slowrider8

Adding to previously mentioned feedback on checkpoints, not only are they particularly easy to just drive around, but some can be completely driven through at high speed with no resistance at all, no threat level rising even. I used this to get past the checkpoint on the bridge to get to the southern island.

Accidentally discovered an exploit for unlimited money, not sure if it was this merchant in particular or this gun in particular but although most guns immediately go down in resale value once you buy them from a merchant, this MK-1 EMR only went up in value, meaning I could continually buy and sell the weapon back and forth and make money each time. This was at the merchant on the small island West of Koumac Price before purchase: Price After Purchase:

Another thing to add, it would be nice to have some more feedback or maybe just some written information about what the player is or is not allowed to do around authority. Standing in-front of a gendarmerie, I had a combat vest on and they did not seem to be bothered (do they care about your clothes/armor at all?), however the second I opened my inventory he yelled to drop my weapon although I was not holding one (I did have weapons in my inventory including grenades). I proceeded to drop all my weapons and as I was doing so I was shot on the spot. Another time I was driving up to a convoy of CSAT vehicles that seemed to have stopped for repairs, I attempted to drive past but CSAT were standing in the road and got a little close to the car. They suddenly yelled to stop and get out the vehicle and then surrounded me with weapons drawn, but seeming to do nothing past this. I was then shot immediately when attempting to move. I don't really know what I did wrong and it wasn't really communicated to me through the gameplay much at all.

I'm on the investigate camp mission and I'm having some issues with the first objective:

I do like the idea of this but think the current plan is innately flawed with the (plenty mentioned) "optional installation" requirement. First off, I'll say that this would be great for singleplayer only players. However, for all of the community that plays multiplayer, it is less so. Very very few public servers would consider running missions with a "third party DLC" if it resulted in the majority of their player base not being able to join at all. Even on our private server with the "official DLC", while most players own Apex, much less own the smaller DLCs. However, this is less of a problem because if we choose to play a mission with those premium assets in them, those with the DLC and use them and those without can do something else. It was mentioned that the third-party modders could release a free version of their DLC on the workshop. This has its own problems Unless BI implemented some kind of condition to ensure this, it is completely reliant on the modders to release this "free" version to the workshop. And I'd imagine it's hard to find a pull for doing this outside of good will, when you ask someone if they want to release something and get money for it or release something and not get money for it, you can imagine which option is more likely. This is still reliant on the player actually downloading and loading the mod from the workshop, this is fine for most players who play regularly on one server, but for someone new or who goes through many servers this might be a lot to ask. For server admins, the risk is still there that the player won't download the mod and it's likely they'd just choose not to run anything with the DLC. Kinda harking back to the first part, what would a "free" version even be? Low res textures like Arma 2 days? Doesn't that kind of go against the approach that Arma 3's content licensing set out to change? Finally, with this whole thing comes the question of how it would actually work in some situations. The one I see most possible is if a player who owns a Third party "Weapons" DLC uses the virtual arsenal in a server and equips one of the weapons. What if someone wasn't running with the DLC? We can assume that these DLCs will be signed with the official keys (if they weren't this would be a whole other problem) so it's not like the first player would be kicked for having the DLC, and in this same situation with a mod currently, the player would be seen carrying an invisible weapon. I'd assume this is something BI do not want. A solution to this would be to change how addons were checked against the server, being able to restrict use to a player that has it loaded if the mission does not have them as "required". This is likely more work than it is worth though. So yeah, just some thoughts. I still wanna say I think this is a good idea overall but I just think the policies need a bit of refinement.

Spawning works sometimes and other times doesn't. It breaks before DAC finishes initialising. Errors like: 18:07:17 Error in expression <; } else { _GroupWP set [count _GroupWP,_fwp]; _check = 0;_run = 4;_go = false; > 18:07:17 Error position: <_fwp]; _check = 0;_run = 4;_go = false; > 18:07:17 Error Undefined variable in expression: _fwp 18:07:17 File D:\Jonny\Documents\Arma 3 - Other Profiles\Slowrider8\mpmissions\coop45_gameofgulf_v5.Sara\DAC\Scripts\DAC_Create_Groups.sqf, line 463 followed by errors every frame like this: 18:07:17 Error in expression <e (_oldArray select _n); if(format["%1",_entry] != "<null>") then { if(count _en> 18:07:17 Error position: <_entry] != "<null>") then { if(count _en> 18:07:17 Error Undefined variable in expression: _entry There are also some enum errors when spawning units: 17:54:28 Error in expression <]; _eman allowFleeing _setFleeing;_eman setRank _setrank; if(count (_unit_skill > 17:54:28 Error position: <setRank _setrank; if(count (_unit_skill > 17:54:28 Error Foreign error: Unknown enum value: "lieutnant" 17:54:28 File D:\Jonny\Documents\Arma 3 - Other Profiles\Slowrider8\mpmissions\coop45_gameofgulf_v5.Sara\DAC\Scripts\DAC_Group_Soldier.sqf, line 235 It should be "LIEUTENANT"; Same thing in DAC_Group_Tank.sqf etc

It's not classnames, and I don't use vanilla classnames anyway. Errors are like this, but show up in different places around Create_Groups: 14:35:39 File mpmissions__cur_mp.namalsk\DAC\Scripts\DAC_Create_Groups.sqf, line 542 14:35:40 Error in expression <,_m,_DAC_This_Zone,_DAC_UnitTyp,"null",[_countmax,_countmin,_DAC_ZoneRadiusX,_DA> 14:35:40 Error position: <_countmax,_countmin,_DAC_ZoneRadiusX,_DA> 14:35:40 Error Undefined variable in expression: _countmax I do use the script version of DAC, as do other people I know who have been having this same issue. However, I've never changed any of the files outside of the configs. The undefined variables typically seem to be arrays, but I can't be sure without more testing.

DAC is completely broken as of the latest Arma update (1.78). A lot of undefined variable errors in DAC_create_groups.sqf. I'm wondering whether this is just something in Arma that needs to be fixed or something in DAC.

I wonder if the Bobcat plow being able to move (even if it's broken RN) insinuates towards some sort of enhanced repair mechanics or ability to flip vehicles? Probably not though, most likely one of those little detail additions for very specific mission or mod use! Also looks like some (broken) mine detector stuff slipped in with the update, including detection sounds. I also wonder if these new additions are related to each other and a particular soon-to-come DLC?

So this is an odd question to ask and maybe the wrong place for it, but does anyone remember at one point around the launch of FFV being able to shoot out of the Co-Pilot seat of the Hummingbird? I remember reading it in a dev branch changelog and actually testing it out in the editor but at some point possibly before the release of FFV or maybe after it was seemingly removed. If this did actually exist and I'm not going crazy, what was the reasoning behind it being removed?

Wind affects helicopters in both AFM and BFM.

Question, now that Tanoa Structures etc were downloaded to everyone for free last update, does this map still require apex? Been excited about this map launch for a while, good work!

The optional RHS configs are missing the asr_ai3_rhs_xx_camo_c.pbos, I had to use the old ones as any missions made before the update could not be played due to those missing addons. Also, do you think whatever Incognito is could be disabled by default? It sets the player to civilian and breaks any missions with triggers for a certain side, I don't want to have to explain to all of my members who make missions that they have to go into their addon options to disable something that wasn't there before just so they could test their missions properly in the editor.

Is there a way I can accurately track all civilians in an Area being spawned? I need to be able to count all civilians at the start of a mission without a using constant loop. I tried putting it at the end of cosInit.sqf but that only seems to be accurate to the script initializing and not actually spawning the civilians. FYI I am only spawning the civilians in a single town (the spawn points of which are made up of the town itself and 3 markers around it) and after the first civilians spawn in the town I don't need to spawn anymore. Is there somewhere perhaps in cosCore where I could put my count which would be accurate to all the civilians being spawned?

I'm no expert on plane aerodynamics but what I'm referring to is how when you pitch either up or down if you don't hold it there by pushing the mouse continuously it will pitch back down or up so that the plane is level. It makes using the plane for CAS pretty difficult as you're constantly fighting the plane just to keep the nose down for an attack run. I suppose this might be realistic or necessary but if the effect could be toned down a bit it would be appreciated.

It appears that the Buzzard has had a Flight Model Overhaul on the Dev Branch. It feels a lot harder to stall now which is nice and it seems that the wings actually produce lift now and you can't fly completely inverted without being pulled down. Also seems like it has some sort of auto trim that forces the plane to fly level, doesn't feel exactly great to be fighting with the plane constantly so that might have to be toned down a bit. Can we assume that the Buzzard is a testbed for these new changes and we will see them spread to the other planes later on?

Now that Apex structures are being opened up to all Arma players, regardless of ownership, would you consider switching out the vegetation on Lingor for this? Or would you consider the current vegetation to be more fitting / the switch being too much work?

Thanks for the quick turnaround, all seems good now

Rearming and Refueling works now, but Repairing still gives the same error.

Having some problems with this script. Every time I try to Rearm, Refuel or Repair a vehicle I get a chat message that says "All Ammo/Fuel/Repair Sources are currently busy" and get a script error regarding a missing variable _source each time. This is happening not only in my own mission but the example mission provided with the script.

Unsure if this is related to Malden or just the dev branch in general but I've been noticing some really bad pop-in and out on clutter, don't know if this is an old thing or not but I've never noticed it being this bad before:

To add to this here is a video of some bad flickering LOD blending I spotted while moving: If it matters I'm at grid 045019 but I'm guessing this is an object problem.

Liking the Terrain so far. The hills and cliffs are impressive and the extra splash of paint on the buildings differentiates it from Altis and Stratis enough. Haven't looked close enough to find any bugs with the terrain itself yet, but I have found a problem (?) with the two new lighthouses (Land_Lighthouse_03_Green_F and Land_Lighthouse_03_Red_F). Instead of the spinning light being an actual light source with a flare it's simply a flat texture, as seen here: Maybe this intended? Not sure, haven't seen enough lighthouses IRL to know, but it doesn't look too great and doesn't actually light anything up when compared to the first lighthouse. Other than that, anyone know if these two new puddle objects are used on the terrain? Can't find them anywhere (these are placed):

Question, does the mod need to be run on all clients in multiplayer for it to function correctly for one?

Not to be a killjoy, but isn't the Mediterranean Sea a non-tidal one? Not to say it doesn't have tides at all, but aren't they like within a very small range? Tanoa is probably fine but the difference between high and low tide on Altis and Stratis seems quite large. Also, +support for scripting commands to raise and lower tides at will, although this is would probably be pretty difficult to implement.