victim913

I am kind of lost with Functions and what they do and how they work. Learning scripting a little here and there, I still don't know much. But I want to use the BIS_fnc_destroyCity. I just don't know where or how. I know this: [position,areaSize,seed,blacklist] call BIS_fnc_destroyCity I saw the wiki about it and it gives this: ["destroyBase",500,42,[bis_vila]] call bis_fnc_destroyCity First, where do I put this? Second: For position it gives "destroyBase". Is that some code or something? I'm assuming since it's to destroy the city, I don't have some building that I add and name it "destroyBase". Can I put a marker, then name it "marker1" and put this stuff in it's init? I know what the numbers mean, but I don't know what blacklist is. I would like to know this stuff but if worst comes to worst, at least someone can tell me exactly what to put and where for it to work. For now I want some city in Chernarus. I can play with the numbers. And do I need functions manager or something? Thanks, and anything else I left out

I still haven't gotten this to work correctly. It just does what it wants. Changing values don't change anything. Maybe the size, but I tried it on Chernarus and some buildings are not destroyable to begin with. But anywhere else I have not gotten any accuracy. That is why I want BI to unblock the headers on their pbo's so I can see how they did it.

Yeah, I noted that picture in another post that said Merkava was OPFOR. I don't see Israel ever joining any side but their own, and especially not joining countries that are known enemies.

They can't please you gus can they? Thread after thread about hating to always fight T72 and T90's, and know they make it a little further ahead and you guyscomplain that you want to use your T72's and T90's. I personally don't like Comanches, I never have. They never looked "real". But going in to the future gives them so much play. Like I said in the hacker thread. Bi doesn't like to go out and give us a REAL life enemy, probably piss too many people off. Creating Chernarus was a little lame because that meant physically taking away from a country that does exist. And tryng to make it real world believable makes it a little harder. Making it futuristic gives them an angle like this persian/iran thing. It also gives them room to let the "good guys", NATO, get their ass handed to them. I mean Blufor always wins, always good guys, and always outnumbers bad guys. It's time for a change. Also some of you like the Merkava being OPFOR, but you don't know that. In fact you can see a US guy standing behind it in one picture as if it's on the same team. It may be BLUFOR. I don't see Israel ever giving in to anyone, and joining a Persian/Iran/China thing doesn't seem like something they will ever do. Unless Israel gets wiped out and OPFOR take left over weapons. Other than the Comanche, I thnk it went to a good place in the future. Like someone said about BF2142, that sucked. Went too far into the future (and killed gameplay). This is slight. Besides, seriously how many more games about past warefare do we need. I love the WW2 stuff, but stop making games for that. Modding this for that is ok. But we don't need any more WW2 games. Or anymore games where the only BLUFOR tank is always an m1a2 and OPFOR tank is always T72 , T90. But still a year away kills my excitement about it. I told you all of our excitement would be crushed when we saw that it would be a year away. OH, AND THERE IS A TAIL ROTOR ON THE COMANCHE for all you that keep saying there isn't.

Some feedback. You may already know this. On your "Blackops" units I can confirm for sure that your Blackops "light", and "officer" for sure do not show backpacks. I have tried different ones but they never show. However, they are there, just invisible. And inventory is there too. I even used the 2 backpacks you added: Merc_Patrol_Pack_black Merc_Backpack_Sabot_black neither of those showed up either. Side note; I like the "light" soldier. He is the only one with a black only mask, and both knee pads. All the others without helmets all have skull masks, except for sniper, but only one knee pad. Is there any code I can put in the init of a "skull" face in order to change it to be black? All the blackops that don't have full black on, all have skulls. I like the diversity in the models, but don't want nothing but skulls. The units are really impressive.

Why would it be ridiculous? Your missing 2 points. Putting Reinforcements on a disc = more $ for BI. Besides people that couldn't DLC it, how many people bought the DLC also bought Reinforcements? ALOT. You forget the point of this entire game. Make money! Second, they don't need to screw around with BAF or PMC anymore. So there will be no more Reinforcements reloaded. It will be entirely seperate. If you look at the clues: Maybe the next expansion for Arma2 will be "Guerillas". There was alot of mention to that in the clues.

