ClaytoniousRex

Since you know exactly what you're looking for, one way you can check for sure is to first make a backup of your files, then edit the version.ini in your /data directory (make it, say, 1.1.5 or anything other than 1.1.6). Then run the game and let it update. You will now have the "public" version of Volcanic Deposits and you can look to see if it's right. Don't forget that first step - backup your files!

There's a lot of information in this forum. You might want to start with this post.

Poesel, the code already does what you need but unfortunately there's currently no way for you to get at it from the XML. You need a couple of new tags that we don't have right now. I'll drop you a line when they're ready.

A legend to the tac diagramming symbols. Of course, as a team's commander, it's up to you to communicate the final meaning in a given context, so this is only a guide. Use waypoints and voice chat to clarify your intentions... Block (asterisk is toward enemy to block): Bypass: Clear (arrows point toward area to be cleared of enemy): Contain: Fix (arrow points at enemy to be pinned in place): Occupy: Retain: Ambush: Drop Zone, No Drop Zone, the schmoo and the circle are pretty obvious. Currently, bots only pay attention to the drop zone and no drop zone glyphs.

The demo server is the one called Arpinum. Just register a demo account to play on it.

Should be OK now.

The OGRE game type has not yet been implemented (and will not be called OGRE when it is). Some past discussion on it here.

...is now available via Update. You should be prompted to update automatically the next time you run DropTeam. Important: There's a new command in this release (for firing smoke grenades). If you have customized controls then you need to go BACK to the default keyboard or default joystick controls and recustomize your control set with this release. Changes in 1.1.6: </font> New scenarios from Toby Haynes, Hub, and Iceman (see readme files for more author information within the update)</font>Diagramming, Grid overlay, Layers, and Slider Windows on Tac Display</font>Dropship pilots now automatically seek out flatter, safer ground near the designated drop point if the drop point is dangerous</font>You may now "Take Control" even while you are passenger; for example, you can deploy infantry into a building and then take control of some other unit (give bots a MOVE command to get them to exit an object that they're inside of)</font>Objective game type now does scoring based on ratio of force strength within the objective area(s)</font>Camera now correctly moves to stay in position when you move underneath objects such as large buildings and bridges</font>Fixed bug that was causing a team's # of dropships to be depleted prematurely</font>Added ability to view scenario objectives at any time</font>Fixed right click orders menu when multiple objects are selected; you can now issue orders to all selected objects via right-click</font>Fixed Territory game type scoring</font>Added smoke grenades for the Thor (backspace key by default) - will be coming for other unit types soon</font>Fixed client-side CTD</font>Fixed server crash related to taking control</font>Minimap now renders at much higher quality</font>Increased acceleration of all Apollo variants</font>Allow servers to run different game types in the same rotation (Delta Pavonis will now offer more than just Objective)</font>Fix bug that left bots in "not allowed to drop" state when all humans have disconnected from their team</font>

That's true, Bnej, but it really does depend on the specific story of the scenario in question. The LOS objective as you've described is probably better done as its own victory condition so we have both types available for scenario authors to use as appropriate. For 1.1.6, the normal Objective game type now uses force ratios for awarding points on the objective(s). So far, I think it's really nice.

Yes, but if the X X X's are close enough together then it acts like the === (or close enough). Still, a line charge might be quite doable.

If you mean the funky skybox on Ice Island, that's fixed for 1.1.6.

Break? We don't need no stinking break.

The entire, finished, ww2 mod was visible behind that distant hill so we had to cover it up. Shhhhh...

There was a bug that was causing some mines to be "left over" from one scenario to the next. These "extra" mines weren't really there so driving over them caused no damage. Fixed in 1.1.6.

Yes, you can do that, Poesel.

Will do, Aittam. Please feel free to post a reminder as often as you like. Thanks to a little prodding by Poesel, it will be even better in 1.1.6. We will now have different game types in rotation at the same time, so we can now have the same map as Objective AND as Territory, for example, in the rotation. Add to that the recent new scenarios, and 1.1.6 will offer lots of new play.

Yes, Toby, that's correct. Alex, one of the improvements in 1.1.6 is that dropship pilots automatically seek out flatter, safer, landing areas near the designation drop point when the drop point is dangerously steep or rough. They should do a much better job on Wumpus with this update.

