kyfohatl

Actually... that's not a bad idea. Though I would prefere not to have to read subtitles all the time. My idea is to rename the ingame land to Gernobyl and assume it takes place in germany... so it would make sense if the narrator had a German accent (just kidding! I know sled has already rejected the idea :p. I think the voice acting is fine).

Do I need to define them? They are DAC zones, already present in the map. You probably already know what DAC is, but just in case you don't: With DAC, you can put a trigger on the map, and the trigger will spawn random groups that patrol randomly generated waypoints within the radius of the trigger. But you have to name the triggers using, "z1,z2,z3,etc." (representing zone1, zone2, etc.). So "z1,z2 and z3" are names of triggers in the map. Here's a script I wrote to test to see if the DAC_fInsertGroup works: [grp1,1,[z1],10,1,1,[1,1,1],0,false] spawn DAC_fInsertGroup; And it works fine. So group 1 joins the DAC and begins patrolling between the randomly generated waypoints. So I don't know what squint is talking about there... EDIT: Maybe the groups have to be global?

Nope, I live in down under (AUS). Why the hell do you think he is talking in that accent? Obviously English is not his first language. So you didn't like his accent... how does that give you the right to bloody insult him? Besides, you are not paying for this, so you don't have any right to be worked up. I don't think sled has any problem with constructive critisism, but this is not constructive critisism. If you didn't like his accent, and thought it ruins the game's atmosphere or whatever, then instead of your rude comment, maybe you could've said: or if you think you're own accent is so good, maybe: The whole thing doesn't take place in England/USA anyway. So it wouldn't make sense if all of the characters had a perfect English accent. @ Sled88: Sorry about this man, but I honestly don't think he should get away with insulting you like that. Though I know you're too much of a man to get yourself worked up about petty things like this judging from your constrcutive response.

Very good. Well done. I've watched a LP maybe once or twice before, and didn't like them at all. I thought this one would be similar; that is the only words you could hear from the commentator were, "f***k, sh*t, as*h*le, c**t, etc." This one on the other hand had a very good commentary. Keep it up

Your the man shk! Thanks very much

The title says it all pretty much. Here's what I'm trying to do: waitUntil {!isNil "BIS_fnc_init"}; _Patrolgrp1 = [position player, WEST, (configFile >> "CfgGroups" >> "West" >> "CDF")] call BIS_fnc_spawnGroup; So basically, I want to create CDF patrol groups, not USMC ones. The code above doesn't work, but that's what I can understand from the wiki. Any help would be greatly appreciated. EDIT: Here's the wiki page: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/BIS_fnc_spawnGroup Maybe you can figure it out. Kylania has put some good info up there, but I can't figure out how to do this (I don't know why what I'm doing already doesn't work).

Oh yeah... actually I looked at that page. But doesn't this means that the function will spawn CDF_InfSquad, which is a specific infantry squad I think, every time? I would like to take advantage of the fact that the function spawns a random group (e.g. AT group or AA group), but if I specify the group (say CDF_InfSquad), wouldn't that mean only one type of group is spawned? (I'd like to specify the faction, but I'd like the group type to be random). ...or am I wrong and "CDF_InfSquad" is a general group class which spawns a random group type? Thanks for the help by the way.

Yes... I'd like to confirm this bug. I also get it when playing warfare mission (e.g. War Welcome). Nothing game breaking; that is I can still play the mission... but there seems to be something wrong, though I don't know what. Cheers

Just a very minor thing, but I don't get why you've got: if (isNil "BIS_fnc_init") then { waitUntil { !isNil "BIS_fnc_init" } }; Wouldn't this do just the same thing? waitUntil {!isNil "BIS_fnc_init"};

Ohhh... gotta wait till next month for my shitty internet to renew. I downleaded like 250 MB of Dead Rising, and its gone back to dial-up speed already, cause apparantly it's finished for this month (and I hadn't downloaded anything this month :(). Anyway, the trailer looks awsome. Great job :bounce3:. Will comment once I get to try it. For now I've got to live with dial-up for a few days (for anyone that has forgotten what it feels like... it's like torture; trust me)

Are you sure about this? Cause in one of my missions, I have moveInCargo for my whole squad, transported by a truck. When unloading, the truck has the condition countCrew = 1 before moving on to the next waypoint, and it works fine (so it waits untill my squad unloads before moving back to base). So, no; I think moveInCargo makes the units a part of the "crew", although as I said, I haven't tested the script I gave, so you could very well be right.

