Some units that would be intresting in resistance

[Legion5 0]

well with the upcoming resistance XP there are some units that i think would would be cool in resistance.

Well first off in one of the earlier american mission u hear them talking bout an aircraft carrier but there is none in game yes the game is set 3 years earlier but this could be part of a mission where you have to steal a boat or helicopter and tell the americans of the atrocites that have been done to your peopel

Also the harrier from the marine version would be nice   with a few other like 1 or 2 carrier aircraft.

Finaly some civilian building improvments like opening doors and the refiting of those building with just the black in the doors that look uncompleted.

Actual destructabel buildings, it always anoyed me how when I crashed my tank goin 80 down a hill into a building and not even a  scorch mark

Also there is a lack of women and children but this isnt that obviouse.

The game is due in about a month and is probabley in the QA stages or in the last mission stages but this would make a killer patch or a last mission

[N.o.R.S.u 0]

I hope BIS has taken time to make some nice Russian vehicles & weapons rather than giving more stuff for NATO, because NATO is, what i've read, not seen very often in Resistance. And of course there's a load of civilian vehicles in Resistance (hopefully some armed civilian cars like a rusty UAZ with MG).

[LordZach 0]

why would USMC give harriers to some island boys?

[Legion5 0]

well as I said before the carrier would be a cool last mission where the resistance has to steal a helicopter and contact a Nato carrier that hariers and other planes on it.

The mission would go like this.

You start out in a tent and your comander tells you that they have just heard that a US carrier will be patroling near here and that they need to contact them so that they can help them. Your mission is to get the the carrier with an aircraft radio it so your not shot down and then land on it and tell the captain of what has been hapening on islands and what the russians have been dooing

This would just be a cool unit and i think they already have the model for it in the marine training version so it wouldnt be that hard.

[Legion5 0]

bump carriers r cool

[Antichrist 0]

BTR-80!!! Its a symbol of a Russian army!!!!

[EBass 0]

I still think this game needs some Artilliary, SP maybe

[LordZach 0]

contrary to some beliefs carriers don't patrol alone half a mile off shore, so in order to make it realistic you would have to fly for like half an hour just to end the mission.

arty would be nice too, but mainly only for the AI unless you want to manually try to set the range or just click on some coords.

and carriers don't have harriers, amphibious assault ships do. if a carrier was really patroling right off shore i think they would notice the ruskees going in and blowing up the towns. i don't mean to critisize just pointing out kind of useless.

[m79 0]

I would like to see some BTR's

KPV

NSV

RPK ,

RPG-7V

RPD , you will find this in any half arsed mountain boys inventory

Rifle grenade for the AK

T-62M's

maybe also a Mi2 for resitance

[Blake 0]

RPG-7 definately!

The very symbol of robust and reliable Soviet arms technology alongside AK-47.

[Gollum1 0]

Hmmm...I doubt that the U.S or NATO will just say: Oh you poor thing! We´ll gladly waste time, resources and the lives of our men to rescue your puny little island which isn´t allied to us in any way and where military intervention by us could cause WWIII and, therefore, the apocalypse.

The U.S supported the Afghans in their fight against the Sovs, too, but only with some training and weapons (discreetly, I might add).

BIS has obviously adopted this approach (cameo by James Gastovski)

So there.

And BTW, a BTR would be cool.

[Legion5 0]

YES!

Well the carrier would probably not be patroling off the coast of (i think its called dunmberg or somthing) but maybey kokuchev(yes that is spelt wrong 2).

Hmm amphibiouse assult ships u say  

(sorry that is what I meant in the first place they do look suprisingly alike)

If im not mistaken there are sevral NATO military bases on the other 2 islands and maybey it could be on tis way to refule and just in range.

