beta

Figured it would be so simple Don't know why I didn't think of that, I must have spent a good hour looking at all the new ArmA scripting commands before it was released. Guess I was looking for an 'easy' answer heh. Thanks for the replies, we'll see how it goes in multiplayer, never did like scripting for multiplayer ...

Very nice, love all the new placeables! I'm having trouble however, certain objects (from the 'House' directory to be specific), when placed, can't be 'operated'. What I mean is that, say you place a Radio Tower from the 'House' directory, then you won't be able to climb the ladder. Stuff from 'Objects' works fine, but stuff from 'House' seems to be completely static, house doors don't work, ladders can't be climbed. Not a big deal, just reporting in case LowFly is a perfectionist

Yeah, I've got some CTDs with various buildings too (YES, I actually individually placed EVERY one of them ...) This is the list I've got ... benzina domek_radnic Domek_sedy domek_zluty dum_patr_nizky_prujezd HANGAR jizak_test molo_drevo_krychle molo_drevo_krychle2 sara_domek_patr_nizk_prujezd townhall zluty_statek_in brana_krat_1_7 And, the 'skola' model is missing a texture for the steps (gives you a pop-up error, but runs) Don't know if it is machine specific, but my guess is that they are missing "ruins" models as a couple of them I couldn't find a duplicate in the #RUINS directory. Hope it helps.

I guess this could be considered scripting, didn't know where else to put it, if it is in the wrong area, feel free to move it. I recently un-PBOed the character.pbo file and took a look inside. The FSM files were ... interesting. I'm hoping we might get (would make it MUCH easier hehe) the FSMeditor BIS used. Currently the files are a little hard to comprehend with all the extra stuff put in there from their editor, but I think I got the basic gist of it. The reason I was looking at these files was the AI's contact drills are a little weak. They tend to only 'see' the enemy once one of their troops has died, when being shot at, they just seem to not care. After scanning through the formation FSMs, I saw a lot to do with the 'leap frog' system and general formation stuff like moving around, taking command, etc. etc. I didn't really see anything on actually SHOOTING though. Basically, what I'm asking here is has anyone else looked at this stuff yet, or are you all waiting for more patches or such? The Biki topic on 'AI Modification' is non-existant: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki?ti....on=edit Looking forward to seeing all those nifty AI enhancements from OFP put into ArmA, might even be able to do more!

I'm pretty sure its the last 'updated' direction of the formation, NOT the squad leader (as I previously thought). Either way, once a firefight starts and troops start moving around, the clock indicator tends to get quite useless. I find it best to GET DOWN and hide in some sort of bush. Once the gunfire and snaps go away, THEN you can move out Best way I've found for keeping you and your team mates alive is to stay in formation (as best as you can), that way the clock directions are useful and you don't have to worry (as much ...) about wasting a friendly that decided to flank and suddenly pops up in front of you mixed in with the enemies. Basically, 'Combat Awareness' is something that is VERY hard to achieve, just like in real life ... heh.

I've noticed the sights are more screwy with the east weapons. PK sight is WAY low, AK sight is slightly high (the front sight posts also seem to be missing/very hard to see). This is VERY noticeable in AI vs. AI combat, east troops tend to get rocked at range (CRAZY M249) while US troops are mowed down up close (full-auto AKs ...) The recoil also seems a bit strange, on both sides weapons. The second or third shot in a rapid semi-auto burst hits in front of the target, shouldn't it pull up and to the right (no left-handed people in ArmA!? Hopefully the weapon sights are 'fine tuned' in the coming patches, especially the M4A1 and PK sights, IMO they are the worst right now.

Could also add all the rating together (for various units/groups) then check the condition. ie: (unit1 + unit2 + unit3 + ... + unitn) <= negativenumber

Now I thought someone said that the Easy mode was removed in ArmA (since it was pretty useless), and that the editor is always on 'Advanced' mode. Didn't even check that ... its true though, no more 'Easy' mode.

I've got a similar system, was getting similar FPS. How much video card ram does you 7800 have? That seems to make a 10-15 FPS difference from 256 - 512. I found that turning texture quality to Low solved my FPS issues, was getting 15-20 in open areas, and under 15 in cities/forests. With Low texture quality, I usually get 25-30 FPS in open areas and 15-20 FPS in forests, 20-25 FPS in cities, this is all with units on screen too. The other options didn't really add or subtract much FPS, save terrain detail and shadow quality. Viewdistance was a pretty big factor, have it set to just over 3000, setting it lower will improve FPS somewhat, but it still won't help near lots of foliage.

