ansin11

Bro what are you doing xD

Behind the function?

In that case, that's what I was thinking too, because it would be nice to have some way to access it when it bugs out. I couldn't do it. I read through BIS_fnc_iDontRememberTheName source code but I could not replicate how BI brings up the squad menu dialog. I also tried to reset the squad menu manually (to fix it when it bugs out) by removing and readding it but that didn't work either.

missionNamespace?

EU#1 is intended to be played with clientside mods at most (e.g. Blastcore, JSRS) so that anybody can just join in and have some fun without having to set anything up.

I too have never been to AWE. I've seen Scar on EU#7, and as far as I am aware, he defenitely has a few more than three days of Arma 3 experience. Do you read what I write or do you just reply? Yes, Ryko has all the code, but unless he wants to paste even more I & A 3 into I & A 4 he's going to have to find out what needs to go where all by himself. Yay.

What limitations did you encounter? Most of the people on EU#7 have played Arma 3 (or even AWE) for more than three days, they already have somewhat of a clue what's going on. You want my stuff now or not?

The respawn system might need some Event Handler work, as far as I found out the vanilla revive system doesn't use FAKs if the medic has a medkit; meaning infinite heals if you have a medkit. About the slot / role thing: It's a public server, so in my opinion, it's in our best interest to keep the role selection (and things like that) as close to the popular ingame standard as possible. And yes, roleDescription is what I used instead of isKindOf too, for... reasons. Yea, I was disappointed by the amount of uhm starting-from-scratch I saw while going through it briefly.

Did we even play the same I & A 4? I was talking about JOIN SERVER - SELECT SLOT (AND ROLE) - JOIN / LOAD MISSION while it currently appears to be JOIN SERVER - (ALL SLOTS ARE THE SAME) - JOIN / LOAD MISSION - SELECT SQUAD (AND ROLE) in I & A 4. Vehicle seat restrictions Stan, vehicle seats. Like pilot seats. There is indeed little wrong with using init.sqf, but if you already run if (hasInterface) then {}; you might as well place that in the initPlayerLocal.sqf and split the rest up that way too so that everything is where it is placed best and where it is expected by people reading the code who try to grasp what the hell is going on and why and where it's going on.

That's kinda how I got the mission file @Stanhope.

I like what I'm reading about locking backpacks and vehicles. I don't like the existence of an init.sqf file. I hope the use of vanilla slots is planned, I don't think public EU#1 needs or appreciates the (presumably) AWE dynamic group system. As I can be considered an expert in the field I once more politely offer to fix / implement: The Virtual Arsenal + Gear Restriction system I made for I & A 3 The Seat Restriction system I made for I & A 3 The Ghost Hawk Door Action (maybe just all vehicle doors if I have time and motivation) Clean Vehicle Inventory Action + Earplug Action (overhauled and fairly refined as of I & A 3.3.8.2, BIS themselves would be proud)

@Stanhope [Crossroads, "All units, be advised, we have detected an enemy aircraft!"] remoteExec ["sideChat", -2, false]; Something like this?

You see one problem with the Xi'an here is that it follows a design philosophy similar to that of the Kajman, based on the Mi-24 Hind. It combines the gunship with (personnel) transport. For I & A we don't really want to have a gunship on respawn, so one would have to take the Xi'an's weapons, which is possible, but to me personally, spawning a gunship without guns seems wrong. I know that the rewards do this, but that's not my fault ? There already is a Blackfish at base and it gets used rarely and usually unsuccessfully as most people can't fly - or rather land - the VTOLs. I assume the same would happen to a Xi'an.

AT vs vehicles was balanced, the launcher distribution was not. Is dropping CLS for four new AT slots still on the table?

Could also reduce the insane amount of armor.

That sounds like a reasonable idea to me, however server roles are so packed there are not even basic rifleman slots. Maybe if we removed the CLS Team?

I see no reason to change this unless core staff asks me to. LAT and HAT are both AT; sitting on some hill and exploding things with a guided missile launcher might be entertaining from time to time, but whenever I load a LAT loadout to actually (attempt to) participate in some combat (and kill MRAPs and low shit) I feel like the last fucking retard on the server because I might as well pick any other slot and do the exact same thing plus have the other slot's benefits, abilities and equipment. That is the exact point I personally see in restricting all launchers to AT. If a regular foot soldier carried AT that would make him an AT rifleman, wouldn't it? Might as well give every slot access to all gear, aircraft and engineer / medic skills, maybe disable stamina and remove the weight limit too while we're at it, maybe that's what people are looking for. But if we're going to restrict equipment, then maybe the restrictions should make sense and offer some balance.

@TheScar No, I meant does it really decrease server fps?

@TheScar What really?

The Editor doesn't need to bother with multiplayer and AI unit locality.

Arma.

On EU#1?

One of the better ones indeed. Until you use the ["AmmoboxInit", [object, true, {true}]] call BIS_fnc_arsenal; syntax of BIS_fnc_arsenal, then it will work but always throw an error. Solid.

Yea I'm seeing weapon assemblies copied from CfgWeapons that you can't use in the Virtual Arsenal