Dreepa

I am also looking for that information. Was not able to find any related stuff for the Arma 3 editor. Can anyone help?

Thanks for that. For a start it would be sufficient for me to just have a way to find out that the AI is under fire. In my mission I would like them to start moving towards specific points. I could do it with (get)combatstate, but that means they all need to start NOT in danger mode. Also using the combatstate creates some other problems for me. If anyone maybe knows something else I can check against what would be helpful!

Hi, i try to make opfor flee when under fire from very far away. Is there any trigger condition you could recommend to use? thx!

Hi, I ve seen Norrins revive script been ported to Arma 3 ALPHA, but not updated BETA so far. Do we have a working one I could use in my mission for the BETA?

Hi, I am looking for a way to create a trigger that fires when the player is looking at an area. Currently I use OPFOR and have the trigger fire when they are detected. However, I want to make a recon mission, where the trigger should fire when the player observes a compound, where no troops are at.

Hey, so I am trying hard to get the hang of this all :) I am making some progress, but for some reason some stuff won't work properly. For some reason this trigger produces "Error Generic error in expression": deleteMarker "obj4"; task4 setTaskState "SUCCEEDED"; sleep 10; hint "Data recovered." But the task is still set to done and the hint "Data recovered" is also shown. And another trigger that will fire an error message ingame when triggered is: sleep 20; task3 = player createSimpleTask ["Survive"]; task3 setSimpleTaskDescription ["Your escape route is compromised. Lay low and move south east.", "Survive", "Survive"]; task3 setSimpleTaskDestination (getMarkerPos "obj_3"); hNil = [objNull, ObjNull, tskobj_3, "ASSIGNED"]; hint "Your Tasks have been updated"; I am a bit lost as to what I am doing wrong.

Thanks! I also looked spawn up immediatelly. Helps a lot. Thing I go that way first. It returns a script handle, but in your quote you do not assign that script handle to a name/variable. I saw other examples where people use "Nil" etc. for putting the void. Is that recommended? Or does it not make any difference?

I think you misunderstood me. :) Of course I do not want anyone to spend their time here explaining stuff... I was merely asking for an "approach" to learning it. You know, when you see someone playing a chord on the guitar, and you ask him: How do understand the composition of the chord, and what notes make sense in there? And he will reply with: "Alright, you should probably start getting your fingers to do all standard minor and major chords first, then memorize all notes for each tab on each string, and thereafter you should get a book about harmonics and learn which coords fit into which scale. That will get you started for a good foundation." :)

Thanks! May I ask for the slower workaround, out of curiousity? (eager to learn more stuff) :)

Thank you, will try this. How do I approach it best, if I want to understand the script? (Like what are variables with _ in front of them or what does "select" do etc.) Thanks again!

Hey, I just read on PC Gamer that ArmA 3 will feature "completely new motion-captured animations" and I was wondering if that is actually something which will improve the handling of your soldier. Since OFP the handling always felt choppy and snatchy when trying to move small inches (like when moving around a corner, only tipping the movement keys). Now I am wondering if this change is purely cosmetical or if it actually changes the feeling of how you move.

Edit: The title should better have been: "Why is movement in BIS games so choppy while aiming down your scope when making small adjustments to your view by tapping 'a' and 'd'. Hi my suggestion to make Arma2 more appealling for a wider range of players and less clumsy to play in general: Get rid of animation bound movement. If feels weird and hurts the gameplay experience in many situations where you need exact control over your camera and target reticule. A human naturally controls his body and is not bound to "bopping" or "choppy" movement like we are presented in all BIS games. Since OFP I am wondering why you went with this movement model. It is really just -not fluent -annoying when you adjust your position just slightly -frustrating in buildings and around obstacles like tress where you tap 'a' and 'd' alot to get into the right position -feeling like an artificial restriction I know Arma 2 is aiming at sim people (and I like it, I come from all the Jane's Games and also worked on a game called "Soldner" which was fairly realistic) but getting rid of that sluggish movement doesnt contradict realism. In fact it is not realistic to limit movement to animation sequences as you will never be able to animate a character like it would move in real life and thus will never be able to create an authentic feel of movement while binding it to the animation. Thanks for reading. Edit: My suggestion would be: Add a new key, like SHIFT does for walk, that makes the soldier go really slow while putting all effort into maintaining a stable view down the ironsight. That key would probably be CTRL, just becauses its handy.