Title sounds a little confusing but its quite simple. I want to try and get the leader of one group command leaders of other groups. So, squad 1 would have 4 units in it, the leader, and 3 subordinates. Those 3 subordinates would also have, say, 3 subordinates of their own. Any way to do this? I've tried, but the commandFollow (and doFollow) only work when the unit is assigned to grpNull, same with the join command. Any thoughts?

Depends how complex you want your patrol, and how much time you want to spend on it. You can use the move waypoints and at the end of the chain put a 'CYCLE' waypoint, and they will repeat all the waypoints in reverse order. Make sure you have 'Advanced' mode on, otherwise the options are rather .... limited.

Yeah, I tried it (not extensively mind you) to see if it worked, the player(s) couldn't hear my transmission. Works good on all the other modes though. However, the other players were NOT on the 'Direct Communication' channel, but since someone talking on 'Side' and someone talking in 'Group' were both received, I didn't think it would matter. Will need to test it more extensively I guess.

The global, side, group, and vehicle channels work good. The Direct communication channel (I am assuming this means 'talking', like if a player is 5m away they can hear you) however, doesn't work. Was looking forward to that, ah well.

Yepp, *crack crack crack* Really? Sweet! Why has no one said anything of this before? Seems like a pretty nifty new feature to me! This would definately leave a positive first impression for me since I've NEVER heard this in ANY game (excluding the PR 0.403 mod for BF2). So negative around here

Wanted to know a few things about ArmA here ... Is there any supersonic sound modeling ('snaps' or 'cracks' from incoming small arms fire)? I thought I read about supersonic sound modeling in one of the press releases ... Also, I've also read that the dreaded Invis-O-Grass is in Armed Assault too. Is the locally rendered grass (stuff that is only rendered in a 50-100m or so circle around the player) very high? How much of it is there? If I am in a field of grass moving towards a bunker will I stick out like a sore thumb? These are the only real major concerns I have about Armed Assault at the moment as the AI seems to be equal to and even better than OFP's, all the other bugs seems like standard new release bugs. Oh, why has no one said a single word (in the whole 10 page thread ...) about the multiplayer? Has it died or something? People here are talking like ArmA is WORSE than OFP ... I don't understand how having a join in progress multiplayer system can be worse. Hell, I would have paid the $100 I'm going to be spending on ArmA (live in Canada, go games from Germany! to get OFP with JIP and NOTHING else. Try to enjoy the game, I'm sure in 3 months these 'teething' issues will be resolved ...

Yeah, thats what I meant, forgot they had different names ...

First post here (signed up to give ideas on a CTI like mission ) but long time reader. Well, it seems to me that you simply want to "screw around" in the missions. I'm not saying you only want to screw around, just sometimes, but instead of going through the hassle (and quite possible ruining certain missions, both in development and play) of making all these different difficulty levels, why not just (as in classic OFP) extract the campaign mission and screw around with it from the Mission Editor? Don't want to/know how to do this, just make your own missions in the Mission Editor to screw around! Now, when I say that it could ruin certain missions, I mean that a pivotal plot point might be misunderstood/not reached when one can so easily waltz through a mission; some of the missions are meant to be hard, they are trying to show you that "war sucks". First time I played the "After Montignac" mission, I thought: damn, this just plain sucks! I tried the mission three or four times and started thinking ... if I could "save" my squad in the missions before, could I avoid this fate? So I replayed the earlier missions from a new campagin, and *gasp* it was ACTUALLY different, I preformed better on the previous missions and now my squad actually made it! Anyways, the point I'm trying to make is that if you restrict how "hard" the missions can be (ie: uneven, as in 400 enemy vs. your 12 man squad), you WILL take away some of the "atmosphere" of the game, you won't be as fearful for your life when you know "safety" is just one click away. If this game is truly to simulate (not completely of course) war, it MUST simulate that in war, NOTHING is fair, one day you could roll over the enemy, the other day they roll over you. I feel that OFP succeeded in this, but it was at a "cost", you HAD to be able to lose what you valued in the game, the time you invested in it ...