PlacidBox

This seems to be the chronic issue with people thinking that AA is too powerful, they go balls in without planning and wonder why 12 units dedicated just to killing them are allowed to succeed. If ANY OTHER unit in the game did this they'd die nearly instantly, but somehow that doesn't apply to aircraft? As a half-decent pilot in game, I find that flares are stupidly effective. Being able to fly over a group of 4 of the new tracked AA vehicles and survive them shooting their entire payload of missiles at you is completely crazy. If you get surprised by one of those things within about 2km of you, you should be dead. The inability for AA units to achieve their *only role* is one of the worst bits of balancing in the game at the moment. Flares should be a "press countermeasures to not die" button, they should be used as a way for aircraft to disengage when on the edge of the SAM's engagement distance, stopping the aircraft from going too close

Of course not. If the AA gets caught out in the open, or if the attack helicopter is hunting down a single AA with knowledge on its position, the helicopter should stand a good chance of killing the AA. As it is though, flares are so amazingly effective that the AA almost never wins, at any range. the very small 3km radar range on the AA units certainly doesn't help, either. Seems to be a problem with man portable AA too, but those don't show up as a giant red 'kill me' on the helicopter's radar. If anti air systems stay like they are, I can't see any half-decent attack craft pilot dying to AA. It'll be worse than arma 2, at least there you had ONE effective AA vehicle in the tunguska..

The AA vehicles seem..useless. Attempting to shoot down an armed orca 500m away, when it starts facing the other way. It managed to use flares to dodge every single missile, turns around and kills the AA unit. What's the point of AA when it can't kill air?

This is the vehicle respawn, it's just a few odd cases that I would like to use them in that I can't quite seem to make them do Keep up the awesome work on the modules

For those wondering about how to use the respawn, you'll need to use the multiplayer editor: go to multiplayer hit new server make a new mission in the multiplayer editor and save it leave the editor in your arma 3 profile under my documents, locate where you saved the mission in MPMissions add a file called description.ext with the following content: respawn = "BASE"; respawnDelay = 30; respawnTemplates[] = {"MenuPosition"}; respawnOnStart = 1; This enables the infantry respawn system Then you'll want to put down players as normal, but feel free to stick down infantry respawn points. When you die you'll get the option to select a respawn point: If you sync (f5) the respawn point to a trigger, it'll become enabled once that trigger gets filled, for example, here's an infantry respawn synced to a trigger with conditions OPFOR and NOT PRESENT. When i kill the opfor units the respawn gets enabled If the trigger is set to 'repeat,' the spawn point will be removed when the trigger condition becomes false. for our example you would lose ther spawn if more opfor came in range, and would get it back again when they were killed. This can lead to very nice situations with the new sector control module, enabling respawns based on which areas you have captured. Vehicle respawns are similar, you put down a "respawn position" for various vehicles types. You then put Vehicle Respawn down and sync it to any vehicles you want to have respawn on demand. Setting the 'starting position' controls where it will come back. To use the respawn positions you want to select a side's respawn marker, and optionally which respawn marker to use (new will used the most recently activated one, old the one that was activated first). "tickets" lets you control how many times the vehicle can respawn. My current issue with the vehicle respawn is that there doesn't seem to be a way to have the vehicle not spawn on mission start. It would also be nice to have a range on the 'deserted' system, so you could set a vehicle to be deserted after 10 seconds, but not have it violently explode around people as they got out. Overall though, it's a very nice system, and you should use it in your missions

Hey, I'm doing some multiplayer scripting and am running in to strange behavior with "publicVariableServer." The problem is that with a non-dedicated server, the publicVariableEventHandler only gets called when the local player does publicVariableServer, not when any remote players do. init.sqf is esentially: playerDeath = objNull; if (isServer) then { on_player_death = { hint "player died"; }; "playerDeath" addPublicVariableEventHandler on_player_death; }; if (isDedicated) then {exit}; on_death = { playerDeath = playerSide; publicVariableServer "playerDeath"; }; sleep 0.01; // wait for mission to begin player addEventHandler ["killed", on_death]; Swapping the publicVariableServer for just a normal publicVariable works as expected (remote deaths cause the function to be called, local ones don't.) Is there something extra that I need to do to get these calls though, or is it just bugged?

You're right, it's a mistake, i'd swapped it from if (!isDedicated) then { // client code here }; but it doesn't matter, anyway, since this isn't being run on a dedicated server at any point.

While I realise this is mostly a troll post, I'll give some sane answers. This really depends on your definitions of 'cheats' and 'tricks,' Is using tactical view to look over walls a cheat, even though it's very much a feature of the game? Decent pvp players will use everything available to them, it's part of competition, you don't randomly place things as 'off limits' just because it doesn't give an enemy a chance to shoot back at you. If there's things pvp players find too powerful, they attempt to fix them to make pvp more interesting, both for new players and themselves. CO-OP players should do the same, too. When you're given an objective, you try your hardest to complete that objective. If it's more effective (i.e. an advantage) to solo around ignoring your team, you do that (hence many of us preferring missions that require good amounts of team work to complete the objective.) No, most PvP players are fine with asymmetry. However, we want /interesting/ game play, vehicles that are more effective /should/ be harder to use. Currently tanks and aircraft are literally trivial to be super effective with. This makes it boring to be both on the receiving and giving end for us. We'd like to see it fixed.

