wobbleyheadedbob

This went through my head when I loaded the page up this morning: http://www.sadtrombone.com/

Have a quick run around the island... then onto porting our mod content over to A3. Fun times ahead.

Ditto this! Projects like these are the ones that have the potential to take the engine to a whole new level. Keep up the good work!

There isn't actually anything wrong with the Arma sounds, they're closer to reality than any of the games mentioned above by the way. Though I'd admit that the engine could use a nice postprocessing engine for the sound, some environmental audio at least would be good. What it sounds like all of you are after is the traditional hollywood-type bs that most other games employ to make them sound like movies. Arma is a simulator, and it does that pretty well. I'll admit some of the rapid-fire weapons don't quite hit the mark but again, you need a better sound engine to get the correct effects (something BF:BC2 has... a good engine, their sound samples are a bit shit though). Some variability in the samples Arma use would also be good, again this could be achieved through post processing.

A2 already does that...

Agreed! Havok was used for the Source engine, while that not really comparible to Arma, I think it may have been used in "World in Conflict" which... well if you were to scale up the models or just zoom in to the battlefield CAN be compared to arma. They handled physics client side evident by the fact that you can choose realism levels in your setting which impact your local performance. However, the phyiscs are used on a base level for ballistics. Another game that uses VERY accurate physics on a wholesale level is the "Men of War" series. Another strategy game which if you havent played... GET IT!!! It is the "Arma" of the RTS world(if I may make so bold a statement). There's no greater pleasure than having your sniper take out the front wheel of a german motorbike with sidecar going full speed and watch it cartwheel forward throwing the passenger. Or perhaps watching your AT round richochet off a german Panzer only to slam into a house that comes tumbling over onto it. (it's the little things that amuse me).

Well you shouldn't, if an HE shell landed be near a fella's feet you'd see a poof of dust, a pinkish mist where the soldier used to be, followed by a light shower of gravel and burger patty. PEOPLE ARE NOT HELD TOGETHER BY TITANIUM-ALLOY-BUNGEE-CORD! We are steak with a pulse! But I agree with some of Walker's comments, hollywood style ragdoll physics has no place in Arma BUT, seeing a chopper get swung around and explode cos an inch of its rotor clipped a %&*$ing leaf is not very immersive! Watching a soldier keel over in a bullet-death animation as a tank runs over him at full kilter... is not very immersive! Flying a Harrier at 500 km/h into a tree only to have it stop dead on the spot... is not very immersive! The list goes on and on. There are a lot of ways to simulate physics in multiplayer games, not many of them are comparible to Arma 2 because there is no game currently on the market that can simulate the scale of arma 2, but that doesn't mean BI won't try and nor should the community try and stop them. BI push boundaries, its what they do. Arma 2 should have at least extended things on this front but they chose to wait in favour of other extension to their engine, now that they're finally attempting it you wanna get all ancy? Thats a bit dumb.

Top of my list would have been: 1. A Physics engine that belongs in this century But seeing as they're drawing attention to that maybe they've nailed it now. So... 1. Improved Sound engine - Could do with some environmental audio, firing a rifle in a valley would sound very different to indoors I imagine. 2. Improved User Interface - Having to look away from my screen to find the right "F1 - F12" key is retarded. -- Logical/Intelligently structured rose menus are an EASY solution. 3. Improved Voice comms - I know Arma 2 has a pretty neat built-in VOIP but why bother?!?! -- 90% of the comunity use Teamspeak, why not just set up a pipeline to a plugin and do what ACRE has been doing with GREAT success. -- You can even make it part of the game engine, (losing contact with your air support cos your radio man got sniped adds great immersion!!!) 4. Improve the SQM scripting language - It has rough features that mimic object oriented like coding but why not go all out? -- Allow inheritance, overloading contructors, custom object classes etc. (if this is already possible then pardon my ignorance) UPDATE: Prayers..? Answered: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?128800-Take-On-Java&p=2073101#post2073101 ---------- Post added at 11:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:58 PM ---------- Oh, a 5th point! 5. Carry over old content! - All those old islands and models will be missed :( -- This is a mammoth task which no SANE company would do but how about an officially supported community project?

Bahahahaha!!!!! You should work where I do. You'd delete that post vey quickly. There is more BAD code in the world than there is good code.Trust me. When it comes to particular coding problems there are usually multipe ways to get the job done. Different options are often suited to particular scenarios, when you pick the wrong one you can often go down a path that completely over-complicates your solution and the result is inefficient code. Managers see no profit in redoing work that has already made them money so optimizing existing code hardly ever happens. If you'd like an example of a well written engine: Farcry 1 I used to run that game on a PIII 733 with a Geforce 2 at 35+ frames in a loaded scene. Let me remind you that game had large environements, physics and decent lighting. anyhoo, this is turning into a rant... END

Damn, I'm after the same thing! I tried opening up the missions but can't extract them. :confused:

Try setting combat mode to "Danger" and firing mode to "Hold Fire" ?

Thanks again Shuko, this has worked brilliantly. I've made Deployable MHQ's that players can "Sign-In" to and they will then be "Stationed" there meaning they will respawn there when killed. They can also pack them up again into a Mobile vehicle. Tested on the Dedi and Listen server and it's now JIP compatible.

