DeltaFOX209

your comment seriously wasnt needed. did you read ANYTHING? also its not the fact of just higher ups, a low ranker made the mission anyway, editing nothing and claiming as yours is just stupid and selfish. Also i addressed the sharing and things being public. We under stand if you take the mission and edit it. but to take the mission, as is, take off the signature and claim as yours is the issue. But the mission isnt ours you say? True, but ArmA models dont belong to me but if i made a reskin and uploaded it to a public area, id pretty pissed if someone took the reskin and took my name off of it and put theres on there. Now if they took the unit, edited it majorly, ie: keep the marpat camo, but change the vest, change the helmet, maybe change the pouches, i wouldnt care as much. So before you lecture me of the rights and wrongs of arma, how about you "get a grip" and stand back and re-read that its just a simple question and that we arent trying to stop them, they already have it, we just dont want people claiming our missions as theres. Simple. You are the only one to post a useless post and be slightly insulting in the process. Its a question, i got some answers, thank you for your time. However unneeded it was. @Iceman: \ @zooloo: / Thank you both for your answers. You were great help (:

I guess thats true. Im mostly on the fence of it, i figured id inquire about it since the hire ups arent too happy, and edits, i suppose im alright with, just not taking our version and not editing it at all and then saying they are the ones that made it, the former makes sense because if you draw a car, and some comes and erases the back and turns it into a truck, technically its not your art, but drawing a car and signing it, then someone erasing your signing and putting theirs is a bit different, but oh well. I'll just shrug and say what my first post is, "Mimicry is the sincerest form of flattery"

you arent being a prick but, And mostly we dont care about them anymore since they already got their hands on it, we just want prevention, like brand the mission so they cant take credit you know?

all of you took everything wrong except for page number 1. I was just simply expressing my distaste and desire to prevent people taking things without permission to take credit them selves. So telling me to "GROW UP" is a stupid and un needed answer as i wasnt ranting/flaming/venting. I believe i stated my inquiry in a professional manner. "ground up": of course we didnt make lingor and insurgency, thats horrible. I understand the mission is public and people have rights of usage, what we dont like is taking a mission that was just blank lingor and basic insurgency that we spent time working on to add a spawn point, units, bases, scripts, parameters and other little things to try and make it more enjoyable for the public. And when someone takes said mission, hosts it, and takes credit, thats LIKELY to upset someone, especially the person that took time to make it. So other comments and additions wasnt needed, I understand the ArmA community is focused around sharing, modding and gerneral cooperative activities, I've played arma since Armed Assault. So trust me, i understand the theory. SO! I'll re word my question. Is there anyway to brand our mission, so when its "acquired" and used by others because they dont want to take the time to edit, is there a way we could have the map or something to show "made by So-so unit"? lets stay on topic shall we? ---------- Post added at 21:42 ---------- Previous post was at 21:39 ---------- so far the best answer ive had, Thank You

i just find it hard to believe that after this many years of arma no one found a way to stop mission taking :\

they are actually starting to remove our markings now that public affairs tried reasoning with them... so i believe they are heading in that direction, but my question is if theres a way to prevent this in the future? I mean we cant do anything now if they wont listen, hey have the files and are being immature like a bunch of Day Z kids that got blamed for stealing someones beans so THEY are kind of out of our mind now, we just want to prevent future stolen maps.

basicly its a lingor insurgency map, its built from the ground up, base layout and everything, it took a good chunk of time to put together, i dont mean to sound like a crybaby or anything, its just starting to get on our nerves, they even failed to edit it one bit, the map still has our ts address, our rules, and the mission says "edited by SRU" only thing they changed was the splash screen

I do believe this would be the correct position for said post, if not ill move it. I did use the search function after i used google, no results, so here i am. Recently we've been dealing with people stealing our missions and hosting them on their own public servers, and people keep getting confused and coming into our ts thinking they are on the right one (they have our website and ts info on the map). Now i know the whole, 'mimicry is the sincerest form of flattery' but it doesnt help but annoy us when we try talking to them and they get all offended and kick us from ts while we try explaining that our guys worked on the mission for a good amount of time and knicking it like that just seems kind of underhanded. So my question is this. Is there ANY way to stop this from happening? I remember a unit my friend was in tried stealing a mission and when they did it caused the spawn points to be glitchy as hell (like cobras upside down in trees and stuff and the mission was just horribly broken). Thanks ahead of time

I agree. even with this most recent ACE bug my unit is noticing this "random damage" im able to just shrug and go about my business

Maybe im just an accepting person or maybe im now realizing im an ArmA fanboy o: Ive been playing arma since Armed Assault and started ArmA 2 maybe a few months after it came out with 1gb of RAM and a 8600GT! now it was from there i was introduced to ACE and all the mods yadda yadda blah and i upgraded and run it well. All that AWESOME stuff that makes me keep playing online. I have noticed that ArmA is very lacking in alot of physics and is just straight up buggy in general. but am i the only one that just COMPLETELY forgot about glitches and just chalk it up to "ArmA logic"? lol i mean ill see DayZ forums and see people complaining of glitches and bugs and say ArmA is a buggy incomplete game and part of me wants to say "take that back :..C " I'm angered easilly but ArmA just fro some reason doesnt piss me off except for ONE time. Just when it kept crashing from MSO lol. But i guess even though its super buggy, poorly optimized, requires a god like computer and now plagued by DayZ, Arma is just so fun it would seem i forget all of that. It is by far the best game ive played! Anyone else share these thoughts of the Acceptable buggyness? lol

The dev. in our org. just had me download 2.5 right now. everything works fine. thanks for the assistance. Topic closed/solved :3

Anyway you can help me with texview2? i already got rid of Kegety's PAA plug in. and i tried O2 but it was too complicated and not what i was looking for. im just trying to get the vehicle templates to color and make retextures without modpacks... sorry im pretty new at this

As the title explains, while getting taught how to view .paa vehicle templates to re-texture. My friend's TexView2 opens the .paa files fine, but i get the "Error loading file: 'C:\Editing\wheeled2\LAV25\Data\lavbody_co.paa' the error comes up no matter what texture i try loading. (.paa form). I've tried reinstalling multiple times and trying to use Kegety's PAAplugin for PS. PS still says that PAA is unsupported.. :\ help?

Figured it out. Using .png files and converting them to .paa then putting them in the mission folder and using this setObjectTexture [0,"TextureFileName.paa"]; in the init. line will load the art. For more accuracy and detail. going into the AddOns folder and finding the vehicle you want to color and using cpbo on the vehicle textures gives you a template