Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by JohnKalo

  1. The next task not appearing is strange since they are still in the same group when they re-spawn for example. So even if there is a glitch and there is yet another player in the group alive they should be synced again? How about syncing the players with the task modules again if they die?


    Like a repeatable trigger with this as a condition:


    !alive nameOfPlayer;

    and make it activate 0.01 seconds after the player is re-spawned like this:


    nameOfPlayer synchronizeObjectsAdd [NameOfTaskModule];

    so you will have as many triggers as the number of units and it will all work?


    Sounds weird or too simple but with Arma whatever works and causes no lag or whatever glitch should be used in my humble opinion 

    • Like 2

  2. Thanks for all replies! Now,




    I have no experience with mission making, but I would guess you could make use of the firednear EH.
    You can set the AI behaviour to no combat with a loop and use the firednear EH to set it to combat if needed.


    I don't know if there's another way to force AI behaviour to no combat, other than a with a loop.



    It sounds like a good idea but that would mean using many event handlers since there will be multiple people firing a variety of hostiles with different weapons and magazines. Esepecially considering that the players might pick up a hostile's weapon.




    The ASR AI3 might causing this exact reation ,



    i don't remember the vanilla ai to do something more , than being just in aware behaviour.

    Have you asked @Robalo about ?



    Nicely said, I have not yet at least. The knowsAbout and reveal however will need many conditions looping so they might lag the mission.



     I have made a couple of stealth missions and the AI is a pain in the backside. Couple of things I have found don't group enemy AI units together, they have some weird hive mind thing going, but even singles can still react if an AI unit is killed even though they did not see it or hear it. Also I tend not to use any type of AI mods when doing a stealth mission, ie ASR,VCOM etc. I will try and link a mission I made in my  dropbox. You are welcome to tear into it and see if anything I have done helps you out. I am using scripts from other authors and alot of scripting I came up with, some of it is more brute force to make the AI behave correctly. It is "hollywood" stealth, basically if you have a suppressor AI can't hear you, I know this is not realistic but makes for a fun mission. It has only been tested on hosted server with friends, not sure how it will play on a dedicated (i am pretty sure things will break). 


    Bravo for a very detailed description! I know players tend not to read the briefings. I still write them however even for that 10 or ..... rather 1%. There is a problem however. If not 4 players play the mission together there will be AI units so them ruining everything will be a problem. I shall check out the if the AI is shot but not killed the alarm sounds script though. 



    You could also try playing around with the audibleCoef of setUnitTrait. In my testing (with vanilla AI) it would lower the chance of detection by sound dramatically. 


    An awesome idea! If the audibleCoef works it will be really effective!


    Oh and with vanilla AI, at least when I had it in vanilla, I remember that they would detect you according to the distance from the unit and not according to from which side you approach them.

    • Like 1

  3. So if you are following the Defying the Odds campaign and wish no semi spoilers you can stop reading here. If not you can continue :thumbsup:


    I am trying to create a stealth mission and everything seems to be possible but one thing. That is how the AI reacts to players. You can come close to the AI and take him down easily if he does not see you, something which is great but if you fire your weapon everything gets ruined. You see AI units that are far away can detect you and sometimes they can even detect your exact position. This might be semi real but it can easily destroy the mission. I would like the enemy AI not to hear any gunshots coming from suppressed weapons. Or if possible get in AWARE mode without knowing where the player is. One thing that should be noted is that I use ASR AI3 and we are talking about MP missions.


    So can anybody please help?

    • Like 1

  4. 6 hours ago, Grumpy Old Man said:


    It's not a bug.

    Tasks assigned via module to objects cease to work, because upon respawn the player becomes a new object.

    Can be handled via onPlayerRespawn.sqf or respawn eventhandler etc.

    Also you never should execVM either onPlayerRespawn.sqf or onPlayerKilled.sqf since they are automatically executed upon their respective events.



    How exactly can it be handled? 

    Because in previous missions of mine players re-spawning and having their own tasks kept on having their tasks. There was never an issue with units losing their tasks.


