thobson

Thank you so much. Â I really appreciate your comments. Â Your reaction is exactly the one I hoped the mission would create. Â I hope you continue to feel that way as things progress. Voice acting: well we did our best, but we are not profesisonal actors.

Use a GetIn Event Handler to check the type of unit that has got in as the pilot and take the appropriate action eg setFuel 0 or some such?

Thank you. I had a very gratifying response from the beta testers. I now wait with baited breath for the response of everyone else.

This is a bug in Flashpoint itself. Â It is often possible with the right vehicle to safely drive around killing soldiers, especially if it is dark and/or the visibility is low. Â The soldiers just ignore you as you drive over them and their team mates. Â This applies to any mission. Â I have gone some way to fixing the problem in this mission - it is now dangerous and unpredictable for the player to do this, but I made no attempt to do anything about the AI behaviour if the player is not in a vehicle but one of his team is. Â There has to be a limit to the cpu resources that I consume on issues like this. This is just a feature of the FlashPoint that we all love - but perhaps never fully noticed before. Bye the way I have only ever noticed infantry making this mistake. Â Armour units get you every time. Just pretent that the soldiers were fooled and didn't recognise your guy for what he really was - such things do happen.

Okay I have uploaded a new version with the corrected reference in the readme file. Â The link above will take you to the new version. They said FlashFX.

I have no experience of it. I can only go by what the beta testers told me.

Sanctuary. Â Thank you. Â I just tested from my office PC and it fails in the way you describe. This must be a recent change - or maybe I neglected to test it from my office before. Damn it! Thank you for posting the link. Â Be sure and use General Baron's Editor Upgrade not one of the others. Â That is the one it was tested with. [CAS] Daniel: Yes finally, and I have been working on it all that time.

This is a relevant extract from the readme file included in the download: I would add that the beta testers using ECP 1.085 reported no problems subsequently, and in fact seemed to enjoy the experience. I have no information on FFUR I am afraid.

Well I hope you enjoy it. Â If you had commented on it you could have had your name in the list of beta testers, and you must admit that at one letter you don't take up much room There are two ways to see that list. Â The easy one is to look in the readme file. The hardest is to finish the mission!! Best of luck

You could group him with a senior west soldier, and set the probability of presence to zero for that west soldier. That will put the east soldier on the west side without him being in a west group.

hardrock: That is unlikely to be a reliable method for comparing arrays that have real numbers or arrays as their elements. Â It should work well though for arrays that contain integers and objects. EDIT: Baddo and I should enter a synchronised typing competition.

What does the hint message tell you? Are the following correctly defined: ["icp_t72bwreck","icp_t72bwreck2","icp_t72bwreck3"] ?

Try this: http://www.ofpec.com/editors/comref.php?letter=T#typeOf In fact the whole document is worth a read.

Well I take it from the title that you have tried: if (getPos unit1 == getPos unit2) then {...} and that has not worked.  Bear in mind that arrays work a bit differently from other things.  If a is an array say: a = [1,2,3] then  the instruction b = a does not make a new array, it makes a new pointer to the same array so if you then did: b = b + [4] a would then also be: [1,2,3,4] To make a new array you would need to put a = +b So what is the point of this?  It is that we should not asusme arrays work the same way as other variables.  I have not tested: if (a == b) then {...} but I take it you have. Okay so you have tried it with arrays and it does not work you will need to check each element of the array, but now you hit another problem.  These are real numbers and so may be close enough not to make any difference but may still be different.  For example are the following two numbers different: 2.999999 3.000001 ? Well yes they are but do you care? So you would need to check each element of the array with a tolerance, are they close enough.  Now with positions there is a quick way to do this and that is to use the command distance.  I suggest you try some thing like: if (unit1 distance unit2 < 0.5) then {...} I also suggest you look at: http://www.ofpec.com/editors/comref.php?letter=D#distance In fact the whole document is well worth a read EDIT: I see Baddo and I were writing at the same time. Â

vehiclename setFuel 0 combined with vehiclename setVelocity [0,0,0] will prevent it from starting to move again under player control.

Try changing the line: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">_targetarray = [icp_t72bwreck,icp_t72bwreck2,icp_t72bwreck3] to <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">_targetarray = ["icp_t72bwreck","icp_t72bwreck2","icp_t72bwreck3"] Also for debugging purposes (ie you take it out when it is all working) I suggest you put a hint in the code as follows: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">hint  _target #begining

I have no experience of re-spawning - but you might want to try giving each unit a {killed} event handler that either deletes the unit, or sets its name = nil. Then give the new respawned replacement the same name. You would probably need to script this so that the new unit is created a bit after the old name is deleted.

The first thing that comes to mind is to give each of your units a {killed} Event Handler that would create a unit of the same type at that location.

If you eject a unit from a vehicle you also need to unassignVehicle as well.

I don't think this would work. Â The result will always be _targetarray select 2 whenever _ran is <= 3; and whatever if it is > 3I would do it this way (If you then find another model to make it four models then just add it to the array and all the code will still work): <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">_targetarray = [icp_t72bwreck,icp_t72bwreck2,icp_t72bwreck3] #again _targetindex = random (count _targetarray) _targetindex = _targetindex - (_targetindex % 1) if (_targetindex >= count _targetArray) then {goto"again"} _target = _targetarray select _targetindex

This will give you some examples and explanation on createUnit: http://www.ofpec.com/editors/comref.php?letter=C#createUnit See particularly the second comment by macguba where: "this addweapon {binocular}" is the init field for the unit.

SetPos out of a vehicle is fine in a cutscene providing you don't need the guy in the rest of the mission, it really confuses their ai later. unassignVehicle unit is best followed with a [unit] allowGetIn false instruction to stop him getting back in again.

You could find the object ID of an object on the map that is close by (<50) and use nearestObject to get hold of the targets. Here is something I used to get hold of a flagpoles without giving them all names: _objNearFlags = [62882,90628,91913,35935,58951,82754,17111,77142] _flagIndex = 0 #mainloop _flagPole = nearestObject [object (_objNearFlags select _flagIndex), "Flags1"] . . . _flagIndex = _flagIndex + 1 if (_flagIndex < count _objNearFlags) then {goto"mainLoop"}

You may wish to try putting it here: http://www.ofpec.com/yabbse/index.php?board=23

I just noticed this. I have not looked in detail at it but the title caught my eye: http://www.ofpec.com/editors/resource_view.php?id=803