galzohar

That seems to be the Take On Helicopters variant of the setHit, which seems to only work with an actual selection, and not for the "overall" damage. I think my solution will be to simply change the value returned by the handleDamage event handler, so the engine sets the damage itself. Hopefully it will achieve what I'm trying to achieve. The problem so far is that you can't setHit to "" selection, and the event handler for the "" selection is fired before the one for "body" (in case of a body shot).

A few days ago it wouldn't load at all. Now version is just stuck on alpha as reported above. Why isn't the default the latest version, anyway?

Speaking of Arsenal fixes, do you have any idea why the armor, impact, etc values shown in the arsenal have nothing to do with their in-game performance? For example, vermin shows very low "impact" value compared to mk20, but it actually does pretty much the same damage. Also "light" bluefor plate carrier shows lowest armor value, but it is actually the same as the other ones, while green army "GL" vest shows high armor value yet it is weaker than the other green army plate carriers. Any idea what is the displayed "armor" and "impact" values and why are they completely unrealted to the actual damage dealt/mitigated?

Hi, What are you guys using for ballistics configuration? I noticed some serious inconsistencies, for example: - M249 has lower damage than M4 with all ammo types. - M4 and M16 have the exact same damage. - Not sure about how it should be, but Mk262 has higher damage than vanilla MX. Those are easy to test by shooting a target with body armor at point blank and recording+resetting the damage after every shot.

It can be rather easily ported, and has been successfully ported to IFA3. Mostly you will just need to edit the mission.sqm, which is pretty self-explanatory. Everything else should work. If you want support for additional mods (different weapons or uniforms than those already supported), though, you would also have to edit some scripts. If you just want to use a different terrain all you have to do is decide which areas are valid for objective positions and where to place the "preparation area" (where you wait between rounds). Then you just have to edit the mission.sqm to represent those decisions :) Official mission already includes Altis, Stratis and Zargabad support. Look at the mission.sqm to get an idea how porting would work. Again, no scripting is needed for adjusting the mission to a different terrain. First post updated with video guide of the mission. Next version will include "ready" check for defenders as well (so only when both defenders and attackers are ready the round will start), some loadout adjustments (still WIP, but vermin SMG is now included for both sides), unstuck option for attacker drivers, increased unstuck time for defenders, and possibly more improvements if I can think of any before the release :)

First, hitting up google with the keywords "Arma 3" and any of those game modes (DTAS, TACBF, EUTW) will send you right into your answers. But to help you a bit more: DTAS: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?153398-Dynamic-Take-And-Secure-Randomized-Round-Based-No-Respawn-A-amp-D Also more DTAS videos in my channel at my signature. TACBF: http://www.tacticalbattlefield.net/forum/ EUTW: http://www.eutw.net/index.php?id=home

Ask Leon who plays DTAS with us, somehow for 3 rounds in a row he managed to have an enemy step on his mine, and in DTAS you only get 1 mine with the settings we use! You can be sure he was pretty happy with it :) Of course, we also have a guy who stepped on friendly mines twice in a row, too...

There are plenty. They are actually the most popular... But even in those you will be often be much more effective with a proper team. In addition to what was mentioned, you have EUTW and King of the Hill, and probably the life mods sort of count too. Even more tactical game modes such as DTAS and TACBF don't exactly force you to play with the group and communicate. But they do have more specific missions that you should be focusing on rather than running around exploring the world, and will give you a much more obvious disadvantage for not working with the team. But it's still a good way to start - Play serious PvP missions alone, and when you feel like it take it to the next level and try to support the team and see how you like it. You can find relevant videos in my channel.

A lot of what you guys are saying about PvP is just flat out wrong. Though I see where you're coming from, playing only the PvP missions you have been playing. You can have tactics in a 10-minute round. Actually, 10 minutes is plenty for a single-life mission if it's designed correctly. It's not easy to apply tactics at first, but once you get the hang of it, it gets pretty damn tactical. You can have a good PvP match with just 12 players. The mission just has to be designed properly and not spread the players around a large area with long respawn delays and travel distances. Let people fight in the purest form, and if the players are the tactical kind, the fighting will get tactical. If the players aren't the tactical kind, no game mode (COOP or PvP) will make it tactical. With no respawns you actually have to apply some sort of realistic tactics, since there's no playing around the respawn system and taking best advantage of how the respawns work in the mission. With short rounds, you actually get to enjoy it multiple times in 1 hour and not get bored waiting 30 minutes for next mission to start or guard an objective for 30 minutes while the attackers are really just AFK. With efficient spawn positions (defenders spawning at the objective, attackers spawning 1200m away already inside their vehicles and in the position they chose during the planning stage before the round), 10 minutes is more than enough to actually execute your assault - No need to waste time flanking as the defending team does not know where you chose to come from, and no need to waste time with logistics since you just start driving towards your disembark point as soon as the timer starts. The competitive nature forces you to try get every possible edge over your opponents, yet the rules (available equipment, positions of objectives, time limit) prevent the usual "abusive" (or just "not fun") behavior you often see in other PvP missions, such as sniping from a hill 800m away or just ignoring the objective. You really should just give it a chance and join the Arma 3 PvP Community Steam group to see the event notifications. You can see some DTAS action in my youtube channel, though the tactical level is obviously not easy to see in a video. But I'm telling you that the teamwork levels I've seen in DTAS are some of the most impressive I've seen in Arma, simply because it's playing a realistic game with properly tuned competitive settings. Don't get me wrong, COOP has its upsides - AI can be set to perform a duty that no human player would be willing to do in a game, and it is the most patient kind of player you will ever meet (which again allows you to make him do stuff no human player would be willing to do). However, after playing enough PvP, I really can't go back to the AI which are just not good enough of a simulation of a human soldier. The way they detect you and the way they shoot you is just off by more than I can live with. You can tune them down to easy mode or tune them up to god mode, but in both cases they simply won't detect and shoot like humans. And that's before even mentioning their behavior on the tactical level, as the detection and accuracy are more than enough to burn me out on COOP missions. Again, it's not that they're too good or too poor, but that they just follow different rules regardless of what settings you use for their difficulty. They don't see trees and bushes the way you do. They aren't affected by distance and camouflage the way you do. When I started playing PvP regularly, I had to get used to the fact that getting behind a bush actually makes me invisible from the enemy, unlike AI where getting behind the bush didn't seem to matter. I might play some COOP again here and there, but PvP (the tactical kind, where realistic teamwork is beneficial) is where it's at for me.