    In any case nearly all missions of ours have tasks assigned to BLUEFOR. Pheeeew!


    @Far East LieutenantIn case you are not aware black boxes showing errors only appear in the editor and not when you play the mission. 

    • Like 2

  5. For issue number 1 I use the same  onPlayerRespawn.sqf and  onPlayerKilled.sqf scripts and it works with no errors. I call both via the init.sqf like this:


    execVM "onPlayerKilled.sqf";
    execVM "onPlayerRespawn.sqf";


    For issue number 2 I used to use modules but thanks @Grumpy Old Man I now use scripts. It is a bit hard at first but it soon becomes really simple. Here is an example. You call it via the initPlayerLocal.sqf like this:


    _handleTasks = [] execVM "Tex_fnc_taskHandling.sqf";

    and the script goes like this:

    //make sure these 3 are identical inside the _makeTaskN arrays
    _myTaskIDs = ["Task01","Task02","Task03"];
    _makeTask1 = [["Task01"],west,["long description goes here","short task description goes here","Task01Pos"],getMarkerPos "StartHere0","ASSIGNED",3,true,true,"land"];
    _makeTask2 = [["Task02"],west,["spoilers","Reach pos Delta","Task02Pos"],ObjNull,"ASSIGNED",2,true,true,"walk"];
    _makeTask3 = [["Task03"],west,["spoilers","Hack the Security Center",""],getposATL tv,"ASSIGNED",1,true,true,"interact"];
    waitUntil {time > 0};
    waitUntil {!(blue0 in tran0)};
    sleep 1;
    _watchTask1 = [] spawn {
    waitUntil {sleep 0.5;when the task will be done condition};
    ["Task01", "SUCCEEDED",true] spawn BIS_fnc_taskSetState;
    _makeTask1 call BIS_fnc_setTask;
    waitUntil {!alive vic5};
    sleep 5;
    _watchTask2 = [] spawn {
    waitUntil {sleep 0.5;!alive vic6};
    ["Task02", "SUCCEEDED",true] spawn BIS_fnc_taskSetState;
    _makeTask2 call BIS_fnc_setTask;
    waitUntil {!alive vic6};
    sleep 24;
    _watchTask3 = [] spawn {
    waitUntil {sleep 0.5;!alive vic7};
    ["Task03", "SUCCEEDED",true] spawn BIS_fnc_taskSetState;
    _makeTask3 call BIS_fnc_setTask;

    The above are all parts of existing missions so they work. Plus please check this one you mentioned:



    if variable names are lost upon respawn, this part will also get lost too.


    If it does not work after respawn it is a major bug since many missions will become unplayable.


    • Like 2

  6. There have been a few months since anything new has been introduced in-game.


    The only thing that happens is re-balances again and again. I have mentioned before that the same leveled units cannot  battle a variation of leveled defenses but nothing has changed.  Maybe a new building can be introduced. One that enhances already existing units and upgrades them to something new and much stronger. A building only unlocked at higher levels. Also, a map can be introduced. A map where all player bases can be seen and attacked according to the level differences between the two bases. And why not add AI bases that are to be attacked so as to gather resources. Send an occupying force which can be attacked by other players so as to loot what supplies the defending player has gathered. Additionally how about a global chat. How about making alliances worth the while. Like an ally to be able to send forces to help defend your base. A base attack that needs some time to take place since the troops will have to travel across the aforementioned map.


    There are so many possibilities but to be honest I doubt anyone is seriously working on this game. Hence the alliance chats go dead. Why not? There is nothing to talk about. And maybe the game is too. 



    • Like 2

  7. Congrats on the first mission release!

    There is an issue however. In your first post I cannot see if there are any required add-ons, and as mentioned above if there is any re-spawn. As for re-spawn I would suggest enabling revive and also placing a re-spawn on position of death mode. A lot friendlier for players who are not looking for extremes. Oh and uploading on armaholic too would be nice. 

    • Like 2

  8. And it depends on how close all of those objects are to the player. Having many objects in-game in various however locations is much much better than placing them all in one place. So maybe you can change your story mission a bit and have hundreds of victims separated in a number of places?


