Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Posts posted by eXpouk

  1. Hey,

    Been playing Arma since A2:OA, 24 and from the UK (so EU units preferable although wouldn't mind an NA unit if the times are cool).

    Looking for a group that:

    - Runs a variety of scenarios

    - Uses realistic tactics (Don't want a group where people just run around like headless chickens)

    - 1st Person Only (This is preferable not a requirement)

    - Would prefer if roles were fixed but rotated every campaign (Structured training would also be a plus!)

    - Must use realism mods (e.g. ACE when its released) and a radio mod such as ACRE or TFR

    - Don't mind if its just an infantry unit or combined arms.

    - Has FUN (Don't want to be addressing people by rank or sir)

    What you'll get in return:

    - Active and experienced player

    - Can squad lead if needed

    - Some experience in making missions

    - Just a chilled guy looking for some peeps to play with

    PM me!

  2. Hey guys,

    Recently I've had some trouble when removing/adding weapons/items/magazines etc from crates using an init line. The games we play at the moment are MP and hosted on a players PC rather than a dedicated server.

    When I use this additemcargo ["whatever item", 5] it only adds the item for the player hosting the server and not all the connected clients. I thought I could solve this by using additemcargoGlobal ["whatever item", 5]. Now this works but the problem I have is, is that it duplicates the items for every client connected to the game. So for example, if the crates init had additemcargoGlobal ["GPS", 5] and there were 5 players, it would put 25 GPS in the crate.

    For balancing/realism reasons I was wondering if theres a way I can get this to work in multiplayer without it duplicating for every client?


  3. Hey guys,

    This is probably a really noob question but I can't seem to find the answer anywhere. Basically I want to spawn a unit at the start of the mission at a random location that I've chosen using SetPosATL and not markers (so I can get a precise location inside buildings etc) For example a mission where you've got to find and kill the HVT but he could be in a few different buildings just for some replayability.

    I know how to get a PosATL for a certain position (I use it to place units) I just dont know how to make it so it selects one at the start of the mission.


  4. Do I just "setcaptive this;" into the soldier window thingy?

    put "this setcaptive true" in the init of your playable units, also give the units a name (p1 for example).

    Create a trigger around the area where the car will be thats activated when OPFOR are present and OnAct put: p1 setCaptive false; p2 setCaptive false etc. Make the trigger area small enough so that its only activated when the guy is close to car.

    I'm a editing noob though so might not work properly!

    If you want to get fancy you could attach the trigger to the car using trigname attachTo [vehiclename,[0,0,0]]

  5. That's awesome your group has already 100% coverage on the DLC, for a lot of us who create TvT and/or public game modes that is a much bigger dependency to deal with. While there may be more private group mission makers out there, more people play Life, Wasteland, Invade and Annex, CTI, Battle Royale, Breaking Point etc. (that's the draw of being in a private group in the first place, the tailored and unique content)

    It's the author of those public/community game modes who are going to be faced with the issue of dealing with a split community and perhaps even some of the larger clans/units as well.

    We should be spending more time and energy discussing other viable ways that could avoid the risk of fragmentation entirely. The argument of "Well this won't even happen" just doesn't get us anything, if it does not that happen that's great but there is a huge risk that this just hurts the DLC owners.

    Thats an issue you're always going to have being a public game mode developer. What is going to happen when an expansion gets released? Now arguably more people are going to buy an expansion than the DLC, but what about those that don't?

    At the end of the day the community is always going to split when there's premium content/expansions etc. being created. At the minute I think we have the fairest solution for both the players and the developers. BI is at least trying to help the community split, compared to the majority of other game developers who couldn't care less..

    The price of the DLC's isn't that unreasonable... People pay more for CSGO skins..

  6. No it is not speculation. I get Feedback from all over this community, and from my community. Mission maker feedback

    You´ll almost never see this stuff used in MP. And that would be a shame because you don´t get to use what you paid for.

    You're making your argument all about you and your situation which isn't really a true reflection of what will happen.

    This is because I could argue that I'm part of a community that I make missions for, it just so happens everyone in my community bought the DLC so everyone can play the missions I make. That means there's a 100% chance of my mission getting played even though it contains DLC assets and everyone gets to use what they paid for.

    Two sides to every coin and that...

  7. You do realize who you are addressing with these comments? These are people that have given hundreds, if not more, of man hours to working on community missions and scripts FOR FREE. These aren't "freeloaders" when it comes to contributing to the armaverse. BI benefits an immense amount from the work of people like this.

    Imagine playing ARMA if none of the community content existed. How does this DLC compare to that?

    You're right expansions do create a segmented/fragment within the community. I think it's fair to say though that the amount of content provided in an expansion creates enough of an incentive for people to buy it and also makes it easier to target players.

    Nobody is arguing against paying for content, what a lot of us are throwing down a red flag on is the locking out of usability and functionality behind a paywall. Again if BI want to monetize content they would be better off selling campaigns/missions and including new vehicles/weapons as part of the ongoing product improvement cycle to increase their user base.