Yes, once the chopper has been unloaded, the script will stop. This is done by the line: while {_N0Crew > 1} do{... If the number of crew becomes equal to (or less than) one, then the script assumes that unloading has taken place, and will stop executing. Note that it assumes that your chopper has only 1 pilot. If it has more crew, then you need to change the 1 to whatever number of pilots it has.

First of all, I would like to say that I've been eagerly anticipating your mod. I really enjoyed STALKER, and I can tell this mod will be a LOT of fun. Furthemore I am amazed that you managed to actually implement blood suckers/zombies in the ARMA 2 engine, as I think it doesn't even have a melee system (just goes to show your skill). Well done, the mod looks awsome Which haters? This mod only has lovers... ...Except for this mod About the voice acting: Ignore the whining. I think, like most others, that it's just fine. Besides, the whole idea/story is based on a fictional event... we could just imagine it took place in Germany this time ;). As many other have said, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO PRESSURE. Take your time to perfect your mod, so that it can have a standard as high as the previous ones (I just found out about the sieries, so I'm downloading Dead Rising right now :)). I stand behind that decision 100%. Best wishes kyfohatl

I think (/hope) I have a good understanding of the bsics of scripting (mainly SQF), and I'm looking for a guide that explores the more advanced functions and commands. Know any? I've searched both the OFPEC and BI forums, and though I could find some guides on individual commands, I couldn't find any "complete" advanced scripting guide if you know what I mean. Found alot of basic scripting guides thoug... Thanks

The biki is deffinately very useful, and I use it alot. In fact the reason why I was looking for an advanced scripting guide was that there were a few things that I didn't understand, couldn't find anything about in the biki/basic guides, and yet they were used alot. Anyway, I might as well just ask about them: 1. The word "null" (just by itself, not objNull) seems to be used alot, either as a local variable (_null), or as a global one, or as other things. What is its significance? 2. I couldn't find the display ID for the map (to be used in displayAddEventHandler in the findDisplay part). Since advance scripting guides might containt information on displayAddEventHandler, I thought they might also have somesort of an ID list for each display as the biki din't have one. Yeah, I tried to learn by looking at Silola's DAC scripts, but I could understand very little. The biki didn't help much (it could explain each individual command, but I couldn't figure how they worked together). So I went looking for an advanced scripting guide. Thanks for the replies

What about: <Heli's name> setDir <Desired azimuth>; Say you are unloading 5 men, then you could have: private ["_N0Crew"]; _N0crew = countCrew Heli1; // Loop while {_N0Crew > 1} do { Heli1 setDir 160; sleep 2; }; Where Heli1 is your Heli's name and 160 is the desired direction (note: script assumes your chppoer has only 1 pilot; if you have more just change the countCrew part of course). If you execute this script before landing, the chopper should reset it's direction every two seconds to the direction you want, preventing the chopper from changing direction. Though Neo's solution is good, I thought this might be simpler, though I havent tested it, so it may not work.

Wait... Are you using an invisible Heli-H? If not, then just use one of them. Simply place a Heli pad on the map (doesn't matter if it's invisible or not) and put your waypoint directly on it. That way the chopper will land on the spot precisely. I think this also works: <Heli's name> land <Position>; Should give an accurate landing (though I haven't tested this one). Hope it helps.