When I bought OA I didnt touch the campaign, as I really wanted to play with my mates. So I entirely focused on multiplayer up until today (except the first mission of the campaign) So today a friend and me started the coop campaign and it was rather boring. In the first "real" mission (its the 2nd in the list), we didnt do anything. Our squads cleared the airport, then moved on to the other village. As I was explaining the controls to my friend, we slowly moved on. Upon arival, the objective was checked as done. We never fired a shot. So we went on to the 2nd village. Again, upon arrival our squads did all the dirty work. It was a weird feeling: I wanted to present the game to may mate (with all my enthusiasm) and all he did was move to A, to B and C: Done. Okay, so we went on to the 3rd mission and since we wanted to play together, I took the driver seat of the abrams, and he took the gunner seat. After 50% of the mission it just aborted without stating any reason. Just the end screen. So we thought it might have to do with the convoy being to stretched out (we left the Vee and the Avenger at the base). Next try, we did exactly as ordered. I took the abram's commander seat and he took the avenger. After some fighting, for some reason, a bradley was not able to move anymore. After some warnings, that I am to far away from the convoy, the game ended.... again. We got a bit pissed. That bradley was obviously not able to follow up. What were we supposed to do?? So we made the next try, and this time we actually made it to the station. Thing is: I was the only one that was busy. His avenger had no work to do. I killed a dozen tanks and alot of infantry and had some fun, while he was watching. Ok there was one chopper coming, but it was instantly blown away by one of my AI bradleys. So we reached the camp and he was like: Im gonna go make me some food, Im not needed here anyway. So I get to that crash site, eliminate the resistance, activate the UAV and scout the 3 possible locations for POWs. There is a message incoming, telling me that we found the right camp and the I should stay where I am and wait for reinforcements to handle that. So I do. 10 seconds thereafter, I see the endscreen, and the mission is not complete. I cannot select the next mission in the campaign list and when selecting the old, I restart at my last savegame (the camp). That was when I was finally so frustrated that I just said to myself: Fuck it, Im not gonna waste my time any longer, and went back to multiplayer coop. At least we had a bit fun with domination. I wa sso looking forward to coop.... *sigh*

Since that commander mode (del on numpad) was introduced, I am fiddeling with inverted mouse controls, and its sooooo annoying. I need mouse invert, when I play through the eyes of a soldier. Like many people do. However, when using the commander mode (bird's eye perspective) it is a simple point and click interface, and there mouse invert needs to be turned off automatically. So my suggestion is the following improvement: Turn off mouse invert as soon as commander mode is entered. Enable it again when leaving com mode.

Hi, I was wondering why the heck the markers on the singleplayer campaign, indicating where to move, who to attack etc. do NOT STAY for longer than 20 seconds. However, you can press ESC or open the map and return to the game, and the markers will reappear but fade again. I mean, BIS come on... You do so much to make the game more beginner friendly and then you leave in such weird behaviors a QA guy should be able to point out easily in playability & usability tests. I mean, I am a new guy, I get thrown into the game, right into the action. Cool start up scene and everything. I havent played 2 minutes and already am confronted with negative experience: 1. My commander orders me to move to X.Y. but the indicator doesnt stay long enoug on screen to know where he wants me to go. 2. I am assigned a target, same prob as above. 3. There is incoming transmission (story based script) that is totally mixed up with my soldieres reports. Why not mute the soldiers commands for as long as a story audio is running? 4. And finally still the old idiocy of "Enemy soldier at 11 o clock" and all those relative positions to yoru own position, when you have absolutely NO CLUE where your leader is pointing at, and therefore you are totally lost and just ask yourself: What? Where? 2 oclock relative to what? I remember a clock in, erm, Arma1 I think? It was on the bottom left. Where did it go? At least put a marker on the HUD so we know where 12 o clock is. 5. My mate says: "4: Need cover".... Alright, I would really like to help that ppor bastard, but how the heck to I find out who No.4 is? 6. Why is it impossible for a trained soldier to slowly move around a corner and steady his weapon aim? Close quarter combat is still to clumsy. I press SHIFT to slow down and use 'a' or 'd' to strafe while looking down the sights, and my gun is bopping up and down, back and forth like being held by an epileptic soldier. Slow TACTICAL movement with constant eyes on target should really be possible, somehow. Your animation ist just totally overdone. It feels wrong and it is. I am again (as I was with Arma1 and Arma2) stunned how a game developer cannot find this flaws when playtesting there own game. Seriously. This is the 4th generation of your game (not counting VBS)... You have all the shiny stuff in there, masterpiece of open world fun. Yet you miss such most basic things. I just cant comprehend.