It just so happens that with 1.1.6 you can now do this: </font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"><Smokes>true</Smokes></pre>

It has also become obvious that requiring people to download and install scenarios on their own is a serious obstacle (and understandably so). The client really should download missing content (scenario files, etc.) from the server. This would make Creature Zoo really easy to play with. It's too late to do this for 1.1.6, but we'll get to it immediately afterward. Poesel, does your server also have a public http service running?

This is a request for just a few seconds of your time, so bear with me! Some of us don't follow the "Modding" forum so I wanted to take a moment to praise the prolific work of a DropTeam player and modder whose forum name is Hub. He's the incredibly talented guy who has created a few of the scenarios that we've all been playing lately. Here's a random sampling of his work (some of these have not yet been released but will be in 1.1.6): As we can all see he's very talented and creative. His latest stuff (most or all of which I hope will appear in the upcoming 1.1.6 release) is even better than his previous work. There's nothing better than getting new content for free in new releases! Hub invests his time and energy on a completely volunteer basis, toiling away on these things and sharing them with this community for free. He does it for the joy of doing it and sharing the work. So, here's my call to action: everyone please take just a moment to say "Thanks, Hub!" for all of the work he has poured into these scenarios. A simple reply to this topic would do fine. It only takes a few seconds of your time but it makes a big difference to guys like Hub who have worked so hard to share their work! Of course, this also applies to everyone else who has been modding and creating content, so please also offer a slap on the back whenever you can to all of them. I admire creative people who work to actually realize a finished thing and that's reason enough for me, but if such altruism isn't your thing then think of it this way: these people are giving you new content for free, asking only for feedback, thanks, and fun gaming in return. The more often you give kudos the more often you will get free stuff. In Hub's case, he has been pushing the envelope with his scenarios in terms of trying new things such as limiting the inventories of the teams and tweaking victory conditions, etc. Of course when anyone tries new ideas, some of us like them and some of us don't. Scenario creators like Hub want to hear your feedback on what you do and don't like about the new scenarios (after hearing a big "Thanks for making this!", of course!) What they don't want to hear is simply "your scenario sucks", which unfortunately is more or less what someone emailed to Hub directly. Now think about that. He has spent hours of effort creating something new to give to all of us for free - he has created a new scenario for us to play with that we never would have had otherwise. And one of us goes out of his way to directly email him an insult? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you... If that's how we treat our modders, then we aren't going to have much new content. Hub didn't ask me to make a post like this (or do anything at all), but I've never been able to digest the simple, rude, childish, vileness of such things. And, anyway, the point of this is that it's bigger than Hub. We should treat our modders well. As I said, folks who are creating scenarios do want to hear from you, even if you don't like some aspects of their scenarios. You might say you don't like the unit limits or that the limits should be changed or that the scoring isn't to your liking, etc., but you can say "You rock" first, and say the rest nicely. And the occasional senseless insulting email wouldn't hurt so much if it were surrounded by otherwise positive feedback and kudos...

The origin for a particular physical object (e.g. a chassis or a turret or a gun, etc.) is defined by you when you create the model. It's the 0,0,0 point on your model. Which reference to an origin are you wondering about? Yes, you need the Animation tags for your chassis to render. This is the same problem Yurch ran into. Here's how they work: Once you hookup your Animation tags you will see your chassis. Just follow an existing chassis as a guide. As for texturing, that's specific to the modelling program you're using. You need to apply UV coordinates to your vertices and then assign a texture image to the model.

The shadows are not showing because you don't yet have the collision models. Once you add those, the shadow will render.

The auth server was down. It's back up now.

Here's the issue that was making the bots' brains explode on Hunt the Wumpus: The entire terrain is only 8,192 meters across. However, the objective is at the following location: 14528,14628. The objective is several kilometers to the northeast of the edge of the map. The bots are dutifully trying their level best to drop near that objective, but it's not legal to drop out in no-man's land. Moving the objective onto the actual playing area seems to fix this problem. As an aside, setting MaxDropElevation to about 200.0 works really well on this map (500.0 is still 1/2 way up the walls).

Did MaxDropElevation get the Wumpus fixed for you, Alex?