fin_soldier

Hello, I ran into some small trouble with my upcoming horror mission: SILENT ABDERA | COMING SOON™... The problem is that I'm using objects/items in my mission that are interactive. And I simply want to have them as props. Here's two examples: I have tried to disable simulation as well as turning them into simple objects, but it doesn't help. This is not the only object action problems I have. In the mission I'm having quite a lot of these items what I call notes, but they work as leaflets. I wanted the leaflet to have a look of a document, so I used a intel document. I pasted the leaflet script into init, and it works and looks great. But, it also has the dreaded take intel action, and I don't want that. Thanks in advance! I hope the images give clear description of what I want to achieve. Enjoy your weekend soldiers!

The Future of ARMA Reforger Apparently, ARMA Reforger has a future 😉 In this video, we're looking at what the future of Arma Reforger holds, by going through a revealing interview, searching through Reddit findings, as well as discussing my own speculations.

ARMA Reforger | A Retrospective Comparison Here's a recent video I made comparing visually and in gameplay ARMA Reforger to the first game in the Arma series, Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis. Enjoy! 😊

For example, how would I go about targeting a cutText to the _caller of an addAction so it's visible only to the _caller, or wanting to kill the player who walked into a trigger. Thanks in advance! 🙂

Hello, I have no idea where to find the names for Muzzles. I'm trying to BIS_fnc_fire a 40mm flare through a unit, but I can only find magazine classnames and muzzles seem to be a mystery. None of these work: [dude, "F_40mm_Red"] call BIS_fnc_fire; [dude, "UGL_FlareRed_F"] call BIS_fnc_fire; Thanks in advance!

Thank you! Strangely when I typed in the same code, it worked perfectly. But copying and pasting code from the forums seems to make things strange.

I'm not sure where things went wrong, but the code gives an error both through debug console and init.sqf:

Hello, I want a cutText to be visible only to the trigger caller. I have the trigger activation for any player, so anyone can be the caller. How would I go about this when the text appears to everyone, but it shouldn't. cutText ["<t size='2' font='EtelkaMonospaceProBold'>The text which should appear.</t>", "PLAIN", -1, true, true]; Thanks in advance! 🙂

Yes, but I don't really know much about scripting, so I wouldn't know how. I could put a cutText that on completion shows a cutText to all players, but how would have to only be visible for the _caller?

Everything works well, and all with the above. Thank you! But, how would I go about targeting the cutText to a specific player; let's say _caller of a holdAction? I've got the holdAction working, just don't know how to target specifically the _caller of the action. Thanks in advance! 🙂

Hello, Well the question is quite simple as above, and I have yet to found a solution. It seems like the system is broken because I've tried these "solutions" below without success: I tried this: nul = H1 setslingload Veh1; And this: I'm running the game completely vanilla, and I'm not sure how to get it working. I simply want the helicopter to initiate with the cargo loaded from the gecko. I appreciate the help, so thank you in advance! 🙂

Thank you, I'll test this out later today.

Interesting points! I do find it strange that Bohemia has been releasing these cold war CDLC's recently, as the Arma Reforger leaks do point to a OFP setting. Despite this, I still believe there to be some kind of a tribute / remake of Operation Flashpoint on the 22nd of June (at the very least an announcement). I listed my speculative reasons of why I believe this in my video below.

Sure, it could be a MP-only game as the leaker claims, but it can still be a commemoration to Operation Flashpoint, and we don't have much information regarding the complexity of Arma Reforger. When it comes to unfounded claims, I sure think there's a connection between an upcoming 20th anniversary and the assets/terrains displayed in the leaks, and the title itself. Just a tiny example would be the village of Vernon, which is verifiable in OFP on Everon. I don't mind you calling me out as a "clickbait youtuber", as everyone can make up their mind of what they believe. I just wanted to share my thoughts and speculation.