I think it's funny how the last few hundred pages has been about Arma3 or Outera, or other engines, etc... What does any of those have to do with all the clues? We have totally disregarded all of the clues and this whole p8h8 thing and started getting ourselves hyped about arma3 and that other stuff that had nothing to do with all those clues. The clues have been about people and places and timelines and history, not about game engines. If it is Arma3, what does the clues have to do with it? And if it is 3, you will all be disappointed to find out it will still be months if not years before you can get your hands on it. So from the clues, why would it mean Arma3? To me it would seem like whatever they have been building up the clues to would be something they would release in the near future. Or why bother hyping us up at all. If it was 3 I would guess they might say they have started working on it, then when they have a release date, then they would promote it like this. That's just my opinion. But last comment, when they released OA and BAF and PMC, didn't they show video of their entire team working on those things? I remember video interviews that were done showing how few people they had and how hard they were working on those expansions. I don't see how those guys could put together 3 in the short time they stopped that. UNLESS, arma2 was their testing ground for arma3. Even so, that is fast turn over of games, arma2 has alot of money to still be made. EA and Dice would stand to learn something from this small team putting out a new game every 2 years WITH constant support. They get BF2 out, don't support it, then nearly ten years later BF3. Whatever it is BI, Arma rules!!

I can't believe you guys are still talking about the picture being real or fake. Who cares? Do you really think it being real or fake has anything to do with the point of the picture? I think we should be looking at what the picture is telling us. This is what I was asking about the other day. Is any of us really on the right track? Have we gotten any confirmation about anything yet? I see some of the pages that tell us what people have found out of the clues, but has anything been confirmed? Are we even looking in the right direction? We have so many dates and clues that it's overkill. We are doing bis promoting for them. They give one or two clues and now we have 600 pages of people getting excited about arma 3 or expansions or whatever, when it might be something else. You may be setting yourself up for disappointment. Don't get me wrong, I like this. But seriously, you have a real photo, but some of you WANT to believe it's not real, so you can believe that it's some new technology graphic for a game thats coming (btw, which if it is fake, none of our graphics cards would handle). You are setting up for disappointment. It's a real pic, with likely photoshop stuff in it. But lets move on already. I don't even know what I am supposed to be looking for anymore. Too many cooks....I want to see real, confirmed info. which clues have been confirmed?

I'll throw my two cents in here along with the million others. Im guessing the point of the picture has ben edited to mean to show us one of a couple things. This is either a picture of the future or now. It's not a game screen shot as some have been saying. The point of this whole "hack" thing is to show us what is to come. So I think this is what is to come. A first attack, this picture definitely looks like an attack. For us a glimpse into the future. We know it's building up to something like that, and this picture isn't the past. So this pic is giving us a clue to their plan. Maybe this is them showing us the island, and showing us, it's a target. It can make sense. It's similar to Utes. It's perfect for a base of operations in the area, with an airfield. Or it may be that they want us to think that is what is currently happening now. That the war has started. As to which aircraft it is or vehicles, I don't think that is important. Whatever military this will be, will obviously have eastern machines. So wether it's russian or chinese or iranian or whatever, doesn't matter. It will most likely be a fictional army. I think it's funny that all these type of games don't want to make any specific country the "bad guys".With exception of Russia, China, Iran,Iraq, most create a fictional bad guy. I think they will do the same with this. Like BF2 had the MEC, to be a middle eastern coalition, I think Bi is doing that here. Iran, Russia, China have always been the "bad guys" so having them be the backbone for this persian thing is easy. So that is why I don't think the vehicles matter, They can give them any vehicle they want since this force will be fictional. Well thats my two cents. I really hope this isn't an arma3. This game is stll new and there is still alot that can be added to it. Maybe it will be a better platform like OA was for arma2. That I can handle but their is too much playing left to be played here still. Maybe they are doing this in order to try to keep people from leaving to go to BF3 when it comes out. It looks good, but it looks more like COD now, so I'd rather stay here. Arma will be the only thing with this type of playing style left. They pretty much were already anyway. Everyone else changing for more console friendly gaming.

Can someone tell me where all this is happening? Where does new info go? I tred clicking the links from the first post so I can see everything that is going on but alot of the links are dead and "internet explorer cant find it". Is there a page with all the clues and answers sorted out so I can get in this thing too? Thanks

I am looking for missing vehicles. Those that you have hidden and those that you have replaced. The quick version: 1. Can I get a list (or is there one already) of which bi models have been replaced with ACE or other versions? (ex: strykers) 2. How can I get the hidden ones back? 3. Any vehicles that have been moved. Like OU air. Not the a-10 or something obvious like that. Specifically, - OU air used to be in my USMC, but now it's under Other. Why did it move? -Some other vehicles have bad paint jobs, and I thought they used to look better. (could be my imagination) But the little birds. Are the ones ingame, the ones that came with OA or the ones ACE was using before OA? I thought you had a better variety of weapons -The super cobras-the z model, are those bis or ace? -Wasn't there a Kiowa before? -----And very important, what happened to the U.S. Army units you had before OA came out? Is there somewhere I can get them? I remember there was a rifleman, and a rifleman 2 that looked different, not just weapons different. I think one had U.S. on his sleeve or something. I loved those army units. I still have old ACE as back up maybe you can tell me where to extract them, or download them from somewhere. Thanks