Hard drives are cheap nowadays :) Or you can always delete some porn. Just don't re-download it while playing!

Hi, If you look at PWS, since the US mod requires the RU mod, you only need to tell PWS to install the US mod and the RU mod will be automatically installed as a dependency. You don't actually need to have both mods on your mod list. Also, not having a separate mod is good, with different folder names you'd have to download the mod twice if you once join a server running the separate mods and then again when joining a server running the combined version. With AiA standalone I'm not sure why the mods aren't completely separate (as far as I'm aware SA includes the TP stuff), it would probably be better if no content was duplicated and instead a dependency would have been used, but then again for non-PWS users it's easier to have a 1-click download of AIA SA which is likely the reason. In PWS having multiple mods is not a problem as long as the dependencies are properly defined.

It's easier to apply tactics in COOP because COOP is easier. It usually is made very forgiving so you can use whatever tactics you decided on and it'll work more or less because your enemy is not trying to do better. In PvP, even the most sophisticated tactics can be defeated by an opponent with even better tactics. While some might claim PvP doesn't have tactics, in reality it's just more difficult and if you're having a hard time tactics isn't exactly going to be your main focus. If you're playing high level of PvP, though, you should definitely be taking tactics into account, and when you do it's much more satisfying than in coop because you know your tactics were really effective and didn't just succeed because the enemy AI let you pull it off.

Well, any idea how to consistently reproduce the issue? I could provide the command line so others can try the same and see if it reproduces on their servers, but it's rather long, so if anyone can reproduce it with a small list of mods that would be better :)

For some reason when loading AiA since last weekend (before the hotfix, as well as after the hotfix), the server refuses to let people connect. Trying to join will give a black Arma-style screen without being able to even type in chat. From the server side, the console doesn't even show a connection attempt. Task manager shows the arma server process taking up 100% of a core (33%, as server has 3 virtual cores). Trying to close the server console window doesn't work (as it usually does), process must be ended from task manager. Both clients and server update through PWS. Disabling AIA mods on the server and otherwise using the exact same configuration (clients still run AiA), everything works (except AiA missions obviously cannot be loaded). Our mod list can be found here: pws://www.arma-il.info/files/arma-il.yml --- :name: ArmA-IL :ip: 95.172.92.227 :port: 2302 :game: 9DE199E3-7342-4495-AD18-195CF264BA5B :info: http://www.arma-il.info/ :image_large: http://www.arma-il.info/images/aillogo.png :image: http://arma-il.info/images/ail64x64.png :motd: - Welcom to ArmA-IL IDF COOP Server. :rules: [] :force_server_name: false :required_mods: - "@CBA_A3" - "@sthud_a3" - "@IDF" - "@ALiVE" - "@JSRS2" - "@RH_M4_A3" - "@task_force_radio" - "@st_stamina_bar" - "@HAFM_ISIS_A3" - "@AllInArmaTerrainPack" - "@fata_a3" - "@hlcmods_ak" - "@ASDG_JR" - "@hlcmods_core" - "@rhs_usf3" - "@rhs_afrf3" - "@mec" :allowed_mods: [] :apps: - Main TS server :missions: [] :mpmissions: - ":all"

-wrong thread, should have been AIA TP thread-

At the very least there can be a little script added for version control. Though signatures do a much better job compared to any other available option (as in, that doesn't require BIS to change something). Having to script it individually for each mission or creating an additional version control mod to do it is just creating a lot of work for no really good reason.

Would be nice to have the option for normal rifles to also not have that (having 2 separate magazines). Or do we already have such magazines and I missed them? Also, the blast radius of the PG-7VL is extremely low. I know it's an AT rocket, but still ~1m kill radius just does't seem right.

Why are the "last" 4 rounds of the M2010 tracers?

You can host them all you want but players won't join the server. Popularity needs to start with a community adopting it as their preferred mod to play on their public players, and then as players play it and enjoy it, demand increases and new servers can rise.

If you just use PWS you won't have to re-download the whole thing with each change... Just click "update" and it updates only the files that actually changed, and even for those files it won't re-download the whole file.

Well, you can still download the dependency manually, but it's easier when it's automatic :)

PWS is missing the CUP dependency, caused us a lot of trouble tonight :(

Like I said I never even use that CQB mode feature even for weapons that have proper backup sights because at the ranges where it's needed you can just shoot unsighted, but some people just can't get used to this kind of shooting, and need that "CQB mode" even if it's almost purely for show.

As said, try a different server. I get good FPS on both DTAS and EUTW with similar specs (Except I have i5-4690k at 4.2GHz). TACBF for example gives me a bit low FPS (20-25) in some of their missions. I wouldn't even bother trying wasteland and the likes. King of the hill depends on server I suppose, most likely due to server configuration (not to be mistaken with server hardware!).