If you guys are interested to know about the next Arma - Arma Reforger, then here are my speculative conclusions:

Hello, I didn't realize this thread already existed, so I had created a new one, but of course it was locked. Due to my laziness, I'm just going to post my post as a link, as it took quite a long time to write. So here's my take on Arma 4:

Hello, dear Armaholics and Fanatics! It’s been a while since we’ve heard much news about any upcoming projects. Meanwhile, the Enfusion engine has been rolling steadily in a promising direction. And I am sure that Arma won’t stop at its third installment in the series. I want to start a thread for hopes, ideas and speculation for the fourth installment. Here we can discuss what could make up Arma 4. This would be something that the developers could take notes from, before starting the project (If they haven’t already). So feel free to express your opinion and ideas regarding the future of Arma. To begin with, the Arma series has been a slowly growing franchise for nearly two decades. This means that it has strived for the goal of a tactical military sandbox to almost perfection. And it is nearly perfect, but there are weaknesses that have been withholding Arma from the great military sandbox it could be. It is those weaknesses that should be addressed in order to fill the gaps of the series. When those gaps are filled, (believe me) the real apex of Arma is going to be the next one. Here are my hopes, ideas and speculation for Arma 4: I Gameplay I’m going to start with the gameplay, as it is what makes the series stand out the most. With this, we have to go to the roots of the series (OFP: CWC / Arma: CWA). The harsh and unforgiving gameplay was challenging, but every time you failed you changed your tactic, and when you succeeded it was rewarding. It was the freedom of varied approaches on the mission at hand that made me fall in love with the series. Rather than getting a small dopamine rush from every kill, like most shooters, Arma rewards you on decisions. This made the series stand out in the first place. I’m afraid that the balance of the game has shifted towards a regular shooter with additions like tactical pace and throwing grenades with a click of a button. Decision-based and varied missions As mentioned above, the focus on freedom of tactics rather than a linear shooter is what the core of Arma is about. This could be the decision between placing a minefield to reinforce your defenses OR surprise the enemy before they attack your defenses. Most importantly missions where decisions matter and have consequences, such as in the Tac-Ops DLC. These things bring dynamic gameplay, and in reality, war is dynamic. We all know that there was something lacking in the East Wind campaign. Perhaps the story didn’t quite drive you emotionally or perhaps it was leaning too much on infantry alone? In the main campaign, we should bring what makes Arma special: combined arms gameplay. Maybe switch between characters and take on the role of a helicopter pilot, tank commander, or sniper. It is time for Arma to have a memorable campaign and missions once again. Mechanics: combat, commanding and actions Remember before Arma 3 when you had to switch to the grenade in order to throw? It doesn’t work with that system, but if it was a single button to switch from weapon to grenade in hand, it would work, feel and look better, not to mention it is more realistic. I don’t mind the tactical pace, but something that would make it less mainstream and more tactical would be a button to hold the rifle up (for example space). It would also help to give the weapon a sense of weight, which is a huge factor in real combat. When it comes to commanding, the mechanic has not changed since 2001. The commanding could be made simpler with more of a visual focus rather than keyboard numbers. This also would apply to the action menu, instead of scrolling through text options, the use of visual options like in this thread would be a huge step forward. Terrains, not a terrain Terrains in the series are probably the most important part of the gameplay. The open-world allows you to engage the mission however you like. If one side of a town is heavily defended, you can simply approach from a different side to avoid heavy casualties. But Arma 3, in my opinion, has brought a new problem. Let’s be honest, bigger doesn’t mean better. Not many were fond of Altis, as it felt like a never-ending landscape without any real detail compared to for example Malden 2035. Playing in multiplayer, whether it’s Warlords, Wasteland, or Life servers, I actually preferred Startis over Altis, because I seemed to never come across anybody on Altis. The large map was impressive in 2001, but in 2020 an even larger map won’t stand out unless it actually supports the gameplay. Dear Bohemia Interactive, you don’t have to impress us with the size of the maps. Of course, Stratis is a bit small, that’s why Malden was a great addition of balance. With more but smaller islands, we can have more variety of terrains, which was lacking in Altis & Stratis. II Immersion When it comes to immersion, it is a key step towards realism, and unfortunately, an element lacking in the previous titles. In order for Arma to stand out once again in the growing genre of tactical shooters, now is the time to polish the area of immersion. The main issue I face is the lack of a genuine atmosphere of combat. But thankfully there are ways to increase immersion such as with the following points below. Upgrade in effects First and obviously most noticeable upgrade would be particle effects, as the series has always had quite a soft feel especially with explosions. Arma portrays war, let’s make it portray the grittiness and roughness of blasts n’ explosions through particles and sound. (Example images: Explosions, Explosions, Dirt and Smoke) Along with better particle effects, an upgrade in building destruction would be nice. It is neat that Arma has always had a destruction system, but it has never been the neatest (GIF). But building destruction is not the only destruction requiring an upgrade, more importantly fence, wall, and tree destruction animation would definitely need an overhaul. Combat dialog and actions Arma is known for its group dialog, but I think it’s time for an upgrade in order to enhance the immersion. To have all characters saying the same lines makes it feel artificial, as for humans we are characters of our own. What I would propose is having every individual voice with their own character to the dialog. For example in Star Wars: Republic Commando, the friendly AI still is AI, but there’s a certain relation to them. I’m not saying we should implement random chit-chat, but something a little more variable and human-like reporting. Example: Current: “UNKNOWN PLANE, 1000M” Proposal: “There's an airplane over there.” When it comes to combat, let’s feel the harshness and fear with more drama in the chatter. Example: “Fucking hell! I’m pinned down!”