semiconductor

Start simple. My first mission was spanning half the map, had dozens of complex objectives from recovering a wreck of a downed helicopter, investigating ambush site for clues and capturing the airfield. All this with multiplayer support and lots of scripts. It was fun and exciting to make, It worked and worked well but wasn't really enjoyable because it was a mess of everything. As I've practiced, I've found out that small but cohesive and well thought through missions with a handful of objectives (the less - the better) work best. I suggest you to start with something as simple as blowing up the Shilka and see if you can spice up the setting and make the task reasonably challenging. And I concur with @target_practice that scripting is somewhat tangential to a good mission. Sometimes you need a bit of scripting to add some very specific functionality but if a mission needs a lot of scripts it most likely either over-complicated from gameplay standpoint or mission's concept is not as great as it might seem in the moment.

This looks very intriguing but I can't really relate examples from Wiki to Arma. Could you please elaborate a bit more on possible use cases?

That seems to be a long-time unfixed bug that randomly appears when not everybody is running same mods. Basically, if someone has additional mods enabled (even completely legit ones, like RHS and even if those mods aren't actually used in the mission) and other players aren't, then some players might randomly experience that annoying issue. To my knowledge, the only way to fix that is to have everybody run exactly the same modpack.

Interesting, what weapons are these? Yes but it's too much hassle for something that should be a trivial thing.

*crickets* Well, here's the problem with the AI - you can't balance it because nobody has any clue what the skill would actually be and how it would affect bots' behaviour. Most of the time I just tune them to some random level that intuitively seems acceptable and call it a day. The more you try to tweak the AI, the more it will start to deviate from desired behaviour.

I have a somewhat related question that keeps buggering me since the Arma 2 days -- how do you actually set the the AI skill? The skills you change in game's difficulty are not the skills you actually get because each unit has this weird skill slider which somehow affects the final skill. To make matters worse, that slider doesn't seem to be a simple multiplier for the AI skill because you can set AI skill to 1, leave the slider at 0.5 and still get something like 0.74915164. Is there any way to set the damn thing to a concrete and constant value once and for all?

I think the original Arma campaign lives under "Singleplayer > Campaigns". It's called "East Wind". To clarify, Apex does not replace the original Arma 3, it adds some content and changes the interface a bit. So even though you see "Apex" titles everywhere, you actually have all the stuff from both Arma 3 and Apex DLC.

I think you guys should put some time into documenting options like these. It's clear that you put a lot of love and effort into your mod and results are great but without at least some docs the mod is practically useless for both players and missionmakers because nobody knows how to actually play with it.

Yeah, you have to highlight and lock a target from commander's seat prior launching the missile. Scratch that, I thought we're talking Rhino for some reason.

Try huge rocks. :D

You're technically right but this rule isn't strictly enforced. In this case it's ok to ditch the dots over Е as it doesn't introduce the ambiguity although there's a good chance that they still use "Ё" in actual vehicles.

The interiors are very impressive! Just so it doesn't get lost in the development process I'm going to repeat what @KiTooN have said: it's better to use "ДАЛЬНОСТЬ" (range) instead of "ОБНУЛЕНИЕ" (zeroing) in Russian tanks because "zeroing" in Russian exclusively means "reverting to zero" as in "dropping the data and starting from scratch".

I had exactly the same experience as the OP. I have more than 4k hours in both Armas spent messing around the Editor or playing COOP missions so I though that I wouldn't have serious problems with AI commanding. And yet I wasn't able to force myself to complete even the fist mission of "Beyond Hope" so far, it's just way to irritating and unenjoyable even for me. I'll give it another shot especially since there are people why miraculously had no issues with it but it seems that the mission is intentionally designed around tactics that are extremely hard to pull of with AIs. I would expect BI to do the opposite and go along with missions that are not that demanding tactics-wise because while AI can perform fine on their own, micro-managing them under such pressing conditions becomes an irritating disaster.

Arma 3 made tremendous progress in that aspect compared to Arma 2. Software development is slow and steady process, especially when you're dealing with 15 y.o. engine so it's unreasonable to expect those issues to be easily resolved. But the progress is being made. And some problems can't be solved with our current technological level (you can't really make each blade of grass in Altis to be individually synchronized among all clients for example) and I assume that the issues you encountered were caused by people who did not realize that fact and tried to either run an overcomplicated mission with a lot of AIs/scripts and/or tried to run Arma on weak hardware. Arma handles small and medium coop missions (which are its primary scope) acceptably well but you won't get 60fps trying to simulate Battle of Kursk in Editor, yeah.

Your thread had a cool idea of pointing out areas for improvement but it completely sucks.

Yeah, it seems that there's no way to get the old system back. Well, to be honest, I find the new system way much more enjoyable and while I understand that you want an option to get the old one back and I'm not disagreeing with it, I don't think that old approach to commanding should be enabled by default.

Wait a second, wasn't that feature supposed to be optional? I remember reading something about "you'll have to check the checkbox on unit's screen to allow commander to drive", is it forced now?

...two years later a strange sense of uneasement wakes you up in the middle of a night. No wonder, it's hard to stay relaxed when you can't pay the rent. Half-asleep, you turn your head to take a look at the clock. Luminodiodes burn your eyes with familiar four-digit combination. All of a sudden you freeze, you feel the spike of adrenaline and your heart stops dead in its tracks when your brain almost subconsciously notices that there's a barely distinguishable figure standing right next to your bed. You stare at the indifferently shining symbols hopelessly trying to discern the figure with your peripheral vision. You can't really tell what the figure is, but you feel it's heavy presence, you can hear the slight sounds its shapeless dress makes as the figure breathes. After what seems to be an eternity, the figure suddenly bends over you. You stay motionless as its moves what seems to be its oversized head to your right ear and whispers 2 - Ready.

People, just install a DCS already.

https://arma3.com/dlc/tacops Well, it's November 30 and it's 3 (three, as in one plus one plus one) singleplayer (as in you can't play with friends) operations. It's not even funny anymore. :|

I have my doubts about it. It's hard enough to convince people to even install a free mod, let alone pay for it. Well, maybe it's possible to convince one or two guys to purchase a certain mod (which they may or may not like) but if you want to play with more than two people, forget it.

The mission is indecent but this thread is mostly virtue signaling coming from people who got offended on behalf of victims whom they probably don't even know personally.

Ok, apparently everybody just beats around the bush pathetically begging for imaginary 3D models mildly resembling ugly dysfunctional females instead of mustering up the courage and saying the right thing. Late 50s - late 70s the is supermost bestest era with interesting political developments between two blossoming ideas of human society represented by two young superpowers, whose bold sons were courageously operating the most interesting and aesthetically pleasing weapons and machines (and furniture!) that was the pinnacle of our species ingenuity. It was virtually the only time period worth living in and those of us who were born after December 31st, 1979 or died before January 1st, 1955 have lost the game before it even started. I know it, you know it and pretty much the whole world knows it. Think about it! Cuba, Africa, Siberia, China and even Europe if you really want to play it safe — all those fresh and unexplored settings that allow unlimited possibilities for "cold went hot" scenarios. Tanks that are actual starships instead of beaten down Abramses and T's! Proper assault weapons made of steel, heavy as a freight train, loud as a nuclear explosion firing proper battle ammunition instead of contemporary silenced plastic crap firing pathetic lightweight small-sized high-velocity pellets issued to that pussified softie that passes for a "soldier" today! True clash of unprecedented ideologies for the future of a humankind with potential post-apocalyptic follow-up instead of usual unintelligible "hurr durr we marines urrr came to save those irrelevant people from minuscule internal conflict OH HERE COME RUSSKIES AND START COMMITTING WAR CRIMES FOR ABSOLUTE NO REASON AT ALL THOSE MEANIES WE'RE GONNA SAVE THE WORLD BECAUSE OF... UH... democracy and uh... hmmm... human rights I guess?... eh... well... 'cus we're good guys... probably... I think... hmmm... <thinking-face-emoji>"! There. I've said it. Thank you, thank you, no need for exaltation, I just did what any sane person who happens to be an armaholic would do in my place.

That usually means that the inventory is over its capacity.

We would all be in a place with a healthy social life and a lot of free time I guess. :D