lukio

To verify if it is installed correctly - in the server startup you should see an entry like 11:19:54 bCombat AI mod v0.18 BETA | @bcombat | false | GAME DIR | 87ec114ddd9373f3f419aa805c11c91e3051bd3 d | 7dad1112 | /home/arma3/private/mods/@bcombat To verify that it is actually running, you probably can turn bcombat_dev_mode = false; to = true; then the little spheres above the AI heads should be visible (Just guessing). Even without that running, it is pretty visible when AI starts throwing smoke/frag grenades or clear buildings where they suspect an enemy.

1. Players who finished Task #1 do not get updated with Task # 2 2. When players log in or return, smoke goes off again (although probably should be a one time thing) 3. When the task #1 is not completed other players get Task #2 4. An evacuation trigger does not fire, the boat does not go to the move waypoint. dimaS1k I'll give your mission a look. Problem 2 and 4 seem to be simple to correct, however I am not very good with the tasks and had JIP issues myself, so maybe someone else can help you with that.

Hey - I guess I'm really late to the party. First of all thank you for this mod, it's like a brain upgrade for the AI! My group just ran a small (4 vs 16 enemies) test run of bcombat 0.18 (running on dedicated). Scenario: We invaded Charkia from the south with AR team up on the SE hill fo the Mine and TL/Grenadier advancing directly from S. Enemy teams were split up in 4 man fireteams (no grenadiers) dispersed throughout Charkia. Test went for about 4 hours. Positive things we noted: - AI "hunting" you down when you are pulling back or going into hard cover is really eerie, never before have we been pinned down that good, even in a CQB-ish environment. - Smoke grenade throwing surprised all of us and forced us to do a tactical retreat because we lost sight of our prior contacts. Great! - "Investigative" behaviour was really something we hadn't thought of. Some AI was actually flanking us trying to check out the vehicle we had abandoned. When we returned to the vehicle to regroup we got wasted - Worked fine on dedicated, barely any performance hit (2-3 fps). Negative things / Constructive feedback: - Open field combat. Once the AI charged us into open terrain, they seemed a bit clueless, sometimes even wandering in "careless" mode while flanking, made them very easy to take down - Retreat mode - as soon as we had outrun the enemy AI (about 800ms or so), they all turned around and moved to their prior positions, it would be cool if a buddy team remained to act as spotters at position of last place of engagement. Questions gathered: - How does server difficulty profile / skill setting influence bcombat? The impression was that they were a "tad" more accurate than usually and engaged at longer ranges. - Does AI decide that they have the winning hand and "rush"? We had the impression that although we at first overwhelmed them with firepower (AR team suppressing & 40mm grenades), eventually they decided that they had the numbers going for them and advanced aggressively (was totally ok, we just weren't sure if that was bcombat or vanilla behaviour). - Is bcombat inclusive to units on static weapons? We had the impression that one guard on a .50 cal was playing in god mode (do they use thermal?).

You could set up your own NATO faction / groups to your liking by creating their own config for your faction. Its a lot of work to set up, but after you have the base unit set its mostly a matter of copy & paste with adding / removing specific items. Unfortunately there is (afaik) no way to do this automatically from the virtual arsenal.

I do like the AFM. Fly it with M / KB (Joystick broke) a lot in SP. Not so sure of using it in multiplayer, especially in combination with modded content so much can already go wrong, people want to reduce unnecessary risks as much as possible. Then stuff like desyncs or frame drops may cause additional interference when using AFM which may lead to more issues.

Last time I tried it didn't work with the LB / AH-6. To me this looks either like a leftover from alpha or a cruel tease from BIS :-D

This is something I fiddled around with as well. What worked was setting behavior to safe / careless, never fire and movement speed to limited (not sure if that actually is important). Additionally use this: null=[] spawn { while {true} do { player action ["lightOn", VEHICLE_NAME]; sleep 0.01};}; in the init line of the vehicle, where VEHICLE_NAME needs to be replaced with the unit's name (taken from this thread)

I see, great - thanks!

Small correction + addition for the taru transport (identical to huron) & hellcat // chinook both versions [ ["B_Heli_Transport_03_F", "B_Heli_Transport_03_unarmed_F"], [-1.11,-3.5,-24.9], [1.08,-3.5,-24.9] ], // hellcat green [ ["I_Heli_light_03_unarmed_F"], [0.7,2.5,-24.9], [-0.9,2.5,-24.9] ], // taru transport (closed) [ ["O_Heli_Transport_04_covered_F"], [-1.11,-3.5,-24.9], [1.08,-3.5,-24.9] ],

I know this is a really old thread, but it has bugged me as well that CSAT is lacking an armored support vehicle. After checking through the pbo I noticed that there is a "hidden" Opfor Skin for the Bobcat CRV . Replaced it with this setObjectTextureGlobal [0,"\a3\armor_f_beta\APC_Tracked_01\Data\apc_tracked_01_crv_opfor_co.paa"]; - all is well. Don't forget to manually change the inventory on the empty vehicle to default CSAT IFV inventory before sending it out for support! Too bad there is no INDEP version, but I guess that would be too OP FOR them! ;-)

Yes this would be nice, although the Spike rocket actually technically does have the possibility to be fired speculatively and being guided to a target afterwards. I concur that that arc / turn ratio in A3 is far too high. For top-down attack mode this behavior should be completely removed.

