doc. caliban

I've had this happen from time to time. Exiting Eden and then reloading it always fixes that for me. I'm not sure why access to those options goes away sometimes.

Thank you for that! I am very new to scripting, so some of the differences like that are new concepts for me. I appreciate the code as well. The boats are easily moveable by at least 2 people (dragging) or more (carrying) IRL. I've gotten the script working and have found that whatever their weight is in the game, it falls within the default limits of the ACE module. Thanks again! -Doc

Hello! Our team is new to ACRE2, and as the mission maker, I have a question regarding the "Mute Players" option in the CBA ACRE2 options in Eden. (CTRL-ALT-S) I understand that, by design, players not in the mission (dead folks in the lobby, for instance) cannot be heard by the players in the mission. However, it is actually problematic for us to not be able to communicate with those people. We don't use a perma-death system, and in the time between a player dying and respawning we'd still like to be able to communicate with them. For example, someone dies and wants to take the opportunity to take a quick break AFK... I'd like for them to simply be able to tell me that via the radio.) There appear to be a couple of features that I think are designed to allow people the flexibility of making their own decision about that feature. I have a couple of questions regarding those. In the mission editor options for ACRE2, there is a checkbox for "Unmute Players". What, exactly, does this feature toggle? I tried checking it in the mission settings but it did not seem to affect that issue. What does that option actually do? EDIT: Found this farther up in the thread, so it seems this option is not a solution for us: I also saw that the CTRL-SHFT-Down keycombo does two thing: Lowers the headset, and allows you to hear the dead players. I have not been able to test this yet, but based on that description it makes it sound as though lowering the headset will decrease the radio volume as though the headset were around your neck, and allow *only that player* to be able to hear the dead players. Is that correct? So if the headset is raised, that player can no longer hear the dead players? We know of plenty of workarounds for this, but all of them have one limitation or another, so I'm not looking for that kind of info. ACRE2 offers options for adjusting all of the key realism/difficulty features such as interference, LOS signal loss, etc., so I'm simply wondering if it also offers a way to speak with dead players, and if so, how. Or to put it another way; I'm looking for an ACRE-based solution instead of an external workaround. So far we really like the mod and are wanting to use it instead of TFAR, but this is one of the potential deal breakers for us. Being a software tester by profession, I love it when developers don't force their way of thinking down their user's throats, and I applaud the ACRE2 team for offering the configuration options that they do. Well done! EDIT: Well, shoot. It looks like not being able to talk to people outside of the game is a forced feature. Seems odd for a mod that allows the modification / disabling of almost all of it's core, A-List features, so my guess is that it's not the contradiction of philosophy that it appears to be. More likely there's a major factor in how the plugin works that makes it too difficult to make the feature optional, so it simply isn't. That's fair. The team clearly wants the mod to be as customizable as possible and has made it so as much as they can. It wouldn't make any sense to say, "We want the community to be able to use the mod exactly as they'd like to, so here's how to modify all of these features. Except this one." :-) Might as well ask this while I'm here: On a much smaller note, is there a way via the mod or TS3 to lower the volume of the "mic sounds" when transmissions start and stop? One of my guys has an audio setup that makes the end-of-transmission sound pretty jarring. If we could simply decrease the relative volume of those sound affects, that would be perfect. If we have to "engineer" our own way of doing that, I'd thought of unpacking the sounds pbo, editing that file to lower it's volume level, then repacking the pbo, but I assume it would fail to load due to the key not being correct any longer. Would it work if all of us simply deleted the key for that pbo and used the modified sound pbo without a corresponding key? Just a thought. EDIT: I keep seeing reference to adjusting this volume via the sound pack volume slider in the TS3 client. I'm using 3.1.1 and that slider seems to have zero impact on the volume of the "mic clicking" sounds. I'm guessing that since the sounds are in the mod and not the TS3 soundpack, this volume slider does not affect them. Interestingly, the Windows volume mixer slider for TS3 does, so the sounds are associated with TS3, but the app can't control their volume. Thanks, -Doc

Thanks for that! I had tried it as a string, but get a generic error in expression message. Not using quotes produces no errors. I understand what you mean though; the object is looking for the var name of the object, right? I wonder why using class names produces an error... I'll poke at it more tomorrow. -Doc

