SloppySeconds
Member-
Content Count
4 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Community Reputation
1 NeutralAbout SloppySeconds
-
Rank
Rookie
-
MCC Sandbox - The Mod
SloppySeconds replied to shay_gman's topic in ARMA 2 & OA - ADDONS & MODS: COMPLETE
Cant you just run the code that you copied from the paste/safe function in the command console? I don't understand why the load feature is even needed; unless it has a purpose other then loading the code saved? On a side note; has anyone else noticed some issues when coupling this with Hetman Commander? I have begun to try to revert this back to script form, in the hope that I can disable whatever is causing the lag manually (and easily); however I am having some issues smoothing out all the changes (specifically the 3D editor update, and zone's don't seem to work). I have changed all the location code from /mcc_sandbox_mod to the proper destination, and scanned every single line in the hopes of finding the error; but it seems like there is some dependency's in the way the new code is initialized that make it so that it will not run as a mission file. I didn't notice any changed in the zone.sqf file, and I made sure all the .hpp files are correctly coded for the new folder layout. So I am kind of stumped; got virtually everything working but the zones/update feature, IED's, Markers etc.. all work, just not the important zone/update features... lol Anyways, great mod; very enjoyable having all this editing ability at one's fingertips. Hope to see some more good idea's/releases from you! ---------- Post added at 18:47 ---------- Previous post was at 18:38 ---------- There is a guide to do this on the first page; just use the module provided (place it in editor), or add the code (in bold) to the module variable line. What map are you playing on? I have never had this happen before... but it seems like the C-130 is flying to low for some strange reason. -
Technically all their weapons are pretty much "against their ideology". The U.S.S.R. supplied large amounts of arms to the Baath party in Iraq, and while much has been forgotten in light of Iran's much needed military help from Russia. The fact still stands that it was against, and still is against their ideology to purchase Russian weapons. Russia's involvement in Chechnya, and Dagestan has left Iran in a very uncomfortable position, while at the same time they are helping fund/train the Mujahedin fighting against the Russians, they also need the Russian help to arm themselves against the inevitable Israeli/U.S. invasion. So they retain a public stance of being in support of Russia's illegal invasion of Chechnya, while pretending to be tough on them behind the scene's so their Muslim brothers wont call them on their bluff. So as one would imagine the need far outweighs any ideological preference Iran might have. However Iran does not have the same tactics nor the same geography as the Israeli's, and the Merkava seems like it was designed to fill a specific role, the defense of Israel. Israel: Area:total: 20,770 sq km land: 20,330 sq km water: 440 sq km Iran: Area:total: 1.648 million sq km land: 1.636 million sq km water: 12,000 sq km There is little chance that Iran would find efficient use for the Merkava given the large differences in their geography.. The Merkava was to be ushered out of service in 2006 shortly before the Lebanon war, and while this decision was ultimately overridden by Israeli General Staff, their decision still must make it evident that this machines lifespan is limited. Thereby making it quite unlikely that 10-20 years in the future we will still be using such a piece of hardware. Especially Iran who requires much more maneuverability of their tanks then the Israeli's. Not to mention if the Iranians are going to be the "offensive" nation the Merkava is not what they would likely use. The Iranian MBT currently is 36–41 tonnes, while the Merkava is 65 tonnes, that is a big difference when you are moving through the mountains of Iran. Remember Iran is the 18th largest country in the world in terms of area, so their tactics would be nothing like the IDF, especially when mounting a massive assault on the Greek Islands. Iran's current military budget would NEVER account for such an expensive tank as the Merkava anyways, $9.174 billion 2.7% GDP IRAN vs $14.5 billion 6.9% GDP ISRAEL. That is quite the monetary difference, even if it might not look that big, just one look at the size of Israel will quickly put some doubt into the ideas that Iran is anywhere close to developing a sophisticated tank like the Merkava, and most certainly wouldn't be mass producing them as their MBT. While I am not aware of the technical specs of the Zulfiqar, it looks like its quite some years behind all other MBT, and yet Iran still produced 1613 in 2010. Meaning they still consider this tank as technically capable on the field, which in all reality is very unlikely judging by the targeting systems employed in most MBT. So altogether I am thinking both tactics, monetary investment in military, technical, and engineering prowess, geography, and ultimately Iranian desires for the Middle East would make them ever using the Merkava very unlikely. The current estimates of Iran's engineering, and software designing capability's are far below what would be required to operate, and facilitate advanced military hardware anyways. They seem to all directly contradict the idea of Iran using an any advanced hardware anytime soon. From what I have read the majority of analysis's have come to the obvious conclusion that Iran would, and will fight unconventional warfare. The Lebanon war was an example of what modern conflicts of the future will hold in store, the use of military facility's closely knit with civilian one's will make Arial bombardments almost impossible without heavy civilian casualty's. The war will almost 100% certainly devolve into insurgency style street fighting as we saw in Iraq, but with a much stronger civilian backing, mimicking the strong resistance found in Lebanon. In light of these obvious assessments of Iran's military, I have no clue why BIS would make this decision. Not only does giving Iran's military advanced hardware seem unlikely, but it ruins the tactical "collage" that the "insurgent" style Opfor brought to Arma 2. I personally am a big fan of fighting against superior forces with just by AK-47, and some IED's.
-
Arma 3: Community wishes & ideas- DISCUSSION
SloppySeconds replied to Maio's topic in ARMA 3 - GENERAL
I would love to see more documentation on the editor, and a more in-depth editor system. The wiki for Arma 2's editor is still not complete, and much of the information on even the basics (Modules) are not there. If you are going to create something as amazingly versatile as the Arma 2 editor, then they should provide some documentation on how to use it to the best of our abilities. Yes, its true that one can find all the needed scripting code, and information themselves by digging through the PBO's, but one cant expect the average video game player to have an understanding of how to find variables, class-names etc.. It seems like Arma's editor was much more geared towards the proficient in coding rather then your average video game player. This in my opinion is something that must change if BIS want to usher in a large audience base. Especially since when one actually starts to learn how the use the Arma 2 editor, and learn basic scripting/use of variables etc.. The game opens up, and is way more of an experience. You can do almost anything with this editor, but you have to understand how to use it first... This was something that struck me immediately as a problem with Arma when coming from other games with more in-depth editor. Personally the testing of missions has driven me back to using others missions instead, because spending the time it takes to test a semi large mission is quite frustrating. The ability to speed up the simulation (much faster then now), or possibly "skip forward" would be enormously helpful for mission testing, and debugging applications (like the TroopMon mod) would make the testing so much easier. A 3d editor with the ability to play the mission forward/back at different speed while in the editor would also decrease the amount of times spent testing/creating missions drastically. Regardless Arma 3 is bound to be the best game ever, even if I have to lose sleep testing the missions.