boecko

I've unpacked the ca.cpo (campaing) and edited this mission in the editor. The only thing, what i've changed is to insert a "Search & Destroy" - Waypoint (speed:restricted,combat mode) before the normal vanilla-WP. Instead of going in like the cavalry, the squad actually survives now and can meet with beta squad. Where was the QA?

For me: Bad mission design == bug If this should "simulate" soldiers exiting nearby buildings, a message from Papa Bear would be quite nice, to get some atmosphere. BTW: I've played this 'Ammo Depots'-mission minutes ago. OMG

I second that. I filed a bug for this mission after i played it. http://bugs.armed-assault.net/view.php?id=2204 Respawning of the soldiers at the place which is sweeped already? Pfft. Compare that to 06Ninjas.EDEN from ofp. regards

done it's called 'open bugs with high prio' rss-feed: http://bugs.armed-assault.net/issues_...._id=261

This may be true for single core procs. I'm using an Dual Core Cpu 1st cpu -> real time for Arma 2nd cpu -> os duty So this would be quite handy. Bye

Would be nice if this could be integrated in  Kegetys ArmA-launcher. I used this tool: http://www.majorgeeks.com/Win2000_Launcher_d438.html but it's of no use, if you start ArmA via the ArmaLauncher.

Hi, if some reports lack of quality, we could mark them private and inform the reporter, that he should clarify his problem with notes and attachments. After that it could be set public again. This would: * keep the normal list cleaner * level up the quality Regards

Hey, this has nothing to do with your issue.. http://bugs.armed-assault.net/view.php?id=2185 Trust me. Look in the history ... first feedback ... then you attached it .. you can be sure that someone from BIS will set it to ACK. I would, since it's very clear what you meant (i tested it). This thread was about the really bad reports. And your report is certainly not one of them. Btw: I'm wasting my time, too

Feel free to complete this page: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/BTS_Guidelines

No, he is not ... Google and you'll find torrent sites with his username.

I did some googling of his username and "Armed Assault". It seems to me, that he will actually buy it, when it's released in his part of the world. On the other hand, he only should have looked in other threads (gogamer,fedex,etc) to know how it could be done. Bye

It's in the list: http://bugs.armed-assault.net/view.php?id=2042

Sorry, i'm afraid, it's only possible with higher permissions. i changed it public. Maybe i can disable this. Bye

@W0lle http://bugs.armed-assault.net/view.php?id=2123 I thought, we suggested "ACKNOWLEDGED". next time

EDIT: misunderstood i would say you should do an ACK

No... just like in the real world, you should have one person, who is responsible for something. Possible would be: 2 people could share one account. Maybe: art_dep@bistudio.com -> all issues about island&object.

CONFIRMED and VERIFIED is basically the same, so there is no need to change that. This might be interesting for choosing the right status: <a href="http://mantisbt.org/manual/manual.page.descriptions.system.management.pages.manage.configuration.workflow.transitions .php" target="_blank">http://mantisbt.org/manual....ons.php</a>

About the appropiate group.. It's just a name. Look at the differences  between UPDATER and DEVELOPER here. http://bugs.armed-assault.net/adm_permissions_report.php not much IMHO. Essential is, that the THRESHOLD for getting mail when new bugs are submitted is DEV. So people, who like to contribute (e.g. cleaning up things), can react more quickly. That's why I gave him this permission.

It's the version in which the bug was reported. That means, if the bug isn't marked as resolved, the issue is still there in the next versions 1.03,1.04 ,etc. BTW: I gave you the rights after reading your sandbox

Have you installed a Script debugger for IE7? This one is old but works. Maybe you get a better answer, when it's clear which line causes the error. don't forget to activate debugging under "advanced settings" in IE7. Regards Boecko

hey meister ... wer lesen kann ist klar in vorteil... http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/BTS_Instructions erst dort suchen.. bevor du anfaengst ... P.S.: Sorry, for the fallback to the mother tounge.

hey meister ... wer lesen kann ist klar in vorteil... http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/BTS_Instructions erst dort suchen.. bevor du anfaengst ... P.S.: Sorry, for the fallback to the mother tounge.

Ok .. maybe CTD is not a good example, because we could use severity "crash". It's correct, that only the programmer could know, if two issues (e.g. AI Pathfinding) descend from the same source problem. It was just a suggestion to group some issues aside from the category or across some categories. I could help to avoid double entries. When you make this kind of things "sticky", they are shown before all other bugs about this. Bye Boecko

Hi, we should introduce some metabugs. A metabug is the parent of some other tiny issues. A good example is shown here: http://bugs.scribus.net/view.php?id=3207 How to adapt that for ArmA? We could make a meta bug called "AI Pathfinding". Â All other issues about that problem (in missions,places, etc) in some way, would be childs of this bug. This would make it easier to track all things. Bye Boecko

I've made one now: http://bugs.armed-assault.net/view.php?id=2074 I like it, because mantis tells you "Not all the children of this issue are yet resolved or closed." and you have some kind of overview over the CTD-issues. How should those custom fields look like? A checkbox "CTD occured?" Bye Boecko