lawndartleo

@ Bux I am convinced that the page you reference was not there the other day when searching. I typed rallypoint in the search bar and got nothing. ... or a browser issue. Never the less... Thanks!

I already have a grumbly bunch when it comes to the mod list... "Oh, great, what did you add now!!!" I just remind them I am unpaid and they are welcome to take over. So far, no takers.

Weeeeeeeeeelllll... hold on a minute. When playing locally, no issue at all. When putting up the mission on a dedicated, fastroping glitches. AI flails helplessly at the top of the rope and eventually falls to their death. Players have similar issue where forst out does the same thing, falls to their death and anyone else onboard just ends up flying off with the chopper.

Using ACE and its native fastrope script. The waypoint action works just fine for me (if not just a little wonky when you don't do the waypoints properly).

Ah, the good old days of ACE 2. Three things... ACE 3... be prepared to fiddle with modules to suit your tastes. ZEUS... This is the one thing that might have saved ArmA for me. It is the heart of our game play. Ares Mod - Achilles Expansion... only makes Zeus that much better. This is the core of our groups gameplay. No canned missions. Limited by the creativity of our own minds. Just a suggestion in hopes that I can convince people that there is more to ArmA than the same old "rinse and repeat" that missions can become no matter how dynamic the authors may try to make them.

Is there a more complete explanation of the rallypoint system, anywhere? The Wiki is kind of weak on this.

Semi, I guess I do not focus on the hardware as much as I do the fun that my friends and I have in ArmA. We have one guy who is ex military and he tells us all about the "defects" of the game hardware just as you have.... and then we go have a boatload of fun, I think he does more so than any of us. Is the game a patchwork quilt of nonsense, YES. Does that take away from the overall experience... I guess it could if you are so detail oriented.

What is so implausible about the setting of ArmA III? Guns... check Planes... check Helicopters... check Lightsabers... nope Starfighters.... none of those either It's a near future relatively plausible scenario that is maturing nicely.

Can somebody recommend a mission to download that has TFAR configured to assign radios as appropriate. No matter what I do my all players are ending up with Personal radios (when I think some should get rifleman radios) and unneeded microdager reprogrammers. I need something to learn from. ACE and TFR through Steam.

How are you playing? Canned missions that are the same gig every time? Once you 've played it ad nauseam, there will be no surprises. There are a few really good dynamic missions of note but even they get stale after a while because the underlying code is reused from location to location. Learn Zeus. Play with a small group that can handle a little downtime while somebody cooks something up. I highly recommend using the Ares-Achilles mod to make use of those extensions . Have more than one person working Zeus so that everyone gets a chance to play. With my friends, there are two of us who run the show and we swap control from time to time to keep it interesting for all. Once you dial in Zeus, add ACE. It makes things dramatically more immersive once you get the hang of its intricacies and overcome its difficulties. Heck, just learning how to get the most out of these two items might even catch your attention. There is fun to be had in making things in ArmA, even if it is just implementing something that others made. Making it all work can be a chore but in the end you have a mission that is never the same because you decide how its going to unfold.

I can't figure out what I am doing wrong here... I have no TFR modules down All units on map are named Everybody gets a 152 but only those in command net should if I understand this correctly class dcg_radio_enable { typeName = "SCALAR"; typeDetail = ""; value = 1; }; class dcg_radio_tfar_command { typeName = "STRING"; typeDetail = ""; value = "tf_anprc152"; }; class dcg_radio_tfar_support { typeName = "STRING"; typeDetail = ""; value = "tf_rt1523g_big"; }; class dcg_radio_tfar_squad { typeName = "STRING"; typeDetail = ""; value = "tf_rf7800str"; }; class dcg_radio_commandNet { typeName = "ARRAY"; typeDetail = ""; value[] = { "plt_co", "sl_1", "sl_2", "hp_1", "av_1", "sn_1", "tl_1" }; }; class dcg_radio_supportNet { typeName = "ARRAY"; typeDetail = ""; value[] = { }; }; class dcg_radio_squadNet { typeName = "ARRAY"; typeDetail = ""; value[] = { { "plt_co", "hp_1", "av_1" }, { "sl_1", "sm_11", "sm_12", "sm_13", "sm_14", "sm_15", "sm_16", "sm_17" }, { "sl_2", "sm_21", "sm_22", "sm_23", "sm_24", "sm_25", "sm_26", "sm_27" }, { "sn_1", "sp_1" }, { "tl_1", "tm_11", "tm_12" } }; };

I have to ask, what is going to be fresh about an ArmA IV? Looking at the roadmap that BOS has layed out for us, I see nothing happening with ArmA IV any time soon and I have zero problem with that. 1) 64 bit is around the corner. What will this bring? I don't know but it has me intrigued. 2) Content. Tanks, jets, tac-ops are slated for future release.

Having been using ACE for some time I am entirely unaware of what the defacto standard is for revive/drag/carry script. I've brought in a bunch of new players lately and they are all way to green to expose to ACE and the default revive system is just fine but the ability to drag or carry a wounded teammate to cover is missing (which is crazy because we had it in A2OA). Advice appreciated because I am not getting warm fuzzy's about what I have found and the best one I know of right now is locked in to Quiksilvers personal I&A server code.