Sweet, I started putting it together last night anyway. now just need to test with multiple clients. I think I may need to add another eventHandler on the server-side to listen for events triggered by the clients.

Thanks shuko! Would this approach work if I used it to create a function to 'addAction'/'removeAction' on dynamically created vehicles?

Any tips on how to perform a global addAction when called from a script? EDIT: Nevermind, this I jsut found a solution. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=116523&highlight=addAction

Ye I tried that, well something similar. This is what's in my init.sqf: if(!isServer) then {waitUntil{!isNull player}}; DAC_Zone = compile preprocessFile "DAC\Scripts\DAC_Init_Zone.sqf"; DAC_Objects = compile preprocessFile "DAC\Scripts\DAC_Create_Objects.sqf"; execVM "DAC\DAC_Config_Creator.sqf"; publicVariable DAC_Basic_Value; waituntil{DAC_Basic_Value == 1}; . . [i]some other funky stuff;[/i] at the begining of the mission, but when starting up it just says: "Error undefined variable in expression: dac_basic_value" EDIT: Ok, despite this, I've done some further testing and even though I've getting this error It's still actually defers execution until DAC has finnished doin its thang. weird.

What's the best way to check if DAC has finnished with initialisation when using the script version? Putting "DAC_Basic_Value = 0;" in the init.sqf actually stops the DAC script from running.

I'v run into a bit of a snag with my script where I'm creating random, trigger-based IEDs. I need to find a way to pass in the actual position value to the 'setTriggerStatements' call, otherwise I get an error due to the fact 'position _spawnObject' is meaningless on the player machine (since it's out of scope). Are there any simple ways of doing this or are Script placed triggers a bad idea? The Script: private ["_spawnObject"]; _spawnObject = _this select 0; //Pointer to the Wreck object hiding an 'IED' _trg=createTrigger["EmptyDetector",position _spawnObject]; _trg setTriggerArea[15,15,0,false]; _trg setTriggerActivation["WEST","PRESENT",false]; _trg setTriggerStatements["this", "nul='Bo_GBU12_LGB' createVehicle (position _spawnObject);hint 'BOOM!!!'", ""]; ---------- Post added at 12:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 PM ---------- Ok, nevemind. Finally found a solution: _trg setTriggerStatements["this", "_bomb = nearestObject [getPos (thislist select 0), 'Man'];boom = 'Bo_GBU12_LGB' createVehicle position _bomb;hint 'BOOM!!!'", ""]; Now I just need to find out what class the objects I'm generating are in, yay!

Genius, thank you! I've put a majority of the code up on this forum post: Random Carbomb Script

Nice one Ebola! I've done a similar script but using the DAC module to generate random objects which will then have a chance of being IED's. Here's what I've done so far: In your description.ext: function to create IED on Object fn_makeIED: You then just create a DAC object zone and use the object pool above. It still isn't fully randomised yet so every object will explode with a GBU12 bang! I'll be adding Paramater based random values for bomb types and probability of IED presence when I have a chance. EDIT: added randomisation! I'd also like to figure out a way of making the DAC Object generator limit the placement to roadsides only.

I'm using a bit of a workaround to do respawning on a mission whereby players choose a spawn location for when they die. It all works well except for 1 little snag. When we tried it on the dedi-server the trigger fires for everyone not just the player who spawns in it's radius.:mad: I'm guessing this is because I'm calling a function in the "On Activation" field and passing in "player". The trigger has the following: Condition: this On Act: [player] call fn_multiSpawn //fn_multiSpawn private ["_mySoldier"]; _mySoldier = _this select 0; _mySoldier setPos ([myRespawnPoint, 10] call CBA_fnc_randPos); My Question is, how do I call this function so that it only fires for the player in the trigger radius?

Thank you! That helps a lot. Like I said, I'm still learning. While I understand programming concepts, ARMA is proving quite a challenge. I ran into another problem wherby I'm struggling to get a script run for each player to do some local initialisation. At first I used this call in the init.sqf: if (!isNull player) then { call compile preprocessFileLineNumbers "functions\common\initSpawn.sqf"; }; That worked, but only for players who were in the lobby at start, JIP players didn't get their variables initialised properly. I'm guessing becasue the init.sqf only gets called on mission load. I then tried this which seemed more logical: //In the player init field: 0 = [this] execVM "functions\common\initSpawn.sqf"; This worked great until I found that whenever a player connected this was being called for all players. So I'm now very confused as my understanding was 'this' when used in the player init. only returns the object the init line belongs to, my thought was that it would only run for that player. What is best practice for calling a clientside script when a player connects? (JIP friendly)

Great, that worked. But I'm still not sure why it worked... can you explain? Sorry, still learning.

Thanks, I'll give that a try this evening.

Yeah, back in the OFP days there was a mission in the singleplayer campaign where you were a pilot shot down behind enemy lines. You had to navigate back to friendly territory in the black of night with no NV, anyhoo I saw some friendlies and ran as fast as I could and then... they opened fire and killed me. I tried this a couple of times to see if it was a bug and noticed it happening often in night time missions when encountering 'unkown' friendly forces. You may be correct that 'Unkowns' are targetted as enemy.