    Imagine playing ARMA if the game was free and BI got nothing back for developing it...... Oh you can't because there wouldn't be a game.

    The main difference between BI and mod authors is that BI priority is to make a profit. Mod authors know before working on a project that the only thing they are going to get back in return is the gratitude of the community and maybe a small amount in donations. BI on the other hand need to generate revenue to sustain their business as well as keeping their employees working lives stable.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm hugely grateful for all the modders/mission makers out there for there work that I get to enjoy for free. There's isn't a perfect solution to this problem where both company and customers are going to be 100% happy. BI have had to compromise and we should as well. We can't expect to get everything for free like the Zeus DLC.

    BI obviously think that locking out some functionality will provide a big enough incentive for people to purchase the DLC if they want to use it (because obviously HD textures wasn't enough). Whether they are right or not remains to be seen but I can pretty much guarantee people are more inclined to purchase the DLC's now than they were before.

  8. So many people wanting something for nothing.....

    I'd love to see their opinion if they were the ones creating the content...

    ---------- Post added at 23:30 ---------- Previous post was at 23:25 ----------

    That's not really the problem we're concerned about. For example, I already own the DLC, and I'm far more concerned with inconsistent experience with my friends playing the game who don't own the DLC. They won't be able to fly the same helicopters as me, they might not (depending on how they handle the Marksmen DLC limitations) be able to use the same guns as me, so I'm not going to use those assets in my missions. I'm not going to ask my friends to buy DLC just to be able to do the same things as me, I'd rather have them download a free mod that does preforms a role similar to the premium content. People creating scenarios won't be making missions that take advantage of the content from the paid portions of the DLC for the reasons repeated in this thread, either, so this DLC I own is going to have extremely limited application in anything I, as an owner of the DLC, play in. THIS is what creates a split in the community- it's not a matter of non-owners complaining about limited access to premium content, I'm upset at this AS a DLC owner because this content I own is going to waste.

    THAT is what does not make sense from a business point of view- punishing (as unintentional of a side effect it might be) the people who do buy the DLC.

    This could be why the LITE solution might not (I'm assuming) be as successful financially- players who want content are fine with using it at reduced quality so long as they CAN use it. Those same people who wouldn't pay to upgrade from the LITE content aren't going to pay to use content when they could be satisfied instead with using free addons. In effect, the new strategy has the potential to not pull in that many more sales but alienate supporters who DO buy the DLC for the reasons above. The former is totally an assumption, but it makes sense given the price tag of the Helicopters and Marksmen DLC, bundled or separate. The amount of content unlocked would have to be massive to justify the cost of buying them for this sales audience BIS is trying to pull in, a significant portion of which would never pay to use addons anyway.

    But it isn't really a problem....

    What do you think is going to happen when an expansion is released? Were there a lack of missions for OA? Lack of people playing OA because you had to pay for it? No. If people want to use the content then they have to pay for it, which I think, is fair enough. There will be plenty of people that do buy the DLCs and create hundreds of hours of scenarios etc.

    There will always be a community split when premium content and expansions are released. Look at every other game developer that releases a DLC or expansion. The fact that BI will still allow people to play together whether they own the DLC or not is being VERY generous compared to 99% of game developers.

  9. I don´t know how it is that hard to get. The current implementation discourages Mission Makers (aka the guys who make fun things happen) to include the DLC content in their missions. So I go and buy the DLC to never see it used in a MP Mission?

    That is what´s going to happen!

    Totally the wrong approach if you ask me.

    It would be better if they provided an incentive for people to buy DLC, like good SP Campaigns (BAF comes to mind).

    Alternatively they could also give the High Res stuff to everyone for the first two days and then downgrade the visual quality for people that didn´t buy it while leaving that little "Buy me" notification symbol on the right side of the screen.

    That would be a sensible approach.

    Or you just want something for nothing..... Doesnt make sense from a business point of view...

  10. Of course we as customers are going to be unhappy about this... Why? Because it means we actually have to pay to use something....

    I can guarantee that the majority of people used BAF Lite instead of BAF, PMC Lite instead of PMC etc. It doesn't make sense from a business point of view to develop these assets if the majority of people are just going to use a free version. The new method still allows people to play together but you WILL have to pay if you want to use the DLC content (which is fair enough right?)

    If you want to use the new stuff, buy the DLC. If you don't or cant afford it then dont use it. But dont complain about not being able to use DLC assets without paying for them. From a business perspective, it makes sense. Compared to most game developers, BI is being very generous...

  11. People seriously need to read before they start whining and moaning on the forums, its infuriating reading some people comments.

    - You can play on the same servers as everyone else whether you have the DLC or not.

    - You get access to the features for FREE but premium content you will have to pay for.

    - I havent bought the Kart DLC and yet I can still play the first time trial for free to try them.

    EVERYONE READ THIS: http://www.bistudio.com/english/company/developers-blog/465-roadmap-14-15-dlc-strategy-blog

    It explains everything well.