LFCChameleon_Silk

its comming soon, more soon then ever... we all anxiously await for the full clicky goodness.

yes Joyride sometimes my sounds do this, I'm also having issues where the ME refuses to play a valid sound that i've added, and also when in mission the sound fails to play. an example would be in Operation Perched Eagle when its creating the tasks at start it makes a noise, then another task is created it makes the noise again, during this process sometimes the noise before the next noise gets clipped.

already using a lot of MIST 3.3 in my latest mission, but I don't see anything to manipulate radios with MIST. I'm using a modified part of CTTS to give radio commands and re-give them based on a unit name array, the problem with CA is that it can be any unit, I have seen code that says if unitName == nil then unitName == "ground commander" but adding Ground Commander to a unitName array doesn't give him the radios. I guess basically what i need is script that is able to detect the CA player and then give the radio commands, will probably have to update itself x seconds using scheduleFunction so that it will be given to the CA player if he switches vehicles. anyways hopefully someone will know what to do.

anyway to give combined arms users radio command menu like you can for the other player slots? I wish to do via script and not with the ME triggers.

updated links and most recent version to 2.16, been awhile since i updated but work has been going this whole time on the mission. - facility bombing - more rewards - full CA support - matured script with much less bugs

by parked what do you mean? on the helo pad beside them? I would have checked myself about my helos but I am behind in my script trying to get it ready for this weekend... doesn't look like I will make that deadline.

I hate when people do this, maybe I am not interested in knowing how you made it work but maybe other people search for ways to make it work -- for the sake of the community at least post the way you made it work instead of saying i figured it out and leaving it at that.

so aspect plays no role in RCS?

thanks for the further posts ENO, I am also behind you in the convoys are brutal debate :P I also don't really get the we are pushing the map beyond its capability line, we are just adding a convoy... nothing more - so the map was never meant to have vehicles drive down a road?

umm score window still there for me, must be a binding issue.

yea i think the cats out the bag in that EDGE will be taking over all rendering duties on all maps :P

yea well I'm gonna be a cynic and say that EDGE and pathfinding will continue to be a problem for years to come -- tried some scripting in Arma 3 awhile back and that engine has same degree of crap with bridges... felt like playing some yakitty sacks watching AI try to path... if it was easy it would have been fixed long ago.. but thats why I am brining it up so much and how many bridges are there in NEVADA? isn't it like all desert... lots of streams to cross i suppose. I say this with love in my heart, to have AI pathfinding work great with or without EDGE would be very nice.

I actually find it really funny how no one ever uses an MI-8 to transport troops, kinda amazed that no one has modified any of the transport scripts to drop off red troops.

this is a very important issue, its not just DCS that has a hard time with bridges I dunno if i have ever seen AI path find across bridges properly in any game, should just remove the damn things. and make it consider it a road...

Convoys Brutal (beating dead horse) I know its been mentioned a million times but its plagued DCS for so long now that I just want reinforce how badly this needs addressing -- we can't make missions and keep the community alive and healthy with more and more complex missions via scripting if something as simple as going across a bridge is so utterly broken - I would trade EDGE for convoys working properly! :doh:

thanks for the help, by dissecting the script maybe both me and alfredo_laredo will get some insight into sub menu creation.

they are fueled up? are you giving them enough time to start up? I will repost once i add some helos to my mission to see if same behaviour occurs with mine.

latest test (thanks to the like 8 players who took part) was a big success and the file has really blossomed, and now i know what parts need tuning up... it got a bit hilarious as the reward trigger kept firing at one point causing almost all the rewards to take off near the same time. this is of version 2.09, but I'm not gonna release this version instead keep working on it till I have something really special to release -- no rush now since the basic features of the mission file are working as intended and quite playable for small groups.

went to try the su-25T version, but you made a boo boo and made the 1 SU-25T an AI and not a client, but even before that the briefing basically made everything your trying to do to fit a SU-25T in unplausable... I think its better if you just design for A-10C, since many things seem A-10C specific. sorry. also i looked through the 4 missions and realized your really going for an atmosphere setting and not so much any action (besides some infantry and maybe some BMPs which i would find very dull) what i would suggest is breathing A LOT more life into the area of operations around the tasks.. it just seems very very barebones and barren with no life to it at all -- and for me this is a huge turnoff. The mission may appeal to those starting out but anyone hardened a bit maybe left wanting a lil. this is tough criticism I know, I always encourage people to be tough on my missions and to tell me what they think of it as well, without a candy coat and I'm just doing this for you so that you may flesh out the area of operations a little more and to push the designer in you a lil more. - in intro mission there was a double radio transmission the welcoming message about entering the warzone just not my cup of tea, but wish you the best of luck.

PROBLEM SOLVED! Anyone wishing to incorporate destroying map objects can use this as a reference, added demo mission as well to show it at work... now if only everyone was so kind to do the same about other MIST functions -- we wouldn't have 10 people knowing what they are doing and the rest scratching their heads -- start posting some examples that are simple and easy to understand! -- make sure you have a mission start trigger in the editor that loads MIST 3.3 on mission start -- and make sure you place TEST1 trigger zone on top of the object you wish to demonstrate the function on ------------------------------------------------ function check_obj_destroyed(arg, time) ------------------------------------------------ check_this_obj_flag = trigger.misc.getUserFlag(9999) -- grab the userflag that is being used by mist.flagFunc.mapobjs_dead_zones if check_this_obj_flag == 0 then -- condition that check_this_obj_flag is equal to 0 (alive) trigger.action.outText(check_this_obj_flag .. ' Object is ALIVE' , 2) -- debug output to say when the bridge/object has been killed -- script to execute when object is alive -- if you wish something to happen then end if check_this_obj_flag ~= 0 then -- condition that check_this_obj_flag is not equal to 0 (dead) trigger.action.outText(check_this_obj_flag.. ' Object is DEAD ' , 2) -- debug output to say when the bridge/object has been killed -- script to execute upon the targets death, -- once dead its dead and MIST does not make -- mist.flagFunc.mapobjs_dead_zones flag value -- true again. end return time + 2 -- reschedule for 2 seconds to show if object has been killed end ------------------------------------------------ function obj_destroy_start(arg, time) -- function to cause an explosion that will destroy the object ------------------------------------------------ local zonePos= mist.utils.zoneToVec3('TEST1') -- insert your own zone name here trigger.action.explosion(zonePos, 95000) -- test explosion so that the player doesn't have to kill object himself, if your using a bridge make sure to place on a the start of bridge where the land is! return time + 10 -- reschedule another explosion (not needed but was usefull in testing, takes 3 volleys to kill a large bridge so wait it out till flag gets set!) end ------------------------------------------------ function start_obj_checks(arg, time) -- begin the check on the specified zone (make sure to change the zone name here to the one used previously, and also to place in the editor) ------------------------------------------------ mist.flagFunc.mapobjs_dead_zones{ zones = {'TEST1'}, flag = 9999 } -- starts checking return -- returns back to normal flow, doesn't need to be scheduled for rechecking, MIST handles this end --- timer.scheduleFunction(start_obj_checks, {}, timer.getTime() + 1) -- schedule the functions to run to demonstrate the object destruction logic this section is run only once at start of mission file -- timer.scheduleFunction(check_obj_destroyed, {}, timer.getTime() + 2) -- print the state of the object every 2 seconds timer.scheduleFunction(obj_destroy_start, {}, timer.getTime() + 10) -- cause explosion every 10 seconds detected_obj_death.miz

armored bunker is not a map object persay its more like a placed static object or fortification, i believe that command your using is used to destroy a bridge or something embedded in the actual map, try just using bomb position or w/e its called.

yes i would playtest if it had su-25, just make sure you give at least 4 waypoints and set altitude at like 3k for them.

just posted up 2.08, although tbh I have yet to test many of the changes in it so i make no promises that this version will fix anything and possibly may break everything. or it works and enemies won't be able to spawn while players are near the zones. off to test :joystick:

its not that I cant fly and be lethal with the A-10C its just that I'd rather fly a Su-25, difficulty doesn't bother me... you either got it or you don't, and whats difficult to one might be simple to others. If you add some diversity to your slots I would test it.

updated to fix a stupid typo in the script causing it to fail... damn last minute changes :P