Unfortunately it's still a massive pain to give movement orders when you're in a wheeled vehicle (although it is much better in the latest patch.) Still, it's very disappointing that the tab lock change is being reverted. Tanks being kill-everything machines with little effort isn't very rewarding to play as, even in SP :(

Try putting "this synchronizeObjectsAdd [theInfantryman]" in the module's init instead. Synchronization has some odd locality issues in MP though (I'm not really sure on the specifics, but it only seems to work on the server consistantly?), so if a scripting way of adding a unit to gl4sys or gl4def is available, it'll probably be easier to do that in init.sqf

An elegant way would be using the multiplayer framework. You'll need to add the functions module to your mission. [nil, nil, rSay, _unit, "allahu"] call RE; Works. If you're still having trouble using RE upload the mission files somewhere. You really want to use it, solves a lot of headaches

That code looks like it should work the way you're saying. How do you initially call in to the script? Is this after they respawn? Are you setting up the waypoints for the initial units in the editor, if so, how?

As in you've SetVariable-d on the groups? If so, it looks like the only way to do it is to create a dummy unit before you leave the group. Either that, or refactor things so that you don't rely on SetVariable-ing a group that may be deleted. (but this depends on how complex the things you're setting are..) It might be cleaner to have a per group flag set, _group disableAutoGroupDelete true; or such. But you'll probably need to push a CIT ticket pretty hard to get it implemented, especially when there's almost always going to be a usable workaround.

ACE rucksacks are weapons, not OA style backpacks. The script may be running multiple times, how are you calling it?

Yep, you can't use local variables in editor code fields (unit init scripts, trigger onActs..)

Alternatively, you can recreate the group just after leaving it. Empty groups don't (appear to) get deleted until a unit joins and the leaves again.

do you mean you want to have, say, the player draw on the map? afaik you can get the mouse position by handling the 'onMouseMoving' event for the main display. http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/displayAddEventHandler http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/User_Interface_Event_Handlers but it may be easier to use the onMapSingleClick function, depending on what you're trying to achieve

It happens when you load a mission, sometimes when you close the map in mission, whenever you change video settings, when you alt tab and occasionally at random.

If you just need an ellipse on the main map you can create a local marker

They're executed whenever the 'receiving' screen pops up / goes away, typically when you come back from the map screen. You may want to disable changing things that are only visual while the game loads? Typically you have something you want to implement, then figure out how, not the other way around.

In Arma 2? definitely not. That image is basically doing edge detection on the thermals, and mixing it in as an overlay to the nvgs where it finds an edge. It'd be possible to do it if you could a) Find a way to write custom post process shaders. b) Have multiple renders, one in TI mode and one in NVG mode. tl;dr; no, but if you're lucky yes in arma 3

It'd be nice if it showed all missiles in the search area, even if they aren't targeted at you (like most actual MWSes...), possibly even a chance of it not detecting a missile. Low cm immunity can be ok, but it's a problem at the moment because pilots know they don't ever have to use flares unless a little 'm' pops up, when they should be using them whenever they think there is danger.

The reload speed is indeed slower, I timed it at 5 seconds, up from about 3 before. The switch-to-at speed is still faster than current release, the switch to at -> aim -> fire process takes about 5 seconds to complete for me on a stationary target 500m away, definitely too quick. No one thinks the game is turning in to a common corridor shooter. We do however think that BI is going the wrong direction or overdoing it in a few places, mainly making AT pathetically easy to use, and overdoing it with the complete removal of weapon clipping on all primary guns. It comes across as them as catering to the people who want to be able to fill all roles effectively at once rather than rewarding teamwork, which is what many of us play arma for.

Which is really the source of the problem, both smgs and anti material rifles reload at the same speed. The correct way to fix it to maintain both gameplay and realism would be to have most animations play faster when the unit is carrying less weight. Unfortunately only BI could make that change easily, and they're not easily able t,o or unwilling to, invest development time in to such a change. So you end up with the awful situation of them fiddling with animation speeds, which won't really address the core issue, it'll just make some weapons handle like they should (smgs come to mind) while making larger weapons far, far easier to use than they should be, effectively fixing nothing at all and annoying a bunch of people in the process. Also, these animation changes don't make PvP any easier or harder, both sides get equally effected by the change. What arma PvP needs is more depth, not to become more run and gun. More pronounced tradeoffs between different weapons and more user intensive target acquisition than just jamming tab comes to mind. The animation changes will speed up PvP sure, but it won't necessarily make it more challenging or interesting. Tl;dr BI is going about making the game more fluent the wrong way, and isn't really fixing anything in the process.

Even in 1.07 and before I _never_ saw any unguided at behave differently than having a slight decrease in angle at the start then flying perfectly straight for the rest of the flight time. They may have decreased the amount of initial drop but it's never actually been parabolic (as it should be.) I also realllllyyy dislike the new collision models for guns. Changing it so that you can go through doors sideways with smgs at the largest would have been nice, but now you can walk through them sideways with an m107...it's just wrong and removes the advantages of using smaller weapons :(