@Armaholic: Firstly Actually, I had already red about that option and set it to 10km, so it shouldn't have deleted editor placed units. Nope, I was right besides them. And about the bases thing: Fair enough. I see your tactical approach, which indeed does work. So if a faction holds certain bases, that faction will have tectical advantage over the other, for example because that base spawns choppers. However, it would be nice if there was an option to turn the spawning to one unit per base, so that if a faction has "X" number of bases, then it would have "X" number of AI groups spawned per WICT turn. Now you may say that this is a stupid idea, and not worth the time, however, I think sometimes you need to establish superiority of numbers by one faction. For example in my mission; where I would like to show heavy enemy presense while having a weak allied (Russian) presense to make the mission challenging. Yes, that is true to some extent, however you could have, say three enmy bases and one allied base. And to prevent allies getting defeated too early, you can simply use the nice little WICT feuture: spawning distance. As you already know, a very low spawning distance makes a WICT base extremely difficult to capture. Thus the spawning distance could be adjusted to give the player enough time to come to the aid of the Russians and even ally the resistance. So really, it would be nice if sometimes extra bases just provided some reinforcements. Well, WICT excells at creating large dynamic battle with minimum effort, and in reality, in such large battles, there is only so much one unit can do. So yeah, basically in any large bettle, the action of one unit will most likely not make a huge difference (unless the player a whole battlion under his command or is an extreme tactical genious). And I think this is realism. The player can't change te course of a huge WICT battle by himself or his tiny squad. What you CAN do is to let the player, for example through a series of missions, to ally the resistance with the Russians (or alternatively get reinforcements), and under the system I'm proposing, that would mean more friendly bases for the Russian ===> More units spawned per turn ====> Can help the Russians win. That way, what the player does IS important. Of coruse this "greater presense" could be done by the editor, but I would much prefere to use WICT units as they behave not as individual units, but as a whole faction. They flank, come to the aid of bases and each other, display dynamic behaviour and have goals (such as capturing enemy bases) that change depending on what happens in the mission. Anyway, its just a suggestion :) Oh, and another thing: As I said, I created a scenario with max AI set to 60, and WICT_jam set to 90. Then I waited for global assualt to begin (i.e. when WICT created an extra 10 AI groups), and still nothing happened. When near squal leaders, I could hear them giving the order to assualt the enemy base to their squad, but no one would move. Though again, I should have provided more detail. Regards Kyfohatl

Yap, the problem was that with DAC V3c, the place in the configs files for the insurgents and the guerilla have been swapped around, whilst the readme file wasn't altered. So you have to enter "[2,6,2,1] for guerilla, not "[2,2,2,1]" which is what the readme says. Though there is still a problem, as the spawned Chedaki units are hostile to Russians. Though I need to do some more testing to confirm that. ---------- Post added at 06:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:17 AM ---------- Question: In my mission, i've written a script that generates a DAC zone at certain areas for a faction if that faction has dominating presense in that area. This allows factions to "capture" sectors, and the generated DAC zones give them an advantage in the fight. Of course other factions can capture the sector back. However, at the same time, I have 3 other DAC zones (the "master" or "base" zones; sorrounding each faction's HQ [there are 3 factions, thus 3 zones]) running with something like 70 or so AI groups overall (because the battle takes place over a large area), and what I've noticed is that deleting the previous zone and generating a new one every times the ruling faction changes takes a VERY long time, even though the zone only has like 20 waypoints and 7 AI groups, and I think this is actually a feture of DAC, to prevent slowdown in the game. However, since the generation of a new zone takes such a long time, not only it causes zones to change hands too quickly (as units are not generated to defend the zone), but it also takes long for the actual full scale batlle to begin (there are something like 5 capturable zones). So, is there a way to speed zone generation up? Or is there a better way to do what I'm trying to do (such as not using DAC_fNewZone at all)? I guess if the waypoints were not somehow deleted, only the units were, then that would speed things up because all zones for all factions have the same number of waypoints for all unit types (so you only need to replace the units). Oh, and the script I was talking about I've already posted here; a few pages back. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks

Ok, I just unistalled V3c and replaced it with plain V3.0 (:() because for some reason, guerilla zones produce chedaki units for me :confused:. Bug maybe?