Why is this getting discussed here in the Arma2 forum? As opposed to Bis general forum. Does that mean it is specifically Arma2 related? I've seen many guesses at arma3 and other things but it's in the arma2 forum. I don't get the point of going in between reality and fiction. Making it seem like it's something real, pointing out locations and naming the developers as if there is some real world conspiracy going on, digging up maps in the real world, as if the map is a real map. I say loose the real world treasure maps for the fake world. Don't pretend real world people are creating a conspiracy to take over the fake world in Arma. And posting clues every 48 hours is pointless. By the time most of us realize a clue is even up, it's already been answered. Is anyone even solving anything? I just see the clues along with what it means. Are real people solving these riddles, or are you just saying they are. I mean really, who has any type of scanner that will scan a bar code made up of avatar pictures? Sorry I must have left my scanner in my other jeans. Yet "someone" was able to scan it?

I have been working on some skins and I want to see them in game. I put them in texview and saved them as .tga. Then i did what i wanted and now I need to convert the image back to .paa. If i save the original image as a .tga after texview, I can still open them with texview and save them back to .paa. But it's the reskins that won't open in texview. I keep getting "error loading image" First of all I am using Gimp. When i save the .tga it asks me where to start the compression i think. It's something like I can start it from top right corner or bottom left. (something like that) I know with BF2 i had to use certain compession with mipmaps and alpha channels etc... So my question is, Can I save it as a jpg or bmp or something and open it in texview to save as .paa? OR Any other type of image? If so, any specific compressions or details on what to save it as in order to go back to .paa? I tried using the *all files and manually type in .paa but it wont Thanks

Thank you! I really liked the Half Moon PLA mod that was out there. I was severely disappointed to see nothing happen with it. I have been dyng for a Chinese jet and anti air vehicles. So now that you brought this mod out, it gives us a much better ability to use it. All your statics, and vehicles and camo schemes finally make the PLA something that can be taken seriously in this game. Unfortunately BI doesn't seem to think it is important to include statics, and support features for armies they give us. It drives me insane that BI releases "Reinforcements" but don't give us FULL armies. We have to rely on U.S. warfare buildings, and most statics, for Blufor, etc... But thanks to you and your mod we have all aspects of an army that we need (except warfare buildings). But, hey you gave us more than what BI gave us with the British addon. I haven't had any problems so far. I put all the units in the game and no errors. For feedback, there heads look weird. Can't explain it. And I'm not to fond of the (T) camo. Looking at pictures online, the colors are correct, but the pattern is more scattered. The halfmoon pla mod, had a pretty close pattern. In fact your © pattern looks more like the way the pattern is, but too heavy. I think if you just added a little more to each patch of color, it would look right. But that's just feedback. It's close enough to play with, and it IS VERY good work. Thanks Wait, added this later, I did find a couple issues. I couldn't find a way to get into the artillery vehicle, or whatever it's called. I couldn't get into the driver seat. just the other ones. And on the tank, I had to stand to the rear and a few feet away from the back corner in order to get into gunner or commander position. I circled around it for a while before i found the way inside. but awesome.

I don't know if anyone is aware of this, but I tried using an AKMS with a solier and he turns into plastic man. "vil_AKMS" Here's the pic:

I did get it working, in fact on chernogorsk, but I can't get it to destroy more than about 30-40% of the buildings. I don't mind the ones that are still standing but have damage marks, but I want it all destroyed. It doesn't make sense that a building in the middle of the block is completely leveled but the building touching it look new. Has anyone been able to get te entire city destroyed or at least get a higher percentage destroyed? I saw a thread talking about the same thing but as usual it didn't finish. Someone probably found the answer and was satisfied and didn't bother finishing it. Then we end up with all kinds of threads about the same thing and then people get scolded for not searching even if they did. So, anyone know how to increase the rate of destruction? The seed is just some randomness thing. I assume if you use the same number all the time, the same buildings will be destroyed? Also, what is the number minimum and maximum for seed? I want to see if we can at least get the most out of this thread for future seekers. Thanks

I didnt think about unchecking the compression. I assumed it was required. Worked like a charm thanks