Well you can do "sort of" top down attacks, the lock / seek stays on - even if aiming almost vertically. Also attacking vehicles behind structures is possible as demonstrated here: Of course it would be really really nice if we could use that top selector to the right hand side. It's already there - just make it selectable by changing fire mode.

First of all - your island looks very nice and I like how you stuck to the geographical details and base layout. If this is your very first terrain in A3, kudos to you! I just wanted to mention that lots of units look at islands / terrains from a different perspective. Is it usable for a small or large campaign, does it have some kind of staging area away from the the AO, what kind of joint operations could we do etc. I think as nice your island / atoll looks, it does not fit in to general terms units may be looking for. As the description says it's basically a land based aircraft carrier. Sure you could do some underwater invasion style mission and probably lots of training missions, but else wise personally I don't see much other ways to make it work within a larger unit. Atoll maps in general are niche maps and imho do not support large scale operations very well. Sure it's doable but the options for scenarios may be too limiting for most units.

Combat Space Enhancement http://csemod.com/, basically its the "other" realism oriented mod that is out there (next to AGM). Not sure if it is possible, but the medical system (imho) is well worth of looking into being supported by F3. Alternatively - would it be possible to add some kind of end-healing / revive by combat medic & medkit into F3's Simple Wounding System?

How close was it? Closer than 5m?

Dear Modmakers, thank you for improving the basic US Helos. My group recently started our new campaign in goold 'ole Takistan and had the Kickoff-Event last Tuesday. Unfortunately although we thought we had tested the misison & mods thoroughly, it seems we ran into a snag with the Chinook. The task for our logistics troop was to load several boxes of ammunition and explosives into the Chinook (Desert) to bring these supplies to the FOB. As I pilot I thought I'd improve their game experience and bring the big brown bird closer to the hanger. Alas the dust settled (Engine off) and the loading began (CSE Logistics). All went well until there was a huge explosion and the Chinook as well as several people (including me) were destroyed by the blast. Luckily our medical team was brave enough to evac us and revive us at a nearby medical truck. What a start! Unfortunately we lost our air transport capabilities. Luckily our recon team located a Mohawk that was left behind on the airfield. Puzzled by what happened we did some testing under the same conditions. Takistan, ALive, CSE and US Helos. During the test runs the only thing that happened repeatedly and could not be explained was that randomly and without visual reason the explosive NATO ammo boxes - when located too close to the Chinook eventually started to burn and be self-incinerated themselves. Probably this is what caused the explosion in our mission as well, as initial damage is not visible right away and the boxes were loaded into the Chinook. Do you have any idea if there is some kind of collision model for the Chinook (desert) that extends far out of what one would expect by the visual representation? What could have caused this issue?

Altis has some quite dense forest in the NW, Stratis has tons of forestry. If you mean Altis does not look exactly like your beloved Chernarus, well then I guess you are right. It has far more variations and of course is set in the mediterranean which would make a huge mixed forest like in Chernarus look very unrealistic. Not missing that personally, I guess for some people atmosphere and ambiance is really important and yes to this degree A3 has a bit less to offer. Then on the otherhand I remember stuff like this being turned off in A2 because it hampered performance (that was a while ago maybe things changed).

I guess I'm one of the few people here who really enjoy A3 far more than A2. Fluid infantry movement Adaptable stances "Modern" weapon systems, things that are in use nowadays, not from Vietnam Era or First Gulf War. A more distanced combat experience with drones and recon playing a much greater role Modern vehicles like the MRAPs and Fennek PhysX implementation Better driving simulation Visual fidelity Two quite large maps (in comparison to Utes / Chernarus) that offer a multitude of terrain and operational possibilities Accessible buildings SDV / diving + underwater combat (yes an LHD or other similar naval vessel would be nice to have) RotorLib implementation Who seriously wants to throw this all away and prefer to play A2 with all it's limits?

Just read up about this game updater, looks nice and does the job, but still no parallel install in Steam. At least I don't have to download the whole game each time. Thanks!

NVidia owner and No. Why? Because this community is divided enough as is. Adding in (performance) fragmentation due to different hardware (basically like a dongle) is the last thing we need.

Guess what ... 1.20 somehow redid that problem with the Grenades not being able to be thrown if they are within the vest. Luckily I just did a retest of my mission that we are playing tomorrow, like that I can at least give a heads up to my battle buddies :-/ Edit: Actually it doesn't matter where they are. Can't swap grenades any more. Whatever is selected at the beginning is the only throwable item. Once you drop them on the floor and pick them up again, all is well. *sigh* It's like meeting up with that old buddy that you never really liked but sometimes he bumps into you. Just checked into http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=15885 and it seems the issue is still in limbo.

Thanks for the info!

Weird thing is when I just start the game with above mentioned mods, I already get an error: "B_Fieldpack_cbr_LAT.simulation" + "B_Parachute.simulation". Hotfix please? The mission does not include any parachuting or parachutes as objects at all.

Same here, just loaded up a custom mission that we are beta testing tomorrow and no backpack on all units (which are supposed to have them). Additional mods in use: CBA,TFAR Loading backpack with:

YES. Thank you!