given the password when they are ready to play. You could then host the briefing separately, on a pdf which can be downloaded from a website, days or hours before the mission is played. It may be possible to create a server side add-on that maybe pv's a variable that would be used on the client side end mission dialogue to display server time and server name, the dialogue would then be proof of what time and where the mission was played, or alternatively the screenshot has to be emailed to the server admin within 10 minutes of the mission finishing. I know there are loopholes in this system, but its gonna be incredibly difficult to find a system that isnt full of them. The only way you could pull this off, was if every mission was played by every team on the same server, otherwise policing it would be a nightmare. You could have a civilian slot with a spectate dialogue, but who wants to sit in that slot for an hour to police the competition I would also create a dry run mission, and go through the entire rigmaroll of hosting a briefing and allowing the teams to test play the entire system. You may find that you will need more detail in your briefings etc that you hadn't felt was necessary and other issues may come to light from the feedback that you may get

I have to agree with Lightspeed_aust. A 15 minute coop just wouldn't allow for the planning, decision making that I have personally seen in my 10 years of playing BI's military simulator. To get enjoyment out of it, I would say you need about 40 minutes to play a fairly fast coop game. Elements I hadn't given much thought too, but which have come to light in this discussion are the concept rightfully or wrongfully of allowing players to practice the mission prior to playing it in the competition. There are arguments to both sides of this one, which from what I can think of can be countered by mission design. As the discussion seems to be leaning towards small coop teams, eg fireteam to section size then it would be fair to assume that the type of missions we are, or should be seeing in this tournament are going to be the type given to real SF units. Intel gathering, covert ops, route denial, assassination, hostage rescue, small scale ambush or hit and runs. in the real world it is not their superiors but the men in these units themselves (not the wanabee versions) that decide on the vehicles, equipment that they want to take. So a mission template design that allows this choice, for example as a "params" option could add an interesting element to the competition. As per the server settings point, this would need to be done either on the same server or a limited number of servers that can be trusted to not "edit" the difficulty settings. There are a lot of "issues" that would need to be thought about and worked around to make such a competition successful

Maybe the following would be fitting Rather than having a final score based on points, base the score on a percentage of completion and call it an efficiency rating The elements of the scoring could be something along the lines of 25% based on casualty rate 25% based on time taken and then the objectives themselves make up the other 50% This could then be implemented as a general scoring system over any mission In more detail: CASUALTY RATE If you were able to complete the mission with no friendly casualties, you would have 100% success on that element and therefore be awarded the full 25% towards the final rating. If you had casualties say you started with 12 players and ended up with 9, therefore having a casualty rate of 25% you would only receive 18.75% as the casualty rate element of the score TIME LIMIT There would be 2 time limits a) Time limit to achive a full 100% for the time element b) An overun time limit, where if the objectives are not achieved by that time you would receive 0% towards the time element and the missions would be aborted. For example Time limit to achieve 100% = 40 minutes Time limit where command would abort the mission, lets say 1 hour 20 minutes If you achieved your objectives within or up to 40 minutes you would receive 100% of the time element score, eg a full 25% towards the final rating If you achieved you mission at say the 1 hour point, you would receive 50% of the available time limit score which would add 12.5% towards the final rating MISSION OBJECTIVES 3 objectives for example would each add 33.3% towards the full score allowed for the objectives, each giving 16.65 towards the final rating Overall clans would then see their overall efficiency rating which would work generically on very different scenarios The final rating would of course be output at the end of the mission via a dialogue with a time and date stamp on it which the clan could then take a screenshot for proof of their accomplishment. Ideally this should always be the same server to allow continuity of fps, warping etc and to better administer and preventing cheating etc Our server "Zeus" is not used anything like to its potential, so I would be more than willing to allow its use for such a project

This would be an interesting concept if you could get it to work correctly. If memory serves me right, this was attempted back in OFP days. How would you go about and define the "Score" for such a competition ?

Thanks for the feedback Killswitch Mangoo's deciphering of the clientside wireshark log has indicated an issue either with the router or the client. Because I have 2 clients with the same issue, both sharing the same router it's defintely looking like the router, so I'll be sticking it where the sun don't shine.

I'm lucky enough to have more than one machine at home capable of running OA, which has completely different specs. The other client has the same issue when trying to connect online, but had no problems when connecting and playing with a Lan server as you suggested So this is looking like a connection issue. I did notice 2 additional Battleye text messages once the mission started on the Lan client, which I didnt notice when trying to play online. 1) Server client version check message 2) GUID information This should then rule out both the clients my network cables from the clients to the router My router is a Netgear N150 DGN1000. which I don't run using wireless connection I'll make this available to you when i see you on TS I've updated my original post with all the tests and events that have occured afterwards up to this point