Jump to content

Iso containers anyone?


Scorpius

Recommended Posts

it's best to place them in the mission editor, obviously :biggrin:

Actually, it annoys me to see them on a map when placed on the mission editor. but, i get over it. ;)

looking awesome Scorpius! are we getting a whole package of these one day?

They are only visible in the same way as minefields or other obstacles - red 'elements' shown on the red map, blue ones on the blue map.

Just make sure that you place 'enemy' ISO containers using the correct 'side'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are only visible in the same way as minefields or other obstacles - red 'elements' shown on the red map, blue ones on the blue map.

Just make sure that you place 'enemy' ISO containers using the correct 'side'.

i didn't mean "seeing" them on the map. my bad. i meant to say that i didn't like seeing them dropped on a map in the map editor. i prefer them placed in the scenario from the mission editor for the reasons you state as well as the fact you can "fill" them.

i should never post before noon without coffee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oooooo even better. make sure that unit inside the CONEX is set to "kill if hit" that way the player doesn't have to put 10 rounds into it. i imagine a CONEX hit by a HEAT round would explode like that T-72 in the Javelin video... well, maybe if you put a couple pounds of C4 inside. ;) COAX would decimate anyone inside. those walls are like 1mm thick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to rain on your parade, but...

Wouldn't it be simpler to crash the UAV when the personnel inside the 'control centre' is destroyed? Putting an unit in a container is a neat idea, and allows you to script things based on the possible 'destruction' of the container, but since there's already personnel present (I assume!?) why go the extra length? No personnel in control centre=no UAV control=crash

-Rump

Containers look very cool, btw!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to rain on your parade, but...

Wouldn't it be simpler to crash the UAV when the personnel inside the 'control centre' is destroyed? Putting an unit in a container is a neat idea, and allows you to script things based on the possible 'destruction' of the container, but since there's already personnel present (I assume!?) why go the extra length? No personnel in control centre=no UAV control=crash

-Rump

He is. The code fragment was the "damage if" command for the UAV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also thought of doing a camo one sorta like congo's. With maybe a window in it, and barracuda net. Militarys covert these containers for all sorts of purposes. My Idea was to use the camo one as control centers for UAV's. And have the UAV destroyed if they are. One could also use it as HQ's for COM net, and have map updates lost if destroyed.

Again, a lot of uses, we need more than one. The sand bag, or wall idea is one of the best.

I've pushed for multiples of this object in game, with different textures. And it is something they would like to do, just have to find the time. This thread just re-enforces my statement that, "If you give us the models, the textures will come"

Really amazing when you think about it. All the things you can simulate with a simple box.

Rogue

You,re right about the simple box. If Al and crew could do several different scale boxes and the option to stack. You could do everything from palletized supplies to bunkers. The basic building block so to speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...