Amazing! SMAW can toast T-90's!

[kireta21 13]

Well, realism in ArmA was always to be taken with a grain of salt. And when it comes to tanks and planes damage system it should be handful of salt.

Beside, even if there was fully working realistic armor/penetration system, it still would have to be simplified to avoid "tanks on god-mode" ballance problem. See Combat Mission: Shock Force, and mission with Abrams-hunting (forgot name).

I wouldn't mind improvement there, but that's not on top of my wishlist. First I would prefer some simple fixes, like RPG hit on turret not damaging tracks and engine via splash damage.

T90==T72B chasis+T80U armaments, slightly simplified for export[to ease training].

No,T-90 IS domestic usage tank. Exports are T-90S (Export T-90A), and special "export" T-90, sometimes refered as T-90E, though it's not official. Both T-90 and T-90A are domestic usage tanks. Also note T-90S, while different from domestic usage T-90A, is no longer "money model" (downgraded) tank.

Edited April 13, 2011 by boota

[BasileyOne 10]

No,T-90 IS domestic usage tank. Exports are T-90S (Export T-90A), and special "export" T-90, sometimes refered as T-90E, though it's not official. Both T-90 and T-90A are domestic usage tanks. Also note T-90S, while different from domestic usage T-90A, is no longer "money model" (downgraded) tank.

wrong.

T-90 initially made as export and only export product.

then due to lack of interests and internal needs, some prepared units, converted into something suitable.

installed approprioate[to that weight-vehicle]engine, fixed FCS[to cope with T80UM line], and thats thing got official T90A designation after getting [considerably]improved APFSD, HEAT, he-frag and missile rounds.

also air conditioning system become built-in, not optional.

or in short "original T-90" simply can't be "domestic usage tank" because don't fit both Tank usage ideology and tank definition itself, mainly due to lack of mobility and few essential systems[most notably ISS, 1st introduced in LeClerc MBT].

similar fate had BMP3, though initially introduced in dual versions, which only later merged together on BMP4 model, which both fits domestic and export needs.

but basicly im agree, thats imrpving Arma2 physics significantly, can also increase CPU overhead so noticeably, so Arma2 can lose battlefield scale[on present hardware], for which we all love[way more than "realist" in encyclopedy-meaning].

Edited April 13, 2011 by BasileyOne

[msy 22]

oh look! The crews are dead around the wreck by the explosion!

They should run away instead of stay so closely.

[BasileyOne 10]

oh look! The crews are dead around the wreck by the explosion!

They should run away instead of stay so closely.

they got bad training in crew shool, i guess.

and they dead now :[

sad story&hard lesson.

[Tonci87 163]

ace you said ? lol ace have more bugs then game itself

put m1a1 and t90 on map.

as far as I remember m1a1 still usable after 15 sabots to turret - t90 blow after 5 or so.

Looks like to game bugs they added ace bugs (double buble lol)

p.s one my friend t90 crew in real life asked me why you only able to enter commander or driver seat from one side only - I don't what answer him :)

If you attack the M1A1 from front this is very true. But if you attack it from behind, he will be Toast after only one hit.

There was some testing some Time ago, T-90 VS M1A1. There wasn´t a clear winner, each one had its advantages and disadvantages.

For Example M1A1 had a strong front armour, T-90 had more Ammo types and even guided rockets that can esily destroy the M1A1.

The thing with the entering....well thats Arma^^

[sickboy 13]

Perhaps when peeps speak of "ACE has it" or "ACE has done it", you shouldn't take it as you MUST use ACE,

but rather as you can take a look at how it's done, giving you ideas and perhaps create something better yourself, or ask for permission to use (parts of) our code.

More a matter of not reinventing the wheel.

I find ace a drag on performance - many people have told me I should only get a 2/3 fps hit. This was the case with ARMA2 ACE... With OA1.9 I get a steady 8-10 gps decrease. Too many scripts going on and firefights are extremely voluminous to the point of making performance suffer.

Please find http://ace.armastack.info/index.php/157/low-performance-with-ace

ace you said ? lol ace have more bugs then game itself

put m1a1 and t90 on map.

as far as I remember m1a1 still usable after 15 sabots to turret - t90 blow after 5 or so.

Looks like to game bugs they added ace bugs (double buble lol)

p.s one my friend t90 crew in real life asked me why you only able to enter commander or driver seat from one side only - I don't what answer him :)

http://ace.dev-heaven.net/wagn/Bug_Reporting

Search the issue tracker, it's full of T90 and M1A1 claims, info, vehicle damage simulation system explaination, etc.

Both are setup to actual proven real-life data (as much as possible... There's a lot of unproven data out there). Super T90's are far from proven.

http://ace.dev-heaven.net/wagn/Vehicle_Damage_System

Plus we've added the T90A placeholder long ago, with improved turret armor, and TI.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Sickboy

[BasileyOne 10]

ACE hit fps so badly?

they dont discovered FSM usage, yet?

too bad.

[sickboy 13]

Im sick of readig this over and over agaim. ACE is no solution ACE is just another small MP Island to make sure players count is droppig even more. Right now you often can't fill regular Servers with players, using mods cuts the player count even more.

For years there's a solution to mods in MP, and it's called Addon Sync and Six Updater. You should try it sometime.

Don't think finger pointing, think solutions.. It's easy to blame.

ACE hit fps so badly?

they dont discovered FSM usage, yet?

too bad.

It's such thread again - ACE bashing time eh?

http://ace.armastack.info/index.php/157/low-performance-with-ace

FSM and spawned SQF makes no diff in performance, both are scheduled.