More of a question than suggestion. But nowhere else to put it. Similar to other threads discussing unpbo stuff. But once Reincforcements arrive, wouldn't it be ok for BIS to unblock the header or whatever that stops us from opening pbo's for BAF and PMC? I thought maybe it was blocked to avoid people from doing stuff with the "Lite" versions of those packages. And it seems like that once BAF came out all the OA stuff became unblocked. Could be wrong but.. Just reskinning those things, especially pmc soldiers. It's one thing to have soldiers look the same, but the PMC guys don't wear uniforms. So it looks like they all get on their cell phones the night before calling their "mates" wondering what each guy is going to wear the next day so they can all match and give each other tips on what colors clash with the terrain and vehicles. I mean it just looks bad to have 2 or 3 different units wearing the same clothes it just looks bad. Or everyone with m4's looks identical, but to also make the defensive marksman look identical (or whoever). Or give them uniforms. Just let us help you along and give a better variety of skins. please Anyway, thanks. love all the stuff you guys do. What's next? you gonnna add more stuff to the small factions like CZ or Germany, or give us better Opfor factions that actually exist like China, Koreas, etc...

Is this a work in progress or is it finished? Just curious. with this and the nimitz, I don't know if you have moved on or if you are going to working on them. They are superior. Great job

Looks like you put alot of work in these units. I can't get past the pictures though. Did you do something to the pics? Extreme shadows and too much contrast or something. I want to see what they look like in the game. The colors look really weird, pinkish red skin etc.. Do you have pics of how they look in the game?

Nevermind. Turns out what i was looking for was not a BIS tank it is a user made one. Someone can delete this please.

supergrunt, asking about the OA backpacks, are they supposed to be wearing the backpacks? If they are, how are you viewing them? I was using RTE and looking at all the units that way, but for some reason, RTE will not spawn any backpacks on units. If you start the mission with the units already placed, they will have backpacks, but not if you place them after the preview has started. If not using RTE, might be similar. And don't forget that ACE takes off backpacks by default, unless you changed that.- if you are using ACE The medics backpacks show up though

I'm getting reallly confused with these patches. I thought we got an official patch the other day. It wasn't the official release?? What is so special about this 1.59 patch that is causing all these problems? I mean the changelogs look like very minor issues and are only 1 or 2 things at that. Will there be any difference between this beta patch and the real patch when it's finally over? I'm expecting some kind of surprise with giving us some new content or something. I just don't see a reason to keep putting these betas out if it is close to the finished product. Usually the betas fix some issues but then when the patch comes out it's a big leap from the last beta to the patch.:confused:

Having IR strobes to locate friendly forces is kind of pointless in this game is it not? I'm not sure exactly how it works, but I can see it being slightly helpful if all of the units are wearing one and I can see him "strobing" with my night vision goggles as he walks around. But if it's something you have to drop for it to work, it seems pointless. Real life I see it very helpful. But real life is way different than playing a computer game. I don't think any game can capture what it's like when you are in situations where this is helpful. In the game it's pretty easy to see who is who, and if it's something you have to set on the ground, enemies can walk into that area and now they are marked friendly. Maybe there is some really awesome MP games out there that get played "right" and use tactics and gets as close to possible as real life. That would be good. But the way most people play is just a bunch of crazed people on their own missions going around killing anyone. If there is an MP world out there that I am missing please tell cause the only way I know a mission will play out right is to play SP. So having a strobe that can be locked on by all aircraft would be ideal. If the aircraft has technology to lock a missle on a target, it should be able to lock on to the strobe. Even without NV capabilities. I know that's the point, to see it with NV, but I'm sure technology can make a strobe that also has other assets, like radio signal or gps or whatever. And most modern aircraft have some type of technology for this to work. And I mean, I want to be able to lock onto that IR strobe, and have my little green square target box to pop up on my screen. And not only that, I want that target box to stay there. If it can lock with a specific missle, and show you your target box, it should stay there even when switching to guns. The computer can lock that position (being that its a computer and can do that) I want to still know where that is even if I lose sight of the blinking. Kind of like when your squad leader tells you to shoot someone and you still see the red circle following your targets predicted path, even when behind a wall. Bottom line, I think if you force an issue to vote on making sure the strobes mark as friendly, you will end up making the strobe almost useless by 80% of the players. Having a strobe that marks as a target, lockable by almost all aircraft (no matter what weapon it uses) and lockable by ground units with that capability (tanks, at weapons etc.) Now having 1 for targeting and 1 for friendly is fine, but i still think the unit needs to be wearing it to be useful. Just don't take away the locking for targets.:bounce3: