semiconductor

Vietnam theme has been done to death a hundred of times already (on a related note, Fortunate Son in particular should be considered a hallmark of a poor taste). The only saving grace for the DLC (and Arma in general, it's hopelessly outdated in evey aspect) will be new game mechanics and/or focus on niche but interesting aspect of the war. Otherwise it will be yet another attempt of putting lipstick on a pig.

Acutally, it may indeed depend on a mission - some disable debug console even for the logged-in admins. There are a lot of mods that get it back no matter the mission though - like Enable Debug Console : 1. Never tried that one but the community I play with uses dzn_CasualGaming - it brings in a lot of stuff for logged in admins, debug console included.

Relatively simple but doesn't worth the effort - believe me - if you haven't done this before. If I were you, I'd just asked the admin to post (position player) createVehicle "<classname of the ACE medical box, something like ACE_Box_Medical_F>" into the console (the one that shows up in the Pause menu for logged-in admins and in Editor) and click "Local exec". But if you really want to test your patience, you can peek at how mi hombre 10Dozen does this.

You're playing the entire game wrong. Arma is about PvE/PvP communities where people usually know eachother. It isn't a Counter-Strike Competitive Mode where you jump in to mess around with randoms for a while. If that's what you're looking for then you probably won't have a very good experience with Arma. You can also try EUTW and King Of The Hill servers, I think they're kinda similar to what you're looking for and they probably do have something to prevent the issue you're talking about.

I strongly suggest you to read the very text you're quoting, by doing so you may actually get an idea of what I'm "complaining" about. That'll save you from the tedious job of making stuff up. You won't be able to get on that high horse of yours though, so there's a downside, yea. Comments like simple suggestions to consider a potential side effect of this type of changes? Are you sure there isn't an overreaction here? As someone who bought an actual Saiga-12 mostly to help with the textures for the CUP's model I assure you, there's no need to act all offended. I came only to say that there could be this particular effect of this particular change that may not be immediately obvious. I understand that at this point there might a knee jerk reaction to any input regarding the project because of how the wider community tends to express their thoughts but not every comment is a rude unfounded criticism.

So basically BI put a restriction in just for the sake of putting a restriction in and making players and mission maker's life harder. The point wasn't to prevent players from getting into vehicles as you can do it anyway, the point was to put spokes into players' wheels. BI seems to have a hard time realizing that actively confusing their potential customers and annoying existing ones isn't going do to them any favors.

In general I would agree but not in this case. I've spent a lot of time making and polishing that particular mission, including writing around 4k lines of scripts just to make it be a little bit more interesting than the average "go there, kill 10 guys" stuff so because of this I can't call it minuscule. Yes but it breaks the mission's narrative which can be almost as bad. Right now the mission appears to be functional and actually works as expected sometimes, so some players could have experienced no issues while others could have been really confused at some point. Point being that even the small changes like this one can be worth being weighted against the risk of breaking existing missions. I'm not saying that CUP is doing a bad job of not breaking things up, just want to raise awareness of the more obscure problems such as this one. @Janez Thanks, yea, I've fixed that one.

Just giving you the taste of your own medicine. Glad that we now seem to agree that "Don't like it? Don't buy it!" statement is somewhat insulting to participants of the discussion and doesn't really move it anywhere. Except for the terrain, as far as I'm aware. So you can try the content but you can't play with it because a GM mission will utilize GM terrain, generally speaking. Throw in the terrain, throw out the vehicle lock and then yea - the annoying pop-up way is good solution as well. As long as people can play.

You even nailed the color, hah. One of the objectives was finding the blue Skoda 1203 with a certain number plate. The mission was all good for a year or so but the latest patch enabled randomization on that particular model and I only noticed because I was un-doing the fix for the ammobox models. Even then I've only noticed that the car is in wrong after a while because it randomly got the correct color a few times. The addition of new colors isn't the problem, problem is the change of state/functionality of object that is already being used. I know that backwards compatibility can be a real drag on any project but maybe we should be more considerate of the effects on existing stuff. It's really unfortunate that most of the content that has been made for Arma 3 over the past seven years is in various stages of being broken because of all the mod patches/abandonment. It would be great if CUP would be able to provide a more or less stable platform when possible.

So the players are not going to spend their money either. They already aren't from my experience. That is an unfortunate situation for BI as a for-profit organization first and foremost, I'm here just mildly unhappy that all this good new content is going to go to waste like GM and Livonia did.

It also has been very wrong, that's the catch. Many products, especially digital ones, critically need community around them to survive, let alone be successful. From a game to yet another buggy JS framework, everything needs people around it to survive. Even Microsoft with its bottomless vaults of gold ingots had to drop the arguably good Windows Phone because they couldn't build a community around it. The current policy not only prevents communities from appearing, it also undermines the one around Arma itself.

Your post can be summed up easily - "Disagree with someone? Don't read them." People enjoy sharing their opinions on things with others, it's a fact of life. No use in trying to shut this fact down with lame arguments. This especially applies to things that are paid, like CDLC. Want to play capitalist? By all means, be my guest, but remember that customer is always right here. Besides, it's not about getting free stuff. People asking for the Lite version are effectively saying "Help us sell your DLC to all our friends". I don't want them to give me a copy for free, I don't want them to sell one copy to me, I want them to sell at least 18 copies to all my friends and me.

Exactly the same story on my end. No missions > nobody purchases the thing > no missions > nobody purchases the thing > goto 1. BI made a big slip abandoning the Lite version in favor of annoying watermarks. All of my friends ended up eventually buying all of Arma 2's DLCs because there was a lot of content and they wanted to enjoy it properly. People are barely even buying Livonia nowadays, I somehow managed to convince one (1) (single) person to buy a GM and with CSLA, despite it seemingly having a great content... forget it. Besides, even if few people buy it many small communities won't play it anyway because they don't want to leave some of their friends outside of the fun. Arma 2 Lite was a brilliant idea on how to break exactly this vicious cycle. Yes, it was implemented a bit confusingly (the game didn't explain why textures are blurry) but the idea worked even with that misstep.

