Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

causticwindow911

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    39

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by causticwindow911

  1. Posted

    try saying "player addaction ..." in the init.sqf file (create it if it's not there). Make sure to end with a semicolon! This file runs once on each computer when they start the map. You can restrict who runs each command (say, you want something server only) by adding the isServer condition to an if statement (or any other conditional).

    Also, you can add "waituntil {player == player}; before your addaction. That means that JIP players will wait until their player object was created before running your addaction line.

    If you want the action to persist after respawn you'll need to do a little more work.

    "player addaction..." in init.sqf does work, but the problem remains that everyone can see / use the player's addaction as well.

    I'm not totally familiar with the isServer command, although looking at the BIS Wiki it doesn't seem like something that I could use in this situation. Could you possibly make an example that I could use in this case?

    Thanks for the help thumbs-up.gif

  2. Posted

    I recently did a search on this forum about private addactions, ie. addactions that only one player can see / use in multiplayer. There were solutions that solved their problems, but none of them worked for me.

    Here's what I have in a few soldiers init field:

    Quote[/b] ]if (player == this) then {this addaction ["the action","action.sqf"]};

    I have tested this in single player and it works. I go up to the other soldiers that have the same init and I cannot see their addactions. However, some things to note:

    1. It seems like whenever I give my unit a name, such as "s1" for DAC, the addaction will not appear. If I change "player == this" to "s1 == this" then it works, but subsequently I can see other people's addactions as well.

    2. These units were manually changed from side East to West in the mission SQM. So, it's East units that are seen as West to the AI. I don't know if that affects anything, but it might!

    Overall, once compiled into a .PBO and tested in MP, it just doesn't work. No addactions appear whatsoever. I haven't tried this on a dedicated server but I don't think it would matter. I have tried other variations that were recommended, such as:

    Quote[/b] ]if (local player and player == this) ...

    Which did not work as well. I wish I could elaborate more, but my testings with this have been inconsistant and downright bizarre. Hope to see some suggestions. inlove.gif

  5. Posted

    When using this on a dedicated server, it seems to work alright, although there are some bugs.

    The biggest ones I saw:

    1) There is a script error that happens at intrevals.

    <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">'[[1,4]],[[2,1]],"Report",scalar |#|bool array string 0xe0fffef,[],[],true]...' Error Missing ]

    2) # of men in the OOB does not update. You have to escape out of command engine then go back in to get updated roster.

  7. Posted

    JIP is undocumented, but the CrCTI and MFCTI guys are coming close to figuring it out. There are already a few CTI missions, such as RTS (which is very similiar to CTI, if not better in its own way) that support JIP flawlessly.

    You should probably do more research or something.

  8. Posted

    possable to a make a 3-4 sided version

    RTS/CTI needs to expand with ArmA 3-4 sides would be sweet notworthy.gif

    Oh man, an independent side would rule. Maybe they would have different objectives, such as holding at least _% of the map for a certain amount of time.

  9. Posted

    edit:

    -- I could not agree MORE... AI Pathfinding is so horriffic, and it really takes this mission to expose this. How often do you have this many dumb ai running around? Think about 50+ people in a server, all with at least 3-5 AI.. That's around 250 AI units... All running into eachother and bottlenecking on certain ROADS and ugh! I hope BIS plays this and goes, "OMFG!@& We Gotta Fix This!!&@#! AI!* <-- Like its the end of the world.

    I'm pretty sure you're being sarcastic, but if you're not, even I was having trouble driving through Dolores last night. There was so much god damn garbage everywhere - turned over bmp's, helicopter hulls, unused ammo and repair trucks - that it made driving anything a challenge. It's not suprising that the AI can't handle hundreds and hundreds of objects everywhere.

    First and foremost, I had a frigging awesome time last night. Me and my friend fought off attackers at an oil CP and certainly got our ass kicked. It was fun just trying to survive.

    However, this game needs a lot of tweaking!

    The amount of armor was just absolutely ridiculous. I saw a column of about 7 Strykers driving down a road - persumably directed by a player using multiple AI - and there were Abrahms everywhere. There really needs to be a limit to how much armor can be taken out within a period of time, or just how much armor period. I gave up trying to attack Abrahams because I realized that same player could pump another one out by the time I destroyed it.

    Gotta be a script to delete unused vehicles. It clogs the server up big time.

    Limit the amount of AI one person can have, give them the ability to delete own AI units. Essential.

    This next one is tricky: there really needs to be a variable resource. Perhaps money, or some sort of mineral, that can be used to buy 2nd hand or mercenary vehicles. It's a little crazy that you pretty much have to build a fire base to prevent total annihiliation, and it would be nice to be able to build something without needing a vehicle factory or barracks. How, where and when I'm not sure. confused_o.gif

    Some other ideas:

    1) instead of 24 minute days ( way too fast! ) how about 30 minute days, 10 minute nights? Just make sure it syncs up with everyone.

    2) Possibly link capture points to prevent "hot potato" gameplay, although I suspect due to the way resources work this wouldn't really work. It would be nice to have a 'frontline' to fight for, though, instead of just flying around ambushing cp's alone. I also agree with the poster above me that having some really basic CP Defenses would help. Right now you just sorta fly around, destroy a CP and repeat about a million times.

  10. Posted

    Oh, so view distance is client side? I always thought that the AI would only engage at the max value of a view distance. Could that be why the AI doesn't engage sometimes, since everyone has different view distances?

    I could've sworn I tried to change my view distance multiple times, but it kept reverting back to 500m. I'll keep trying.

    I played a little more today on your server with about 20 people - really fun. This is easily one of the best missions for ArmA right now, and it doesn't even require addons!

  11. Posted

    I really enjoyed what I played, although I have a few thoughts / suggestions.

    1. Make the default lowest view distance 1000. 500 is really freaking short! It makes helicopters frustrating to fly.

    2. Increase tank / air build times slightly. The mission seemed really armor oriented. I understand why, and I would only propose maybe a 15-20 second increase at most.

    3. More build time for special infantry units. Why does an AT guy cost as much as a rifle troop? What would be the point of even getting a rifle troop to begin with?

    4. The ability to delete units out of ones squad.

  13. Posted

    It would be quite gorish because they would have to make burnt bodies, it would problably increase Arma's rating to mature too.

    Are we playing the same game? The game already has some pretty friggin' gruesome wound textures, especially for face wounds. I seriously doubt a few corpses littered around a crash site would boost any maturity rating.

    I imagine they did it to save some poly's which makes sense. Although, if you shoot people inside a vehicle they remain there and you even have to push them out, so who knows.

  14. Posted

    Do the weapons and ammunition of removed/invisible units in a destroyed vehicle also disappear? I hope they haven't removed the thrill of scavenging like in Resistance...

    In resistance if you completely destroyed something you couldn't scavange anyways. You can actually use half-way destroyed vehicles in this - I saw a burnt out husk of a UAZ but I was manning the DSHK nicely.

  16. Posted

    you do realise there will be a large amount of ww2 mods for arma

    and you do realize that the wwii mods for OFP, including the FDF eastern front mod, all worked with the system fairly well regardless. crew could die inside tanks, tanks could be disabled, etc. personally i don't feel abstraction with a hitpoint system is fatal to any kind of reality people have made up in their heads.

    and like most developement crap, you can have this and that but not everything. i'd rather have a robust system than something like wwiiol, where you can't bail out of your tank, switch crew members around, etc.

  17. Posted

    Ta.

    wink_o.gif

    Enough testing for me I'm afraid but to reinforce your point... On Delores (blow the bridge mission) I hit 2 T-72s each with one shot from an M136. Each shot was to the side and caused both crews to bail.

    Chances are you took a track out, which doesn't seem to have a graphical representation in game.

    I saw the same thing on that mission. After taking out the crew I jumped into the tank and sure enough the track was gone.

    Seems to me that AI crews are programed to bail as soon as the vehicle is immobilised. This is pretty much a good thing for lighter vehicles I suppose, but for a tank crew it's a bit extreme (depending on circumstances).

    They also bail when other parts of the tank are destroyed, such as the turret. It's not just limited to specific damage.

    I'm not sure why people complain about the armor realism in a game where a confrontal engagement usually means instant death. Even in a simulator like Steel Beasts, which does not have crew bail (not counting Steel Beasts II), the engagements rarely last past the first shot if it's a hit.

    Someone comparing penetrative values of WWIIOL to this game is absolutely asinine. WWII armored combat was a slug fest, especially at range when sometimes they wouldn't even bother to shoot at each other if no damage could be done. That sort of intricacy is needed in a WWII simulator, sure, but there's no reason to simulate it in ArmA.

    I think for an infantry sim the game does armor pretty well. It's functional and doesn't need improvement beyond some bug fixes and some added features (such as popping smoke, which would be very nice).

  18. Posted

    How effective is it in real life? I saw a video of some guys in Bosnia who shot down an Mi17. I was expecting the chopper to go kaboom but instead it just crash landed with a bit of smoke. I take it its a fragmentation warhead?

    I'm pretty sure it's fragmentation warhead. In OFP they are a bit overpowered, almost like minature nuclear bombs. They can even take on light armor such as a BMP and such, which is fairly absurd.

    It seems like you can lock onto vehicles in ArmA, but I haven't tested how much damage it does.

  19. Posted

    What is a little amazing is that the AI refuses to use cover inside of buildings. The dude who made SLX wrote a Group Link III script that makes groups of AI run into buildings and take cover for a few minutes - it works really, really well and hopefully he'll figure out a way to do it with ArmA.

  20. Posted

    But anyway, you can see the bounce of some tracer early in the movie and that has never been done quite correctly in a game, they tried with marginal success but not just the same.

    I miss my LMG days in the army sad_o.gif

    "marginal" success? Load up the editor, choose Rhamadi, plop a UH60 down and make player gunner. Make the time of day night and shoot at a hill with the mini gun. I have never, ever seen - in any game - tracer rounds bounce as realistically. Infact it looks exactly like the video you quoted, albiet shooting 2000rpm as opposed to the 800 or whatever in that video.

    It seems like everyone has a different idea on what a tracer should look like. I don't think it should look like the lasers currently in the game, but what is in now isn't that bad. It just needs to be toned down.

  25. Posted

    1200m here and runs fine on my not-so-uber-elite system.

    I gave up long time ago discussing why one needs 3000m+ viewdistance when his weapon has an average range of 600m.

    It would make sense in a game that was infantry only, but when you have things like helicopters and SABOT chucking tanks then longer ranges come into play.

    2000m seems good for me. You can see the surrounding terrain quite well and it's not much of a drop from 1200m or more.

×