There's also plenty of time-sensitive events that you can't put into scheduled space, as scheduled scripts (FSM or SQF) can execute much (several milli-seconds, to several seconds, up to tens of) later than needed.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Sickboy

[BasileyOne 10]

It's such thread again - ACE bashing time eh?

http://ace.armastack.info/index.php/157/low-performance-with-ace

FSM and spawned SQF makes no diff in performance, both are scheduled.

There's also plenty of time-sensitive events that you can't put into scheduled space, as scheduled scripts (FSM or SQF) can execute much (several milli-seconds, to several seconds, up to tens of) later than needed.

ACE bashing is good idea "in general", cuz they deserve it, IMO.

please make it there/happen.

/peace&be the Jedi force w/you!

[sickboy 13]

ACE bashing is good idea "in general", cuz they deserve it, IMO.

please make it there/happen.

/peace&be the Jedi force w/you!

Lol, and what did we do to deserve it? Better yet, what did you actually do to think you can be judge of us hard working peeps?

It's easy passing judgement and conviction from your lazy chairs!

Be a real man - write tickets with bug reports and feedback, be part of the solution, not the problem.

Perhaps the thread can go back to the original subject, and peeps with ACE problems, bug reports and feedback, find our actual ACE Thread and Issue Tracker.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Sickboy

[SteveJA 12]

ACE bashing is good idea "in general", cuz they deserve it, IMO.

please make it there/happen.

/peace&be the Jedi force w/you!

Translate plz????

Edit: Sickboy im not sure he was anti Ace, the entire sentence was incoherent.

[sickboy 13]

Edit: Sickboy im not sure he was anti Ace, the entire sentence was incoherent.

I'm fine with Anti ACE, people shall think and feel what they want, just the unnecessary bashing every time in unrelated threads while we're hard working peeps ready to receive feedback and bug reports, is a little disappointing.

But yea - the sentence read a little weird indeed.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Sickboy

[Guest]

Translate plz????

Edit: Sickboy im not sure he was anti Ace, the entire sentence was incoherent.

Translated for you.

AEC BASHNG SI GOD IEDA IN G3N3RAL CUZ THEY DESARV3 IT PLZ!!!1! WTF LOL MAEK IT TH3R3/HAPAN

/PEAEC&B!11!!1111 WTF TEH J3DI FORCE U!!!!11!11 OMG

[king homer 1]

Just don't feed the trolls and they will stop spreading factoids.

[SteveJA 12]

I'm fine with Anti ACE, .

Im not. No one has the right to be Anti ACE. They may dislike it or avoid using it, but no one has the right to openly insult and try to damage the reputation of the ACE team.

[BasileyOne 10]

Translated for you.

AEC BASHNG SI GOD IEDA IN G3N3RAL CUZ THEY DESARV3 IT PLZ!!!1! WTF LOL MAEK IT TH3R3/HAPAN

/PEAEC&B!11!!1111 WTF TEH J3DI FORCE U!!!!11!11 OMG

haha, nice try.

especially like "OMG" ending :-P

*rofl*

[kireta21 13]

Im not. No one has the right to be Anti ACE. They may dislike it or avoid using it, but no one has the right to openly insult and try to damage the reputation of the ACE team.

There's ultimate way to "win against" ACE team: Do it better!

And I've yet to see anyone doing that.

Constructive critisism is always welcomed in any mod (well, unless modder is total douchebag, ugh...), especially if you have idea how to make it better. Bashing mod because it's not dream-come-true is pointless.

Edited April 13, 2011 by boota

[BasileyOne 10]

There's ultimate way to "win against" ACE team: Do it better!

And I've yet to see anyone doing that.

Constructive critisism is always welcomed in any mod (well, unless modder is total douchebag, ugh...), especially if you have idea how to make it better. Bashing mod because it's not dream-come-true is pointless.

if you want someone to "do it better" than you, you should do Better, himself.

to even get noticed by somebody. seriously. enough. to listen to you.

"in general" most constructive thing about rhetorical/sophistical playthings about "do it better" bs was ... to evade it. "don't argue with..." © thats it !

[Tonci87 163]

Seriously dude, again I don´t understand what the F*** you are talking about.

Get yourself a dictionary please

[SteveJA 12]

What i think he's done is typed something in a "make me sound clever" translator, and even the translator has failed to make sence haha!

But on a more serious note please try and improve your english. Im not expeting a linguisticst (cause English isn't everyones first language) but some of the posts your making are hard to understand and people may take offence.

Edited April 13, 2011 by SteveJA360

[Tonci87 163]

"make me sound clever" translator

Actually a quite nice business idea.....

[maddogx 13]

What i think he's done is typed something in a "make me sound clever" translator, and even the translator has failed to make sence haha!

Just check his posting history. 61 posts in just over 4,5 hours, that's one post every 4,5 minutes, on average. I don't think there was much in the way of spell checking involved. :D

Postcount spam, anyone?

[Tonci87 163]

I don´t think he will be here for long....

[BasileyOne 10]

I don´t think he will be here for long....

one year to be exact, if you insisting on disclosure.

---------- Post added at 03:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:13 PM ----------

Just check his posting history. 61 posts in just over 4,5 hours, that's one post every 4,5 minutes, on average. I don't think there was much in the way of spell checking involved. :D

Postcount spam, anyone?

yeah, yeah, old "good" bs - when you had nothing to say on Subj, switch to personality.

[sickboy 13]

Yea guys no need to resort to that which we convict :)