rangerpl

Seconded. I'm testing this mod with one of my own missions and the sharing function doesn't seem to respond to given settings, causing every AI within 1500m to aggro, regardless of how I set the CBA settings. I am also experiencing a problem where vehicles inside a friendly-occupied town go active and start shooting up buildings occupied by their own side's troops. The building-targeting feature is cool, but is there a way to prevent this behavior in situations where the tank crew is surrounded by friendlies?

As a compromise, I propose that the map be renamed "Macedonia".

When are Extended_Init_Eventhandlers from description.ext executed? Can I reference variables declared in init.sqf? Can I use a function I registered in CfgFunctions? Sorry for the stupid question. I'd check for myself but I'm away from my computer at the moment.

Better yet, being able to specify the civilian faction you want so that you can also use addon civilians.

Has anybody made (or is working on) a middle eastern/whatever skin pack for RHS? CDF and Takistani armies with RHS models would be pretty cool. I'd do it myself if I knew the first thing about reskins.

I personally prefer dxtory. Costs money but the amount of customization options is unparalleled. It's also super compatible, the only games I've had it refuse to cooperate with are ones using custom direct3d DLLs.

Yeah, maybe someone at Ubisoft is a huge Morrowind fan

So IBIS is going to be basically the Green Sea Region? Awesome if so. Hell, still awesome even if not.

I disagree about the CoD and BF games. I was an avid CoD player for quite a while, and only stopped playing them because I got into ArmA and lost interest. They're not terrible games. They're over-the-top and ridiculous, but the developers/publishers make no effort to conceal this fact. They actually advertise it rather blatantly. I played quite a bit of Black Ops, MW2, WaW and CoD 4, and feel like I got my money's worth out of each. Similar story with BF3 and 4. Like many others, I was disappointed that BF3 wasn't going to be like BF2, but in many areas it's quite an improvement over its predecessor. I'm not too happy about the technical issues or the price for a full game + premium, but that isn't enough for me to write the games off as huge disappointments. They're still very fun. I'm a big Wargame fan and I've had hundreds of hours of fun with both Airland Battle and Red Dragon, but I have to admit the games are a bit flawed. I still consider them well-worth the money, but they really have an air of unfulfilled potential about them. They're great games but they gave me a strong impression that the developers do not play their own games. The game modes leave much to be desired, only about a quarter of the maps are actually enjoyable to play on, and far too much development time was wasted adding in naval combat in RD. The actions of the Wargame developers on their forums also do not amuse me.

Half-Life 3

The "militarized police" and efforts to restrict firearm ownership is a direct result of the culture of fear that came about with the 9/11 attacks and was strengthened by recent events such as the Sandy Hook shooting or the Boston bombing. I don't see it as part of a concerted government effort to restrict personal liberties, but more of a knee-jerk reaction to recent events. Politicians don't like being seen as soft on violence and terrorism, so giving police a blank check to acquire military equipment or banning certain firearms is a quick and easy way to gain votes. It's an unfortunate aspect of any republican (as in, of a republic, not the Republican party) system that somebody ends up getting thrown under the bus by politicians, but that's the way it is. It happened to German-Americans in WWI, it happened to Japanese-Americans in WWII, it happened to communists in the 1950s, etc.

Huge bump. The game received a DLC and patch last week. Poland, East Germany and Czechoslovakia have been given 90s equipment (nothing western though since they are still in WP). Autoloader tanks are hilarious now too.

World in Conflict was great. Not a very realistic story, but it's basically the 80s in microcosm.

Those logos remind me of Breaking Bad.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-who-enjoys-thing-informed-he-is-wrong,7057/

Any chance of an AK pack? The ArmA 2 one was a beauty and having all these plastic tacticool guns but no AKM with wood furniture is a sin

Is that a new buzzword? The fuck does that even mean?

If you don't play North Korea like this, you're a scrub 9ONtsL8BdLY

The restrictions are horrible, I rarely see IFVs anymore because it's not worth wasting an infantry slot on them. The whole 5-card restriction is bad in general, it's like going back to EE where every deck was the same.

I'm surprised there hasn't been a thread for this yet, given the popularity of the Wargame: European Escalation thread on here. Wargame: Airland Battle is the sequel to European Escalation. It retains the scale of W:EE, while adding new depth to the game, such as a dynamic campaign (Total War style), new weapon 'traits' such as KE or Fire and Forget, Radar SAMs, and, of course, airplanes. All of these features greatly expand the gameplay and make it far more entertaining than European Escalation ever was. There are also several new countries (Canada, Norway, Sweden and Denmark), and the deck-building features have been vastly expanded, with the ability to make nation-restricted decks that enable prototype units but restrict you to the equipment of one country. You can also choose a "specialization", such as Airborne, Mechanized or Air Assault (there are more), which further restricts your choice of units, but allows you to pick up a bonus such as additional experience for some of your troops. Oh, and they got rid of the bullshit unit-unlocking mechanic! :bounce3: The game came out in late May. Is anyone else playing?

At the very least it'd be nice to have the enterable houses.

I started using mine when I was 10 years old and played Delta Force: Black Hawk Down. I had a chub for the 75th Ranger Regiment troops in that game, so I named myself Ranger. When I moved to the USA, I added the PL to my name to indicate my nationality so that I could find other Polish players to converse with, as I did not speak a word of English. I've kept the PL part since then, just to be distinct from all the other Rangers running around on the internet. I kinda regret not having chosen a more original name, but now I have so many accounts and profiles associated with this identity that it's not worth changing IMO. Plus I'm not all that creative. My avatar is from this: Look at the bright side, at least you're not A-Rod.

Honestly, before introducing an armor system, why not start with something as basic as the netcode? It's both hilarious and a little sad that a game with such scale (unreplicated in any other modern shooter) utterly breaks down once you get more than a hundred people into a server. So much squandered potential there. Armor systems are nice dessert but proper netcode and large servers should be the main course.

Nobody is saying Frostbite should replace RV, you're just using it as a strawman. Just because RV4 (or whichever one we're on) can run a map like Altis doesn't mean it's perfect or that it couldn't be improved on. BIS should start over with ArmA 4 (if there is one) and write a new engine from scratch instead of patching up this twelve-year-old frankenstein.

As soon as someone says that ArmA is unoptimized or could use a brand new engine, the apologists come out of the woodworks to remind us all that RV is superior to all other engines because "BATTLEFIELD 4 CAN'T RUN ALTIS!" while completely missing the point about RV being bloated and outdated.