Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Limited arsenal and any available attachment #9927

Open
Negaiette opened this issue Apr 5, 2024 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #9937
Open

Limited arsenal and any available attachment #9927

Negaiette opened this issue Apr 5, 2024 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #9937
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@Negaiette
Copy link

Mods (complete and add to the following information):

  • Arma 3: 2.16 stable
  • CBA: 3.1.7 stable
  • ACE3: 3.1.7 stable
  • RHSAFRF: 0.5.6 stable

Description:
You can take any attachment item from limited arsenal, which not approved in it

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Take any primary weapon, which compatible with attachment. (In my example I will use the scope)
  2. Take any handgun weapon, which compatible with. (PP-2000 from RHSAFRF for example)
  3. Put scope, which u want to take from arsenal on handun weapon or primary weapon.
  4. Open arsenal and select weapon without scope.
  5. Select needed scope on scope's right panel.
  6. Done.

Expected behavior:
The sight should not be available for taking

Where did the issue occur?

  • Dedicated / Self-Hosted Multiplayer / Singleplayer / Editor (Singleplayer) / Editor (Multiplayer) / Virtual Arsenal (Everywhere)

Additional context:
Video with bug demonstration - https://youtu.be/pD8MSDgqMZA

@LinkIsGrim
Copy link
Contributor

LinkIsGrim commented Apr 7, 2024

@johnb432 duplication, unique virtual attachment is available to multiple weapons

Reproducible in 3.16.3, 3.17.0 and master

@LinkIsGrim LinkIsGrim added this to the Ongoing milestone Apr 7, 2024
@johnb432
Copy link
Contributor

johnb432 commented Apr 7, 2024

At this point we have so much technical debt in the arsenal when it comes to unique items that we should rewrite the internals.

@LinkIsGrim
Copy link
Contributor

Already?

@johnb432
Copy link
Contributor

johnb432 commented Apr 7, 2024

It feels like it. I'm not sure where to even begin with trying to fix this in a half decent manner in the current system.

@LinkIsGrim LinkIsGrim linked a pull request Apr 7, 2024 that will close this issue
@LinkIsGrim LinkIsGrim modified the milestones: Ongoing, 3.17.1 Apr 7, 2024
@johnb432 johnb432 modified the milestones: 3.17.1, Ongoing Apr 11, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants