foxsch

confirmed :confused: but I can't move it unfortunately... @.kju - OK - and thank's again for the help!

Isn't it possible that if I create collections; which will be exactly replicated by your collections (they will at the end of the day be composed of the same sequences of mods), it will create confusion? Your collections have a considerable number of subscribers, and a link to them in the release post provides potential down-loaders the opportunity to assess which particular sequence/collection suits their set up? Your collections also include detailed explanations about how and why a particular sequence does, or does not require players to already own the Iron Front game, and the various other aspects of the conversion and the associated dependencies? Without literally copying your instructions, I wouldn't be able to do that accurately enough to make my collections sufficiently self-explanatory?

@ 'kju, Thanks for pointing this out. I have removed the standalone from the dependencies but as far as I can see, the SIX upload interface will only allow me to add one sequence of DP's. Obviously I do not want to add all of the combinations possible, how would you recommend I go about rigging the dependencies for the SIX page? *I have added a link to your SIX IFA3 collection page into the release threads (hope that is OK) and also the mod page at SIX. Do you think this will be enough? @kecharles28 Looks great, thank you.

Hi, I have a Mission which begins during a descent in a parachute. It's a single-player mission and none of the Radio Channels are particularly important to the mission, in fact it would lend immersion to have a more or less 'silent' environment, apart from the sounds heard by the player during the mission, gunfire etc. Anyway, to achieve a silent parachute descent I added: enableRadio = false; 0 fadeRadio 0; enableSentences false; to the init.sqf added: disableChannels[]={0,1,2,3,4,5,6}; to the description.ext and also added: this unassignItem "Itemradio"; this removeItem "Itemradio"; to my players init ... and I still get radio chatter!!!! Anybody got any ideas? I've searched and found some complex MP threads regarding minimising or selective radio, for ACRE - servers and so forth, but I was sure that there would be some way of completely killing the radio chat for SP:confused: Update:- I have also added: {_x setVariable ["BIS_noCoreConversations", true]} forEach allunits; [BIS disableConversation] to the init.sqf {that used to work in ARMA 2, I know I have used it before myself - thread} then just to make sure: this setVariable ["BIS_noCoreConversations", true]; AND this disableConversation true to the players init field - still radio chatter - completely stumped:mad:

Thanks be to the creators : -) Be sure to drop by and let us know what you made of the textures ~ Missions / Screenshots / Vids all welcome at this stage ~ Early Days!

That's all clear .kju thanks. I'd thought it was a ticket we could vote for - hope it goes through. OK to post up the result when it's decided upon?

Excellent! Thank you .kju, the upload went smoothly, and the mod is currently processing. The release thread for @GEIST_A3 can be found here at the Iron Front Fans Forum. Enjoy : -)

Hi .kju - thanks for getting back to me. I have created a Collection: and published it with public settings and made all of the mods as required. The collection contains: @CBA_A3 @PWS_EnableA2OAContentInA3 @IFA3 @IFA3SA @LIB_DLC_1_Lite The collection appeared immediately at the withSIX website, but @LIB_DLC_1_Lite is still not available at the drop-down for the mod upload interface? Did I miss something? *Edit "Did I miss Something?" My Bad ~ I misunderstood what you had suggested; the @Enable A2 / OA content in A3 in PWS' should be added to the list of requirements for the upload. I created the collection assuming that uploading and publishing the collection would add @LIB_DLC_1_Lite' to SIX's available mods for the interface. Do you have a link for the issue ticket?

Hi, I need to add @LIB_DLC_1_Lite as a dependency for a texture mod, but @LIB_DLC_1_Lite (although it is available at Play withSIX) is not appearing in the drop-down for the dialogue on the Play withSIX 'Add Mod' GUI?

Excellent! Thank you 2nd Ranger :bounce3: "setSpeaker" was only introduced in ARMA 3 and I hadn't come across it at all. It will certainly come in handy to say the least - Cheers! Just to emphasise, what I needed to do to achieve a radio silence (for SP), was to add: unit setSpeaker "NoVoice"; to my players initialisation field. Add: disableChannels[]={0,1,2,3,4,5,6}; to the description.ext, but this did still leave the Group Channel (3) open. So I also added: unit unlinkItem "Itemradio"; to all the units in the players group. Radio Silence! I also noted on the BI wiki page for setSpeaker that there are some ways of modifying the speaker for a Unit. I'm not sure, but this might be configurable for those who wanted to use pre-recorded voices instead of the stock voices for their missions? ---------- Post added at 18:17 ---------- Previous post was at 16:34 ---------- There is also: unit setSpeaker "NoVoice"; to all the units in a players group, which would work in SP, but as Killzone Kid points out, anything more complicated and it will get messy. How is that done from the init.sqf?

Thanks for the help guys! I've removed the '=' from enableRadio and added: waitUntil {time >0}; unitname unlinkItem "ItemRadio"; to the init.sqf The group channel is still active. Thankfully, this is for a SP Mission so; JIP / TeamSpeak or other VOIP complications aren't a part of the problem, but I would still like to find a way of (as Undeceived has pointed out) get the AI to STFU completely. Is it time to add to (or start?) a Bug/Dev Ticket. This ticket seems closest, although directly aimed at MP communications, it is still relevant to disabling the group channel chat. I am sure it can be resolved, and yes, it was definitely possible in ARMA 2. *update I've now also added 'unlink "ItemRadio"; to every member of the players group with no effect. I've assumed that the group channel (the bright green channel notification is still displaying btw) will only apply to the players group, and that there is no reason or need to attempt to silence or remove the radios from the entire side?

Well I get it all working eventually! Now on 2 counts in two different missions:- A mission I have been working on since the first post is where I would like to 'collect' some intel, rather than take it, or 'find' it, unlike the first. I thought I'd post this (very) simple solution to a scenario whereby approaching a unit (on the same side would make sense) and the intel hints and actions all take place without any 'action-scroll' by the player: nul = execVM "intel.sqf"; ../intel.sqf nul = [this,"RscAttributeDiaryRecord",["High Command Orders","Congratulations on your promotion to High Commander! Press Ctrl and Space-Bar to access your Patrols and deploy them wisely",""]] call bis_fnc_setServerVariable; this setVariable ["recipients", west, true]; nul = ["G1", "SUCCEEDED"] spawn BIS_fnc_taskSetState; hint "Orders Received"; I hope this helps somebody!

I've got it Shuko, thank you.

I'm just trying this out for the first time, and I'm drawing a complete blank. It must be something completely obvious I know, but I've tried a whole heap of different variations, and they all come up blank. I am trying to create just the one task - I am trying both the init.sqf; and also calling it in as a script from a trigger. Neither is getting me anywhere. No Briefing notes, zilch. Here's the call from my init: [[ ["Task1","Find a Map","Well that didnt go quite as planned. The first thing you are going to need is to know where you are, and if possible re-establish contact with other US forces",[color="#FF0000"]RESISTANCE[/color],["markerTask1", getMarkerPos "mapintelmarker"],"CREATED"] ],[ ["Note1","Task Note 1",[color="#FF0000"]RESISTANCE[/color]] ]] call compile preprocessfilelinenumbers "shk_taskmaster.sqf"; I was pretty sure that was all OK? As I was thinking that this brief and the notes I wrote might be readable before spawning into the mission, I was going to change the 'RESISTANCE' to 'false'. I haven't got as far as finding out whether that would be correct yet. Then call the pre-charged Task, written in the init.sqf as above, via a script in a trigger thus: sleep 10; [[ ["Task1","Find a Map","Well that didnt go quite as planned. The first thing you are going to need is to know where you are, and if possible re-establish contact with other US forces.",RESISTANCE,["markerTask1", getMarkerPos "mapintelmarker"],"CREATED"] ],[ ["Note1","Task Note 1",RESISTANCE] ]] call "shk_taskmaster_add"; Neither method is working, can anyone spot what is going wrong? As I said, I get absolutely nothing when I load the mission up!!! ---------- Post added at 02:45 ---------- Previous post was at 02:11 ---------- *update ~ bad news. I tried running the exact-same init.sqf through a test area on vanilla units - NATO 'RESISTANCE'. Although I was still running the mods I was running for the Mission the Task is designed for, the script ran fine and the Task and brief appeared :butbut: I guess this means that the script will not work as-is on @units? I read earlier that it was cool to adjust the faction list but 1/ I don't know how to do that - and 2/ I'm not sure Shoku is OK with it? Pointers? :~ the @Units = Iron Front in ARMA 3 Faction List = 'Allies' [RESISTANCE/Independent/GUER] / 'USSR' [OPFOR] / 'Germany' [bLUEFOR]

