setOwner: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Lou Montana (talk | contribs) |
Lou Montana (talk | contribs) m (Fix notes) |
||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
|descr= From server machine, change the ownership of an object to a given client. Using command in an unintended way will log a message to .rpt file. To transfer ownership of all AI units in a group properly, use [[setGroupOwner]] instead. | |descr= From server machine, change the ownership of an object to a given client. Using command in an unintended way will log a message to .rpt file. To transfer ownership of all AI units in a group properly, use [[setGroupOwner]] instead. | ||
|pr= {{Feature|arma3|Since | |pr= {{Feature|arma3|Since {{arma3}} v1.40, this command should not be used to transfer ownership of units with AI with the exception of [[agents]].}} | ||
{{Feature|Important|'''Prior to | {{Feature|Important|'''Prior to {{arma3}} v1.40''' it was not possible to transfer the ownership from a client back to the server.}} | ||
|s1= object [[setOwner]] clientID | |s1= object [[setOwner]] clientID | ||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
}} | }} | ||
<dl class="command_description"> | |||
<dt></dt> | <dt></dt> | ||
Line 41: | Line 42: | ||
<dt class="note">[[User:Demellion|Demellion]]</dt> | <dt class="note">[[User:Demellion|Demellion]]</dt> | ||
<dd class="note"> | <dd class="note"> | ||
'''NOTE''': There are some interesting behaviour about the specific owner digits like '''0''' '''-2''' and '''2''': | '''NOTE''': There are some interesting behaviour about the specific owner digits like '''0''' '''-2''' and '''2''': | ||
# Any mission objects (generated from SQM) initially have '''0''' owner state, but it is not [[Multiplayer Scripting#Locality|local]] to ANYONE (0) like it is expected to be, but actually only to a SERVER (2). You can't make any object owner to be 0 once it was changed. | |||
# Trying to change ownership to any negative digit will always result in attempt to transfer ownership to SERVER (2). Once it is unit (non-agent) it will fail and revert* to initial ownership. | |||
# *Changing ownership of a unit (non-agent) actually gives a result for a brief time after this action is performed. What actually happens next - ownership is getting reverted with a message to RPT of a server. This can be seen by reading results of (owner _object) in really fast cycle. | |||
</dd> | </dd> | ||
Revision as of 17:15, 21 June 2021
Description
- Description:
- From server machine, change the ownership of an object to a given client. Using command in an unintended way will log a message to .rpt file. To transfer ownership of all AI units in a group properly, use setGroupOwner instead.
- Problems:
- Groups:
- Multiplayer
Syntax
- Syntax:
- object setOwner clientID
- Parameters:
- object: Object - Object to transfer
- clientID: Number - The machine network ID of the new owner.
- Return Value:
- Boolean - Returns true if ownership was successfully transferred, otherwise false
Examples
Additional Information
- See also:
- ownersetGroupOwnergroupOwnerdidJIPOwner
Notes
-
Report bugs on the Feedback Tracker and/or discuss them on the Arma Discord or on the Forums.
Only post proven facts here! Add Note
- Posted on August 22, 2017 - 18:56 (UTC)
- Demellion
-
NOTE: There are some interesting behaviour about the specific owner digits like 0 -2 and 2:
- Any mission objects (generated from SQM) initially have 0 owner state, but it is not local to ANYONE (0) like it is expected to be, but actually only to a SERVER (2). You can't make any object owner to be 0 once it was changed.
- Trying to change ownership to any negative digit will always result in attempt to transfer ownership to SERVER (2). Once it is unit (non-agent) it will fail and revert* to initial ownership.
- *Changing ownership of a unit (non-agent) actually gives a result for a brief time after this action is performed. What actually happens next - ownership is getting reverted with a message to RPT of a server. This can be seen by reading results of (owner _object) in really fast cycle.
- Posted on February 12, 2019 - 01:15 (UTC)
- jonpas
- Prints RPT warning "setGroupOwner should be used" as soon as there is one unit inside the vehicle, but performs the action successfully.