Zendjir

I just watched the AI video....and am not very optimistic . It looked eerily similar to stock ArmA AI; Lying in the middle of the road, waiting for the enemy. The fight in the forest consisted of the AI-guy running around and going prone once in a while. I did see some use of cover by AI sometimes, but no convincingly better AI . I mean....there are mods in Arma that make the ai better than the one in this video . Let's hope it improves and that this video was not a good representation of actual AI behavior. Otherwise...no ArmaII 4 me.

It might be a good idea to release two versions: one with and on without swearing. If that isn't too much work ofcourse .

This is great news! Really looking forward to DAC2. I know I loved it in OFP, I'll love it again!

I have found a problem with the 1.1 sandbags; AI will not fire at units that are behind the sandbags. The units defending the position will fire, but they are not fired upon. How can this be fixed?

You should download the mapfact editor download, it has invisible objects I believe.

I voted WWII, as I had so much fun with LIBMOD while playing OFP. WWII mods kind of have the atmosphere built right into them, something that I miss with modern warfare mods, or ArmA in general . I also second the opinion voiced by other people in this thread that the engine is actually better suited for WWII style combat than for modern combat. ArmA is severely lacking in the technology department. I mean, there is no radar, no UAV's, no artillery, no fancy tank gizmo's, no believable simulation of the Air aspect of combat, etc...

I just tried the scripts and I'm very impressed! I have combined the script with a lower accuracy setting in the Armaprofile file. Battles are very slow and intense with constant firing. Just the way I like it . I might set te multiplier a bit higher though to compensate for the increased suppression due to the increased volume of fire caused by the lower accuracy. I believe ArmA might have given us the tools to finally do something about the horrid stock-AI.

We all know that when AI have a low skill setting their aim is terrible and they are horrible at spotting anything. The player however is unaffected by this "skill" setting, as the game automatically sets it to 1 (expert), the highest setting. I tested this. How can I stop this autosetting of the skill variable for the player? I want my aim to be wobbly (sp?) when I'm playing a rookie, and solid when I'm playing a highly skilled sniper.

You have a valid point. However, there is atleast one setting 'aimingshake' that could also be applied to a player character. But to make this work would probably mean alot of modding. I think I'll go for Op4BuhBye's suggestion of setting damage to 0.1 or higher. The downside of this method is that the player will be killed more easily. I think an eventhandler 'hit' workaround would be in order to solve that.

Heh, it seems everyone completes this mission in a different way. With me the bridge did not collapse aswell. So I then proceeded to kill the entire armored force myself, Rambo style . I must have knocked out around 4 T72's and about the same number of BMP's. I destroyed the ural with all troops still inside it with an AT4 aswell. When everyone was dead I destroyed the bridge, walked towards the US positions and hopped into a HMMV and drove off.

I can once again run ArmA with everything on 'very high' now. Thinks alot BIS! Have not encountered anything strange, but I only tested it for 15 minutes.

I can't seem to find the hidden ammo stash talked about in the briefing, where is it?

DisableAI "Target" will prevent the unit from sending troops to engage detected enemies. When applied to all the units in a group it ensures that group cohesion is maintained. The group leader will keep to his waypoint plan whether or not you disable this though, but with disableAI "Target" he will no longer send his troops to their deaths one by one. enableattack might work the same, but have not tested it.

Can't you just make 2 triggers: 1 that detects all the units in the game and 1 that detects all the units in the area you want to check. Then just substract the 2 arrays and you will have an array which lists all the units not inside the triggerarea.

I don't know what the differences are between enableattack and disableai. They both seem to have the same effect. But since disableai is cancelled out after save or load it might be better to stick with enableattack.

type {_x disableAI "target"} foreach (units group this) in one of the groupmembers init line. Works like a charm, I use it all the time.

To set some things straight: the addwaypoint function works like this: the 'position' part of the array determines where the waypoint is created. The second part does NOT determine the index, rather is determines the RADIUS in which the waypoint is placed. So the following line group this addwaypoint [getpos bmp1,100], will let the group move to a random postion a max 100m from the position of bmp1. To let the group move to the waypoint you have to set an additional value: setwaypointtype. An example from a script I am creating: _wp1= _group addwaypoint [_fpos1,0] _wp1 setwaypointtype "move"

No, that won't work. The "==" function is used to check whether a value is equal to an other value, not to set values. There is no setside function that I am aware of. Fasad suggestions are your best bet.

yeah, understanding the scripting part of OFP/ArmA might take a while, but once you got it it is very rewarding. My suggestion is not to be too ambitious at first. If you have a plan, build up the script code snippet by code snippet and keep testing it. If you run into trouble, try to find the cause and a way around it. Try, try and try again. Good luck!

Yeah, sanitize is a bit 'strange'. The friendly AI is as moronic as can be, they get killed almost instantly. And the fact that the enemy seems to spawn inside the town is a bit wierd also. But I found the mission quite enjoyable as squad commander. You have to be really careful in positioning your men but if you do it right the result is devestating.

Ragdolls can be alot of fun and look quite good aswell. But for OFP the impact on performance iwould be unacceptable. I'd rather have a 100 soldiers in a great battle who all fall down in the same way than 10 ragdoll soldiers. I think BIS made the right decision here.

Even though the campaign missions are a bit buggy sometimes and not as immersive as OFP I'm still having a blast with them. The missions are much harder then in OFP due to the higher enemy AI skill, the grass problems and the length of the missions. But there is greater freedom to choose the way you want to complete them, and you are challenged to think before you act. If you just rush in blindly you will probably die but if you move carefully, plan and execute that plan properly you might not lose a single man. The buggyness of some missions adds to this 'thinking' challenge because I'm often challenged to complete a mission in a completely different way then was intended by the designers. For example, in the Corazol mission (where you have to blow up the bridge) the bridge did not blow at the first attempt and I was forced to kill most of the enemy armor myself. It was great fun, but not as the designers intended it. Despite all it's flaws, I'm loving it

I love WWII mods, they seem to have the right athmosphere built right into them. But I would not get your hopes up on I44 releasing something anytime soon, maybe in 6 years.

Actually, there is a bit of a morale system in ArmA. If you kill a certain amount of soldiers of a group the soldiers in that group may panic and run away from the enemy. The higher their rank the more casualties the group has to take before fleeing.

Good news indeed. But I don't mind whether an amount of sweat and cursing was involved, just that they fixed it .