Closed ampersand38 closed 4 years ago
Did you test it with and without ACEX?
Actually, I copied in from the wrong editor window. The setWaypointStatements
should have single quotes around acex_headless_blacklist
. Should I close this one and re-submit?
Edit: I found where to fix it.
I don't know how the heck I uploaded such a wrong file. Here's the unsigned pbo I tested with. modules_f_ares.zip
@ampersand38 Will the issue be resolved (pull request comment) or can I close the pull request?
Will investigate further on Friday.
Could suffer from a race condition when the waypoint for some reason gets completed before setting the waypoint statement. The current scheduled framework does not make life easy.
Is this possible because addWaypoint
and setWaypointStatements
are quite far apart? Would the chance be reduced if they were consecutive commands?
@oOKexOo ^^
Tested on dedi server with this pbo. modules_f_ares.zip
Is this possible because addWaypoint and setWaypointStatements are quite far apart? Would the chance be reduced if they were consecutive commands?
Yes it would, but the cleaner way is to put them in a unscheduled block (e.g. isNil {...}
or CBA_fnc_directCall
.
Reinforcement groups ownership transfer can break the unload waypoint, causing the infantry to fail to disembark.
This PR checks for presence of ACEX headless, blacklists the vehicle and infantry groups, and removes the blacklist after they reach their waypoints.