. I said that I’m not going to delve into AI improvement, but there are some things that are easily fixable and would improve the immersion by a lot. It’s about AI actions or actually the lack of action. Something like below could be added just to make the AI a little more independent, and let the squad leader be busy with other things. Of course with a human-like voice: AI rearming by themselves by going to the ammo bearer and reporting: “I’ll get some ammo!” AI healing by themselves, by going into cover and reporting: “Cover me, I need to patch up!” Variety in animations Much like with human-like voices, so should the movement be believable. It would be nice to have the option of choosing movement animations much like the option of voice in the profile. It would bring out a more human-like pattern on the battlefield, because a single animation seems a little robotic when an entire squad moves with the same animation. (Walking example) Getting Injured We do have limping animation, which was a great addition, but there could be a more diverse system. If the walking limping animation was the last stage, there could be a stage where you’re slightly limping while still able to move faster. Another addition for a more interesting combat would be tripping over if getting shot in the leg (creating uncertainty if the unit died). In reality you’re not sure if you’ve killed someone by the target tripping from your bullet. With the above mentioned, we all know when this (GIF) happens. Too often. Combining better ragdolls with animations such as in the battlefield games (GIF), would be a great addition for the immersion. Not only getting killed, but also getting hit could look less awkward, and have more of a reaction. III Game Changers With every new major release, there should be something new and major addition that compliments the game. These are things that should stick out as a stepping stone in the evolution of the series, but can also be minor things. Naval Warfare Combat at sea has always been a weak and empty spot in the series, although the implementation of diving in Arma 3 brought a tiny light of hope into naval warfare. Let’s hope Arma 4 will expand on that, especially as all other elements had an overhaul in Arma 3 through DLCs. Female Characters This might not be a game changer for all, but anyone who wants to portray themselves as the opposite sex. In the modern military it is common to see female troops, let’s keep it that way unless Arma 4 ends up in the First World War. Seasons This would not be a necessary addition, but for sure would spice up the environment and campaign. There has of course been different versions of a map with different seasons, but it is not the same. IIII Setting and Content Let’s get to the fun part: the setting and what kind of content we’d like to see. Now we’ve dealt with the concept of the future in Arma 3. I think it’s time to go back to the current or earlier setting. Let’s be honest, the community agrees. In my opinion Bohemia Interactive has always delivered the best content when it comes to post-soviet related content. Perhaps it should be a theme to be stuck with. When and why I’ll begin with the two most likely decades the next Arma is going to be set in and I’ll elaborate why: In the current 2020s between the events of Arma 2 and 3, or in the 1990s between the events of Cold War Crisis and Armed Assault. I propose these because they are decades which have not been seen in the series before. I wouldn’t go earlier, because I suppose we want to keep the attachment system, and weapon attachments weren’t that common before the 80s. I wouldn’t go more to the future either because of the obvious dislike of the setting by the community. These two settings would bridge the gap between the lore of the Armaverse. If it came to the 2020s we could see how CSAT came to power and the fall of NATO. With the 1990s we could see the transition of the Soviet Union to the Russian Federation. Either option would have an important plot to start with. Where and why With possible seasons in mind, it’d be great to have a surrounding where during winter there is actually snow, and it’d be something we’ve not seen before in the series. I propose a fictional island group in the Baltic Sea with a mixed culture of the surrounding nations. An archipelago would be great for the possible naval warfare. If not in the baltic, then perhaps in the Bering Sea. But if it was Baltic or the Bering, let’s not have it bare. We want forests as it creates more interesting combat. Also because it is clear that according to most players the forest filled Chernarus was their favorite. Images for inspiration: Underwater Marine Combat Summer 1 Summer 2 Autumn Winter Free Chernarus Plus DLC Don’t let a highly worked on map go to waste. This could go along perhaps with the mentioned events before or after Operation Harvest Red Campaign. To be honest, we all want to see some true combat on the newly decorated Chernarus, not just some small firefights between survivors in DayZ. Gamemodes and missions The thing that disappointed me the most on the release of Arma 3 was the lack of official multiplayer content. No it didn’t bother me that the singleplayer campaign was postponed, because there was a ton of showcase content already. Sure gamemodes like Support, End Game and Warlords eventually were published, but for some reason they are rarely populated despite the quality. Popularity seems to reside on gamemodes like King of The Hill. But in all honesty, arcady FPS gameplay is not what the Arma series represents. Instead there should be a focus on the tactical gameplay which Arma truly embodies and in which form it is most enjoyable. There is a ton of community content for co-op gameplay, but there are those who do not want to rely on the community content. The official content has been very heavily focused on singleplayer and we want the same quality experience with friends as well.