Well that all depends... Zeus and Ares (Ares-Achillies expansion is the current version recommended) can be used to create your own scenarios on the fly. Ares-Achilles adds a lot to Zeus that makes for a lot of fun. As far as using it in BIS missions, it's of no use unless somebody has found a way to crack and edit BIS missions so that the Zeus module can be added. Bear in mind that Ares-Achilles will break the game... meaning you can do things that mission authors did not intend you to be able to do. This goes for BIS and user made missions... unless of course they are Zeus missions to begin with. Have you ever used Zeus (a pre-requisite of Ares-Achilles). Using it will bring out the true sandbox nature of ArmA III. All my friends and I do is Zeus missions. Nothing canned, nothing predictable. Anyhow... single player (missions I create) or multiplayer (missions I create or edit), Zeus and Ares-Achilles are a staple of my ArmA diet. Here is a link to the Ares-Achilles mod thread....

Picking at the inner workings of Dynamic recon ops and attempting to place a Zeus module as I do in every other mission I have made or modified, I have run across an instance where the module has been completely disabled. Put in the module with owner set to a unit name, UID or #adminlogged and nothing happens. What might cause this kind of disabling?

Rats! I was hoping for a Christmas surprise. Oh well....it'll happen when it happens.

I'll give ACE a crack over the weekend. Some overlap but hopeful that those items are easily lined out.

I am tired and punchy so my response may be nonsense... Using ACE? Get an EOD specialist and disarm?

So I have a vehicle with an addaction in its init field, which works just fine until that vehicle is destroyed. That vehicle is synched to a respawn module. Is there a straight forward way to pass the old vehicle init to the new vehicle? I have been reading this post (https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/193240-vehicle-respawn-with-addaction-on-dedicated-server/?p=3074690) but it's all rather arcane to me. There is also the "expression" field in the module but I find no documentation that explains its use on the BIS ArmA wiki. Some direction would be much appreciated. Thanks! The init for reference... this addAction ["Push","pushboat.sqf",[],-1,false,true,"","_this distance _target < 8"]; What I think it should be but doesn't work... I have no idea how to delete this box so just ignore it if (isServer) then { params [["_newVeh", objNull], ["_oldVeh", objNull]]; switch (typeOf _newVeh) do { case "B_Boat_Transport_01_F": { [_newVeh, ["Push", { _this exec "pushboat.sqf",[],-1,false,true,"","_this distance _target < 8"; }]] remoteExec ["addAction", 0, _newVeh]; }; case "B_SDV_01_F": { [_newVeh, ["Push", { _this exec "pushboat.sqf",[],-1,false,true,"","_this distance _target < 8"; }]] remoteExec ["addAction", 0, _newVeh]; }; case "B_Boat_Armed_01_minigun_F": { [_newVeh, ["Push", { _this exec "pushboat.sqf",[],-1,false,true,"","_this distance _target < 8"; }]] remoteExec ["addAction", 0, _newVeh]; }; default {}; }; }; ... this one, too.

Go try beaching a boat. Seems it cant be done any more. So all the effort was for nothing, but it was a good learning experience.

I'd like to have an object in my MP scenario that can spawn an ammo crate using an addaction. I've tried using this one (https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/193093-request-ammo-box-spawner/?hl=spawn+ammo) but to this point, no success. Walk up to something that has an addAction request crate (B_CargoNet_01_ammo_F, for example) crate spawns near player sleep the script for X amount of time so people can't spam

Nope, just followed this thread, nothing else. https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/193093-request-ammo-box-spawner/?hl=spawn+ammo

initPlayerLocal.sqf

Well... on a hunch I put all that in the expression box instead of the init box of the respawn module. I guess that size does not matter. Little box with lots of text works just fine. Anyhow, it's working but I get a "Error generic error in expression" on this line of the script that is triggered by the addaction... if (currentWeapon _Soldier == "") then {sleep 1;} else {sleep 2;}; ... where there is no error until the boat has been respawned after sinking it. Everything works... at least locally. Any advice on the error, though? For reference, the full script being called... /* Boat push script - v0.1 Pushes the boat in the direction the player is looking this addAction ["<t color='#FF9900'>Push</t>","scripts\pushboat.sqf",[],-1,false,true,"","_this distance _target < 8"]; Created by BearBison */ if (isDedicated) exitwith {}; private ["_Object","_Soldier","_isWater"]; _Object = _this select 0; _Soldier = _this select 1; _isWater = surfaceIsWater position _Soldier; if (_isWater) exitwith {titleText ["You can't push from in the water","PLAIN DOWN",1];}; if (_Soldier in _Object) exitwith {titleText ["You can't push from inside the vehicle","PLAIN DOWN",1];}; _Object setOwner (owner _Soldier); _Soldier playMove "AmovPercMstpSnonWnonDnon_AinvPercMstpSnonWnonDnon_Putdown"; if (currentWeapon _Soldier == "") then {sleep 1;} else {sleep 2;}; _Object setVelocity [(sin(direction _Soldier))*3, (cos(direction _Soldier))*3, 0];

DCG is a server side mod. Clients do not have the mod installed or enabled. The mod will run only on the machine that is hosting the mission. DCG is used to populate the map with objectives. There would be no reason to add it to a premade mission. All that would do is add more missions. In the past I have forgotten that DCG is running on our server and then loaded something else up and it populates even more missions which turns into a mess. Basically with DCG you create a base (player units, vehicles, facilities, etc). Then make the necessary to the mission files and configs to run DCG as you want. Start the server and DCG then populates the map with objectives. It's about the easiest way to make a dynamic mission that I can think of.