Hold mousebutton pressed

What nemesis says. It is not a concient choice to move your gun down. You do it automatically, especially a trained soldier. Though what still happens, is a slight offset due to the automatic and conditioned muscle reaction. So the weapon should not climb, but leave the crosshair at a small random offset tot he original point aimed at.

I dont need non fading markers. I just point out (from a QA playability-test perspective) why this is not the way to present the game in the first mission to a new player. Furhtermore, as I said, the markers reappear when you enter the menu or map. Probably an injection of ultra-mem. Get your dose today, it refreshes your memory instantly! :P In RL, as someone already said, I can talk to my squad leader. I can ask for orders. All you "pseudo realistic fanatics" have no clue what realism means. All you do is fight for different qualities of abstraction of reality. There are so many things going on that are nto simulated, that it really makes me smile when I read stuff like that. No, a marker is not realistic. A fading marker even less. Though whats most unrealistic is beign thrown into a world of lifeless AIs that cannot respond to your problems. And thats exactly why there are interfaces. If we had super-AI you d be talking to your PC instead of clicking on buttons.

In the contrary to the OPs opinion, I feel that aiming down the sights is unrealistic. At least the artifical way it is done (toggle with right mouseclick). It obstruct your view more than it does in reality. It feels artificial, as I cannot move as fluent with the gun at my shoulder, putting it down a bit, moving around the corner, putting it up again, or even steadily going around the corner while aiming down the sight. Its either 1 or 0. Its either ON or OFF. My body works different. My body is a natural tool of my will. I am really embarassed that BIS didnt simulate the capabilites of my natural body feel (*cough* sarcasm *cough*). So in conclusion, I need the abstraction of my natural body feel and natural weapon/body movement, that the game gives me: The crosshair on screen. I already bought the game for you. I wouldnt have bought it without the crosshair. So I am the customer that takes your place ;) See what I did here? :P

About the name: Its the forums fault not his. Stop picking on it. It didnt warn him. And I doubt there is a preview of how the forumpost looks when registering.

LOL the arguments in favor of fading markers is just ridicolous. In RL I have MANY MANY more things that arent simulated in this game. Situational awareness in Arma was always TERRIBLE and it still is. If I am told where to go, I will "forget" that info?? If I am told where to attack, I will forget that also??? This is the most stupid excuse ever. Sorry, no offense meant. Its just a really poor excuse for a terrible beginners experience. The first minutes shape the impression of a game. Realism is good. Feeling artificially constraint is not. And just for the record: Every time you press ESC and leave the menu, also everytime you leave the map, the indicators reappear and fade away again. So it really looks like an oversight. Besides that: What is up with that right mouse button target assign. Every newbie will go like "WTF did just happen"? He sits in his abrams, right clicks to zoom in, as to see the horizon better (something you do constantly, as this game is about pixel shooting, and therefor you really need the magnification), and all of a sudden the abrams gunner blasts away that friendly hummer right in fron of you.... Why? Because "assign target" is at the same key as "zoom in". Which makes sense in other situations, but doesnt in this one. Also: If you wanna use the "assign target" properly, you just cant, because there is NO target reticule to aim with. Seriously now, how do you justify a fundtion that assigns a target to your gunner, that is sharing its key with "zoom in" and if tried to use properly, doesnt even have a target so you actually dont know what you assign. Are they expecting you to put a dot on your screen? For THREE generations that stupid system has not been touched. Its like a hit in the face. Its like they dont wanna improve the usability of their game. And those thigns are just the most obvious things. RMB on zoom either lock on wrong target if wanna use as itnende, no crosshair anyhow: press righht click with intention of zoom: friendly in center and AI kills it. wtf?

Fading waypoint indicator influenced by difficulty choice? Is it intended? Sounds like a bug. I mean, whats the reasning behind this?

Well, at least CQB weapons have a purpose if its true that they are less hindering. I like that tbh.

Runs MUCH better than Arma2

Just a quick suggestion, cause its a pain evertime I come across it. I use mouse invert, cause I am a flight sim type... (just used to it, even for infantry). However, when you enter the command mode (, on numpad) you switch to a top down view looking on your squad from above. It immediatelly becomes another interface "feel" as you are more using the mouse as a point and click tool and not a body control. Therefore mouse invert (if enabled by the player) should be overridden with "no mouse invert" while in that command mode.