Trying to enable dragging of inflatable boats. No joy so far. I'm trying to do a forEach of an array of inflatable boat classnames, but in testing I can't even get the feature to work with a single class name. Is this not correct? [B_Boat_Transport_01_F, true] call ace_dragging_fnc_setDraggable; According to the framework wiki, those are the only required parameters. I tried setting ACE_maxWeightDrag nice and high just to make sure that wasn't the issue, but I still don't get a drag option in the ACE Interaction Menu ... only the vanilla "push". What am I doing incorrectly? Thanks, -Doc

Quick question before I delve into this and possibly INIDBI2: Will this, or the combo of the two, allow me to "save" multiplayer games on a non-dedicated server? I play almost nightly with a few friends and have to manually update missions in the editor if they take us more than one session to finish. A method of truly saving the game would be amazing, and that's what this looks like. I just wanted to check on the non-dedicated server aspect. Thank you, -Doc

Adding an action to a specific vehicle by its variable name? I am trying to add an action to one specific UAV. I feel like I'm very close to having it work, but running this in the init.sqf results in an undefined variable error. All I know is that the variable (uavX) is defined in the mission. Thoughts? _action = ["power_up_uav", "Power up UAV", "",{droneX setCaptive false; droneX enableAI "ALL"}, {true}] call ace_interact_menu_fnc_createAction; ["uavX", 0, ["ACE_MainActions"], _action] call ace_interact_menu_fnc_addActionToObject; EDIT: Got it working for the whole class ( "B_UGV_01_rcws_F" ) , but is it possible for just one specific unit based on its var? Thanks, -Doc

Thank you for the reply, Beerkan. I did figure it out ... I had in fact been doing something wrong, but at this point I don't remember what it was, though it was in fact something that looking more closely at your directions revealed. The script seems to work perfectly. Thanks! -Doc

oops, sorry. My bad. I'd just wanted to add my support to the concept from the standpoint of realism as opposed to opinion. I'd like to see something like this created for the game. Experience tells me that if I'd started a new thread about it, someone would have inevitably directed me to this old one with a comment about using search before creating a duplicate thread. :-) I happen to agree with the concept of keeping things tidy with like information kept in one place instead of shotgunned throughout a forum, which makes it harder for someone who's looking for information on a topic to find it. But rules are rules. Noted! -Doc

I have a team of AI divers that I want to patrol around a sunken wreck. Setting the waypoints at the depth I want them to be at, setting their swimInDepth attribute, etc, does not work. The team lead darn near surfaces between each waypoint, and the team itself isn't following him. Behavior and speed are set to safe and limited. Any thoughts on how to get this to work? Thank you, -Doc

I too would like to see the addition of an IR illuminator. The NVG's I've used IRL have almost always had one built right in. Hugely helpful indoors, and on darker nights. As for flashlights, it's basically the same thing. I have IR filters for a couple of my lights that filter out all visible light while still providing excellent illumination via NVGs. My motto is: "If it exists in real life, then that's all the justification needed." Who would and would not use it is moot. -Doc

Disregard.

I'm hoping someone is still paying attention to this great script. So far the helicopters stop and land after dropping the troopers. I expected it to keep going to it's waypoint? I tried setting the pilot to careless, and I tried the setcaptive fix as well. Instead of flying by, it makes the drop and then reefs back on the stick to make a fill stop, then looks for a place to land and does so. Best, -Doc

I've been digging around for an hour and have not gotten anything to work. On player death, I would like to determine the nearest spawn point and set that to where they will respawn, as opposed to allowing them to choose or having it be random. Any help is greatly appreciated! -Doc

Thanks for the fast reply. I've seen both of those pages... I am probably misunderstanding them, but my respawn modules are already placed. I'm looking for a way to determine which one is nearest to the player's death and respawn them there. -Doc

Hello. Thanks for this! I am trying to use your script for changing from red to green on a trigger, but I'm putting it in a simple sqf file after a sleep command. I have a single heli named UH80 that has the red light on by default. I can't get this script top change the color ... I'm not sure where and how to modify it for the vehicle name based on, "(thisList select 0) to vehicleName". I'm not sure what you meant by that. Thanks! -Doc

Disregard. Great mission port though! Thanks!