    It is an Arma 3 editing errr.. lets say challenge. It does not matter how you want a mission to be. You think of a story mission and then you change it so as for the game's engine to be able to handle it. At least that is what we do.

  9. Recording actual human voices is the best way. To do so you can use audacity. Once you record them you need to turn them into .ogg format. Once that is done you can define the audio as music in your mission and then call it via a trigger. That will guarantee that all players hear the audio and if you want text chat too you will indeed need remotExec as stated above.

    • Like 2

  10. Welcome to the forums! For the gore part you can use this:


    As for what hits the most, its the AI. Gladly there is this:



    but even then the AI is not to be trusted. Especially when it comes to editing...


    AI do not even follow simple way-points at times. Whenever you design a mission many things are a no go simply because one AI unit might refuse to follow a way-point and so the mission has to be restarted. The planning and creation of a mission gets way more complicated. Hence many editors have stopped creating missions.

  11. Guessing you are connecting the two computers directly or via another "LAN" device. Sometimes in LAN only the one computer can see the other. For Arma reasons....


    It is a common occasion. To solve it you can try plugging and unplugging the LAN cables, changing where you connect the cables(if you use some sort of device and you do not connect the two computers directly) restarting the game multiple times and such. 


    Oh and you can block the internet so as to be able to turn off your firewall and antivirus program. They might be blocking your game.


    Not a scientific solution but it is the only one that works :thumbsup:

    Most of the times...


    And trying to play in LAN makes you lucky by the way. Other people cannot see each other online and they turn to other programs such as hamachi. 

  12. I cannot be sure without a 3rd person view, as stated above, but it seems like the ropes cannot handle the pressure and they brake. When they brake the weight that was no longer there make the chopper turn to the side instantly. Physically speaking it is a logical reaction. 


    It is like pulling a rope that is stuck with a great amount of power and once it gets unstuck you go way back. If it works with the GhostHawk it is an AFM glitch.


    Nice try to save the chopper by the way. Have you been at a greater altitude you would have most likely saved the chopper.

  13. Just searched in the forums a little more and it said BI has set the speed limit when sling-loading to about 100 kph. You can just tell the AI to sling-load something and you shall see the speed. 200 as reported above is possible but is by no means realistic. It should be an advanced flight model glitch.

  14. Well if you are working with modules you should have a create task module and a set task state module. For two possible endings for a task you can sync two set task state modules to the create task one. The set task state module should be then synced with a trigger. The one for mission complete should be with the !alive nameofconvoyvehicle and the other one should be with a trigger which will be synced with the vehicle of the convoy. Set an area for that trigger and if the vehicle gets in the trigger area it will activate the other set task state module which will fail the task.


    If you are working with a script you can use the distance command:


    nameofconvoyvehicle distance markerwheretheconvoyshouldgo <50;

    In general I have been using modules but scripts are indeed a better way. They have their cons but they remain better. That is why I am remaking my campaign missions. One of the major changes is module tasks turned to script ones.


    Oh and there are many tutorials out there, so you might be able to find your answers on you-tube for this or for any other troubling of yours. If there is nothing there then ... forums!

    • Like 3

  15. I cannot remember the speed limit for choppers when sling-loading but even 80-90 kph seems much for heavy cargo situations. 


    That is because of increased momentum which is mass x velocity. Increasing speed increases momentum and due to that whatever movement you make can be dangerous. Like it happens with ships. In order for a tanker to stop it takes a lot of time even if it travels at low speeds. That is because of its huge mass. In that case even if you want to turn or go backwards because of an iceberg or anything alike you are anyways doomed. 


    It is hard to explain because of translations :thumbsup:

  16. Ehm I took the solution as granted and so I moved on to create the media needed. (Not such a good idea :scratchchin:) Due to that, now that some of the media are ready to be implemented, the condition seems not to work. I tested it by placing it in the initPlayerLocal.sqf of a mission and it reported an expression error. Using this seemed to fix it:


    waitUntil {count allPlayers == count playableUnits + count switchableUnits};

    but does it do the same thing?