Guys, please consider avoiding introducing changes into already released objects, including default appearance and randomization. Objectives that rely on certain object being of certain size or having certain appearance (e.g. vehicle being of certain color) may break because of such changes. To clarify, here I'm talking specifically about enabling texture randomization on Skoda 1203 by default in the last patch.

Hey! I made a simple no-nonsense PowerShell script that launches your server with mods. It does what you want it to do. It doesn't bother you with things you don't care about. And if it doesn't do what you care about then all the code is one Notepad away. Bottom line — it's pretty cool, 9 out of 10 dentists recommend checking it out. Arma 3 SSPSL Hope you like it my man.

Hey guys! I've made a custom explosive - a tripwire flare mine - which is basically re-configured APERS Tripwire mine. Problem is, on the dedicated server the explosion sounds and effects are seemingly localized to the server and don't appear on clients. This issues applies only to mines placed in editor and only on dedicated server, mines placed by a player after mission start work just fine on dedicated. Here are the mod configs: https://github.com/Cambusta/Tripflare/tree/ac85b64d9e171bbd6efd6c0ed569b8f14b748e6d The mod on SW: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2166493362 I'm really confused with that one as the config is really tiny and just changing a few values of APERS mines that are working fine. It appears that RHS dealt with exactly this problem before: http://feedback.rhsmods.org/view.php?id=4331 but I've skimmed over their configs and don't really see that much of a difference, aside from that they're inherit from MineBase instead of APERSTripMine. Any help will be appreciated!

After a bit of experimenting I've ended up moving the firing sounds to the script that's called when mine is triggered (which I had for other purposes). From what I can tell, RHS took the same approach. Less than ideal but it worked right off the bat.

Disables zooming ability (right-click zoom) on CUP and vanilla weapons when aiming down ironsights. Does not affect standard view, free-look and vehicle weapons - you will be able to zoom in and out when using these. The mod is mostly an experiment in game mechanics to see if scopes can be made more significant in combat without sacrificing the ability to peer. Locality: client-side mod Installation: Simply enable the mod, no additional configuration is required License: MIT Source: GitHub Dependencies CUP Weapons Acknowledgements Buzzil (aka 10Dozen) for the idea. ruPal's DisableZoom mod was used as a reference with some parts used in Ironsight directly. Steam Workshop

Thing is, as long as they don't penetrate the armor a guy would walk away with a mid-to-bad bruise. Maybe a broken rib or two. Hits to non-protected areas (that are also non-critical) are definitely going to hurt but a grown man won't just instantly drop dead from those. Right now they drop like flies. I'm fairly confident that non-penetrating shotgun hits, while unpleasant, are easily survivable. I think that's the reason why pretty much every military has ditched them and that's why they tend to be relatively easily available to civilians even in the most gun-restrictive countries like Soviet Union or UK: they are useless in modern combat. Unless you're fighting ducks or random lone home intruders. On a side note, I was told that grown hogs take a slug hit into their foreheads if the angle is right. Don't get me wrong, shotguns definitely should be a viable close-range weapon (and I'm actually tinkering with this one model for some mod right now) but not against a soldier in full gear. It's not that we don't have "soft" targets either: Syndikat, Spetsnaz (allegedly), FIA, maybe CSAT, pretty much everything in CUP Units. I suggest toning the damage down and seeing how that'll work out.

Gonna agree with guys saying that shotguns are unrealistically powerful. You can one-shot fully geared soldiers from 50 meters away with pellets making torso hits. I have serious doubts that pellets or especially slugs are going to pierce even a mediocre armor plate. In the same way a helmet will probably shrug them off. Granted, slugs do pack a punch they're effectively small cylinders with dull surfaces that have almost no piercing capacity. I'm inclined to believe that body parts protected by armor should be almost invulnerable to shotgun shots.

In regards to "M14 (Classic)" — "classic" guns don't get to have fancy Picatinny rails, I believe a more appropriate name would be "M14 (Bubba'd)". 😁 Seriously though, the rail doesn't belong there, it probably would be better if it was at least hidden when no scope is mounted.

So let me get this straight - you bought an infantry simulator and got disappointed that it does, in fact, simulate infantry, and not some absolutely unrelated aspect of modern combat?

Thanks, I'll take a look! :)

Hey there! Just stumbled upon this mod and it looks really exiting. However, it isn't clear from the first glance whether it supports multiplayer or not. Could you please clarify that? :)

You've picked a wrong game, pal. :D In addition to what has already been said by others in this thread, there's a company that did just that. Egosoft (which is basically German BI) tried that with their X series (which is basically space Arma complete with retarded scripting engine and bazillion of user-made mods). They had a very good run with X3 series (Reunion, Terrain Conflict and Albion prelude) and then they've decided to capture the console market and made X: Rebirth, which was basically a dumbed-down console-friendly version of the series. It was a gigantic dumpster fire that both alienated old players and failed to attract causal ones. Honestly, I don't know how they managed to survive that but thankfully a couple of days ago they've released the X4: Foundations (do check it out) which returned to the series core mechanics and autism levels and it instantly got positive feedback from the community. Sure, there are bugs to be ironed out but the main concept is solid. I think BI will end up walking the same road, should they repeat Egosoft's mistake. Dumbed-down version of Arma will lack all the features that make it interesting to the PC audience while simultaneously lacking features of a above-average console shooter, all this while competing with a bunch of established shooters.