Thanks for the heads up, but I don't know where else I'd put this. I don't know what there is to antagonize when it's just speculation though. 😄

Hello, I'm working on a 4 player coop, in which there should be more enemies depending on the amount of players. Let's say for example that there's a enemy group of four, and one enemy for each 4 players. So if there's only one player there's only one enemy in that group. I tried to do something with condition of presence, but without success. In init I executed "player1 = true" if player 1 exists, then I put in the condition of presence of the enemy "player1". Then that enemy should exist right? I'm not sure if this is the right way to do this. If someone could enlighten me, I'd be very happy. Thanks in advance!

Hello, I'm trying to get holdActionAdd to work in MP, which works perfectly in singleplayer and for the host of a local session. But, when another client tries to activate the HoldAction, it does progress to the very end but nothing happens. Not even the first say3D "push" sound appear when starting the action. Note that I've set the HoldAction to remoteExec as the wiki states it should work. Am, I missing something here? [ boat, // Object the action is attached to "Move the boat", // Title of the action "\a3\ui_f\data\IGUI\Cfg\holdactions\holdAction_connect_ca.paa", // Idle icon shown on screen "\a3\ui_f\data\IGUI\Cfg\holdactions\holdAction_connect_ca.paa", // Progress icon shown on screen "_this distance _target < 3", // Condition for the action to be shown "_caller distance _target < 3", // Condition for the action to progress {boatstuck say3D "push";}, // Code executed when action starts {}, // Code executed on every progress tick {boat hideobjectglobal true; boatplace say3D "splash";}, // Code executed on completion {}, // Code executed on interrupted [], // Arguments passed to the scripts as _this select 3 5, // Action duration [s] 0, // Priority true, // Remove on completion false // Show in unconscious state ] remoteExec ["BIS_fnc_holdActionAdd", 0, boat]; // MP compatible implementation Thanks in advance! 🙂

Thanks, I'll try both of these solutions!

Yes, it's a invisible helipad I use for sound FX sometimes, the thing is that all players do hear the sound, only if the host activates the HoldAction. This goes along with all the other effects in the HoldAction, everyone can hear and see if the host activates it. But if any other client tries to activate it, it progresses but no effects happen. I wonder if I should remoteExec the effects like say3D and hideobjectglobal, although that should already be a global effect..

Thanks! I'll try it soon with a friend.

En luo scriptinä, ihan perus unit placement.

Both of these just say "Error Invalid number in expression" in the unit's condition of presence.