EDIT: I see there is a newer version of the Tanoa SP mission as well since I dowloaded it a couple weeks ago, so I'll give that a try. If I have issues, I'll comment in the other thread.

Thank you for the ports as well, Rydygier. They worked perfectly. And thank you for the info, rsfotokz. FWIW, I had the same error after unpacking the original hotfix missions with Eliteness as well. I'll keep the re-importing trick in mind the next time I'm in there though. In the mean time I'm halfway through the Chernarus mission and loving it! -Doc

Thank you, Rydygier! Could you recommend something other than that PBO manager? It seems to work for other PBO's, but not any of the hotfix versions. Would you be willing to create a zip for Bornholm and Chernaus? Best, -Doc

Well, it's been almost 2 years since I've been able to play much Arma, so I might as well pick up where I left off ... playing this great mission! I've downloaded the "hotfix" version of Altis mission and unpacked it into my user's missions folder with PBO Manager. The problem I'm having is that attempting to open the mission in Eden I receive the error: "Error when loading the scenario". The non-hotfix version of 1.94 opens without issue. Any suggestions? Thanks! -Doc

EDIT: Great! I've been shown the error in my information. My concerns are abated. Original post: The topic of this post is the inclusion of suppressors for the two larger sniper rifles in the base game. This is not a place to discuss whether or not they should be in the game: it's known that large caliber suppressors will be part of the DLC, and the topic has been beaten to death here. (A frustrating thread, but a good source of facts, and clarifications of common misconceptions.) The purpose of this post is to call attention to the possibility that the DLC may be forcing us to pay for a feature that should be included in the base game for which we've already paid. Each weapon in the base game that can have a suppressor attached has one included as an option. Each of them except the .50 and .408 rifles, despite the fact that they exist and are effectively deployed IRL. (Again, all covered here.) The DLC includes such suppressors, showing that BIS correctly recognizes that they belong in the game. Then why are they not already provided for the large caliber sniper rifles in the base game? Please, don't let the DLC become an intentional lever to force us to spend money on this obvious, missing feature. Let's let BIS know that, while we may love and appreciate the Marksmen DLC, we don't appreciate having to pay additional money for basic functionality that has been intentionally left out of the product that we've already bought. Not everyone can justify spending the money on the DLC. Not everyone will be interested in the additional content of the DLC. However, everyone deserves to have the complete, basic functionality and features that they've already paid for. The two missing suppressors should be added to the base game via a free patch because they are just that; missing. They are not a DLC feature. Best, -Doc

Sorry, my mistake! When I said, "long-range", I meant the same rifles we've been discussing throughout this thread, and which are specifically mentioned in the referenced request tickets. Perhaps I should have said, "longerer-range" to have avoided confusion. :-) To keep things on-topic with the rest of the thread and referenced tickets, I'll make my statement more specific: The altruistic side of me thinks it would be great to offer suppressed, heavy-caliber sniper rifles, such as the consistently aforementioned .408 and .50, to folks who can't purchase something suppressed with a similar effective range, such as the .338 and 9.5mm, via the DLC. -Doc EDIT: Personally, I still use the EBR (and updated version in the DLC) the most ... great balance between general combat and "long range" shooting. Good stuff!

True. I'm sure BIS has no issues with the request from neither a technical nor gameplay standpoint as both of those are laid to rest with the inclusion of the .338 suppressor in the DLC. The altruistic side of me thinks it would be great to offer suppressed long range rifles to folks who can't purchase one via the DLC, but the selfish side of me just wants them so that I can use them. :-) If it's not something they can spend resources on, so be it. It's worth asking though since the original request was never actually denied, and I felt it was important to clarify that the original tickets were asking for suppressors specifically for the .408 and .50 vanilla rifles; not for "A suppressed sniper rifle. Eventually. That we can pay for." That's why I think there was a misunderstanding on the part of the owner of the ticket that was closed as "fixed". Fingers crossed that the new ticket gains a bit of traction!

Wow, thank you for all of the great info and development lore! Having been on that side of some big software products, I'm always aware that there're a ton of "behind the scenes" factors and decisions at play (which is why my request for those suppressors is just that, a request), but it's fun to hear some of the details related to this title. Much appreciated! -Doc