I tried using some of the calls used in that thread, but they didn't help. Not surprising considering they were designed for use with SHK_ Maybe it will help Tay-UK? Since testing I've also noticed that this (first) objective is available in the pre-mission briefing, so I'm getting ahead of myself a bit, which I want, at this stage to avoid at all costs! I'm going to take a step backwards. I'm pleased I am able to add intel information to the object, and some of the very basic Create Task Module set-up is a lot clearer, but I don't want to run before I can crawl with this, so I'm going to look more closely at how to arrange for any pre-set Tasks to remain invisible for the pre-mission briefing...

Excellent post - thank you, I'm sure that it's going to help. I am in the same boat myself atm (in a hurry), and not able to re-check what I'm doing. But to get this right is uber-critical so I will have to get it clamped down understood before moving into some more complex areas of task editing, so I'll check back later when my objective is as it needs to be - cheers!

Did you get this figured out? I worked my way through the thread and re-worked the objective I'm adding using the Zeus Intel item. It adds a neat touch when you collect some docs. I'm tempted to try the Taskmaster2 as it tends to fall back on a more-scripted approach, which I'm used to. My task is simply to collect the docs, trigger an event, which was simple, have the intel posted for the side to read, all done, but then also trigger multiple further objectives and set the intel/docs objective succeeded. this was close enough: thread but I haven't got a setTaskState Module placed, as I read there I shouldn't need one. I have:Docs/Zeus Intel <--> Set Task Destination Module Set Task Destination Module <--> Create Task Module Create Task Module <--> Synchronised for Side (I use a static and out-of-the-way vehicle and sync Diary records and Tasks to that, keeps the map editing area a bit clearer :) I get a notification that the Task has been created, and an icon for the destination, I can assign it for the team, but when I take the docs, all I get is the 'Intel' notification, the task has not succeeded? This is what I have in my Zeus Intel init: data = [this,"RscAttributeDiaryRecord", ["Enemy Intelligence Map","",""]] call bis_fnc_setServerVariable; this addEventHandler ["ContainerClosed",if ("Intel_File1_F" in (weapons player)) then {_taskID = "1"; [[_taskID,"SUCCEEDED"],"BIS_fnc_taskSetState", side (_this select 1), false, false] call BIS_fnc_MP; (_this select 0) removeEventHandler ["ContainerClosed",0];}]; Should work no? I'm guessing, but have you tried adding: call SHK_Taskmaster_upd; here if (isServer) then { this setVariable ["RscAttributeDiaryRecord_texture","a3\structures_f_epc\Items\Documents\Data\document_secret_01_co.paa", true]; [this,"RscAttributeDiaryRecord",["Top Secret Docs","<br /><execute expression= ""[(group player), 'my intel task', ['an intel task', 'secret docs', ''], [0,0,0], 'ASSIGNED', 0] [color="#FF0000"]call BIS_fnc_taskCreate[/color]"" >These Docs outline the enemies defenses</execute><br />",""]] call bis_fnc_setServerVariable; this setVariable ["recipients", west, true]; }; with all else as written?

There a lot of WWII style games available, and your right about the Multi-player aspect, it isn't always possible to find a thriving on-line community for all of them. But for ARMA 3 the appeal is often the editor and the ability to create your own missions in your own way and use community made content to flesh it out. Iron Front in Arma 3 is the spearhead in this sense of WWII modding for ARMA 3 and if (like me) playing on-line with others is not the real incentive, I most often play COOP against the AI, it is top notch and still growing and developing. You can imagine that with the amount of different mods editors can add to their missions, running a remote dedicated server and deciding which missions to add to it is going to throw up problems, and the way around this is to play with a clan who can get together and decide which missions to play and prepare their set up for them.

Hey, sorry I missed the response - nope I didn't spawn or recruit them, they were available as part of my side when I spawned in. It was a very similar set-up to the 'Domination' style scenario. I needed to create my own Side-Mission and I needed the aircraft in the air as spotters and also to try to knock out the tower as a chosen side-mission (an hours drive at least). However, it is likely I was running the @IFA3 mod when I launched it - I didn't realise it would affect the mission parameters ir available hardware.

Hey JShock thx for the response - unfortunately I didn't get time to check that. Someone came up with an ideal way of utilising the BI Arsenal feature (read up), correctly loaded out for my Mission, so I moved away from the VAS anyways.

Did this ever happen? (The AntiAir searchlight I mean} I've been searching for a long while but never came up with anything that could throw out a powerful enough beam to simulate the'Blitz' WWII type cones of light? I don't have the know-how to put it together but I'd still like to see one - is it possible? If not A2 - A3?

AHA! Just what I was looking for : -) Maybe I am in the same boat as Mates31cz here? I'd like to be able to offer a Pre-Mission Parameter choice between 'SIDE' or 'NONE'. It seems like you have the code I'd need there but I don't know how to call it in? How could I add that to form something for the class params?

It is the first revive system I've found that gets an AI to you when your down fast enough for it to be worth having it in your mission. There is nothing more depressing than dying while an AI (Medic or otherwise) is less than 2M away and not reviving you. I want to find an alternative (Mobile) Respawn for if the Revive function times out, but atm I'm def. going to go ahead and try and make it UPSMON compat. The Revive status bar is particularly good, and like I said - the AI get to you fast!

I am testing a Mission using the A3 Wounding System and I am sure it is breaking the UPSMON set. If I disable the Wounding System my patrols go ahead, enabled they will just stand around immobile. Anybody got any ideas as to where should I start looking to make the two get along? I don't want to be without either for the mission. *10 minutes testing later: If you make sure you place call compile preprocessFileLineNumbers "scripts\Init_UPSMON.sqf"; ABOVE //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ["%1 --- Executing TcB AIS init.sqf",diag_ticktime] call BIS_fnc_logFormat; enableSaving [false,false]; enableTeamswitch false; // TcB AIS Wounding System -------------------------------------------------------------------------- if (!isDedicated) then { TCB_AIS_PATH = "ais_injury\"; {[_x] call compile preprocessFile (TCB_AIS_PATH+"init_ais.sqf")} forEach (if (isMultiplayer) then {playableUnits} else {switchableUnits}); // execute for every playable unit {[_x] call compile preprocessFile (TCB_AIS_PATH+"init_ais.sqf")} forEach (units group player); // only own group - you cant help strange group members //{[_x] call compile preprocessFile (TCB_AIS_PATH+"init_ais.sqf")} forEach [p1,p2,p3,p4,p5]; // only some defined units //}; // -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- They will both work in SP - but UPSMON will still break in MP - It doesn't help as to where to find the cure for it, but it might give somebody an idea.

If it helps, I just set up a new Mission using VAS and it went through smoothly, no problems at all. Point being, I set the Mission up because I wanted to find out how my set-up/configs etc performed without the HETMAN AI Leader Module. To check to see if what I thought was a config problem, was in fact a conflict with the HAL Module? Turns out I was right and if you check and try this combo, no doubt it will replicate. The load time for VAS became several minutes for me! Tonic, if you can get the time to fix that conflict - I like the interface of VAS and would still like to use it with HAL if possible - cheers!