I use this one: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=12078 Not much need for scripting or anything like that for this mod. Check it out

Ok, made some progress... :D, and ended up with some more silly questions :o. Yap, my first question relates to this: As the area of the mission is large, lots of AI groups are neede. So I set AI limit to 80, and to prevent WICT having to create all of the units, I placed 50 AI groups via the editor (without names/scripts so that they can join WICT). They did nothing, and waited until WICT created another 30 groups. Then, I could hear editor placed squad leaders shout out orders (e.g. "move 500 meters..."), but no one would move/do anything. WICT created groups moved for 5 seconds, then froze for 5 seconds, and then moved for another 5 seconds. So I checked the manual (and wiki) for solutions, and found out about the anti-jam system. Next time I set AI limit to 60, but anti-jam to 90 (with 50 editor placed groups). For some reason, after creating a few groups, WICT deleted all editor groups (???) and restarted. What am I doing wrong? Oh, and a question about the nature of WICT: If for example West has 5 bases, but East has only 1, and all bases deffinately spawn something each turn (i.e. spawn probability = 100%), do both sides get the same number of troops each turn? This is what seems to happen from the tests I was doing. The problem was that even though West was clearly stronger than East, they both had an equal number of units due to equal spawns. I guess to get around this I could set the spawn probability of each base only to say 40%, so that West whic has more bases would have a higher chance of getting units, and then to compensate for the slower rate of unit spawn, I could decrease WICT turn time. Again, sorry for the silly questions.

Oops, I don't know why I thought that those folders in the UserSettings were core files and not to be touched :o. I feel like an idiot now; after all it was named "UserSettings" FPDR Indeed, what I had in mind was similar to your idea. The mission does not "end" when the player manages to escape to the Russian base. From there on, the player is given an overall goal, which is to help the crippled Russian forces win the war. He can do this by either simply joining the Russians in the battle, or doing a series of missions via which he allies the independents to the Russians, thus making things easier. This is why I was hoping that WICT treats the independent as a seperate "side", so that they could change their relation (and become allies) to the Russians mid mission. And this is exactly the type of mission I really enjoy. Considering the overall goal of the mission (the Russians winning), the player is not at the centre, nor he is essential to it, he is simply a part of it. The Russians could win without the player (though unlikely), and since the goals of the mission are very general, the player can approach his objectives however he likes, so as you said; you get an open world and open ended mission. I might change the idea of "allying the independent" to "getting the help of the Chedaki", as Murklor's script is a little difficult for me to understand (probably because of my lack of experience with WICT, so I'll wait until I've had some more experience with it). Anyway, thanks for the help

I have a few questions (sorry, I got confused by the manual): 1. Is it possible to have WICT bases belonging to independent forces? (if so how?) 2. Is it possible to specifically determine the FACTION of units spawned by a WICT base. Not that it belongs to which SIDE, but for example if it spawns CDF or USMC troops. At the moment I can only spawn Russian/USMC troops. 3. In my mission, the player is an escaping prisoner (the convoy transporting him from prison is ambushed by his allies). Thus is it highly like that the player may come too close to the enemy base, and stop the spawning process. However, as the player's mission unfolds, there is a background battle (between the Russians [allies] and the combined force of CDF and USMC [enemies] and the independents), thus it is important that the enemy base does not stop spawning, otherwise the allies (design to be weak, so that mission is challenging) may overcome the enemies and the mission becomes too easy. On the other hand I do not want to decrese the spawning distance as the bases become too hard to capture. Is there anything I could do, or do I have to scrap the idea? (i.e. is there a way to temporarily make the enemy bases' spawning distance "incensative" to the player and his squad?) Sorry for the noobish questions.

Try this: Place this in your init.sqf: entry1 = player addAction ["Give unit1 a squad","squad.sqf"]; And this in "squad.sqf": private ["_position","_grp1"]; _position = position unit1; [unit1] join grpNull; sleep 0.4; _grp1 = group unit1; sleep 0.3; "Ins_Soldier_1" createUnit [(_position),_grp1]; "Ins_Soldier_1" createUnit [(_position),_grp1]; "Ins_Soldier_1" createUnit [(_position),_grp1]; "Ins_Soldier_1" createUnit [(_position),_grp1]; player RemoveAction entry1; Where "unit1" is the unit that you want to create a squad for. Works fine for me.