Any ways here is the revised list of units that would be cool:

Boats:

Aircraft carrier

Assult ship(aircraft carrier isnt that realistic but assult ship is)

[you know how it looks]

Life raft (for pilot eject with padel so I dont die in the watter pilot only)

ACLC(would be cool impractical)

Aircraft:

C-130 Herculese(here is what I have in mind)

AV8B Harrier II (they already have the model for the marine version)

F-16 (The US has tons of them stationed everywhere, besides dogfights would be cool)

EA-6B Prowler (it looks so cool and its secondary config is a carrier or large assult ship based ground atack plane)

Vehicels:

M2 Bradley IFV(self explanitory, the version with the side mounted M-16's is missing from the game)

SA-6 GAINFUL Surface to Air Missile(A-10 this!)

Weapons:

M82A1 Special Application Scoped Rifle(meet MY sniper rifel! )

Shoulder-Launched Assault Weapon (SAW) (ive got a present for ya IVAN! )

M224 60mm Lightweight Mortar (and the game said it had mortar infantry )

RPK

RPG-7V

RPD

T-62M's

(sorry hard to find pics of these)

[dinger 1]

well, they do have the static artillery pieces in there; they just need to activate them.

BTRs: hell yeah!  That would be solid.

As for the rest of artillery -- sorry, but OFP is centered around FP stuff.  Artillery would require a whole  bunch of people to slaughter, and they wouldn't be front-line troops (Geez, who's gonna wipe out the FDC and survey folks? Tacfire I can understand...).  It would also imply a larger-scale conflict (heck -- artillery needs at least a platoon-sized target, and preferably something bigger).  Finally, a realistic call for fire would take time and require a viewrange greater than 900.

--Of course, if you still want realistic artillery, I am looking for folks to take a look at my FA simulator script.  It simulates forward observing for between a platoon and a (geographically dispersed) battalion of artillery, with most munitions and fuze types, and realistic distributions/error.  But you'd have to read the field manuals to use it fully, and even then, I doubt OFP can support it.  (Still if you want, drop me an email: dinger@raf303.org)

For the rest, OFP needs to concentrate on what it does best: small-scale infantry battles.  Improve the damage model and the multiplayer, and I'll be happy. 60mm mortars would be nice.

[Major Fubar 0]

Maybe some Soviet weapons for the resistance (I base this on the fact they have AK-47s and T-55s):

RPD

RPK-47

SKS

PPSh-41

Also some civilian type weapons (like maybe a bolt action hunting rifle for use as a "sniper" weapon).

[LordZach 0]

i think i found something you will like Legion5

Jane's Fleet Command because all those units you mentioned are really quite useless except for the C-130 (which doesn't fly off carriers nor does it sit at small airbases) and some of the russian units you mentioned. this is a game about civilians turned militia versus the Russians, America doesn't get involved, so why waste time adding US units?

[Guest Scooby]

Why dont we all stop this nonsense of adding carries and such into OFP.

If we leave aside such improvements like better physics and damage modelling which most likely would be too hard to do to OFP anymore it would still leave us with alot more important features to add than aircraft carries.

I've been telling this since OFP's demo came out, now, let me say it again.

AP mines. Even small stepmines would be improvement. Adding pipe mines, claymores and stepmines would really add some strategy to game.

Animation for short and long leap. At the moment soldiers just take alot more time in getting up, doing short run forward and getting down. So, maybe two different animated sequences for this would do. Short leap would take 3 seconds and long leap would take 5 seconds. Everyone who has been in army knows what I mean.

Mortars. 60 or 81mm mortars would add some flavor to game. Though some sort of even somehow realistic aiming system should be added with them. Point and click aiming would be unacceptable. Pete could explain more. I know nothing about mortars.

Static AT missile systems: TOW, Proper Russian AT-4

Two options how to do this. Either so that mission maker would place it to map like heavy MG's or so that there would be simplified way to assemble them to map in such way that one unit would be divided to two or three parts. First soldier would place tripod, second would place rest of the weapon. Weapon parts would take up space in weapon slots. Simplified way because OFP does not allow big enough amounts of players.

Ability to fire LAW and RPG from prone position: You want to stay as low as you can when you go to shoot IFV (or in case of OFP also MBT's) with AT weapon.

Some tweaking of current settings how infantry and vehicles engage helos. At the moment soldiers dont shoot helos. They should do it if ordered. Damage done to small arms against for example MI-24 is small but idea is not to down helo but to force it to gain altitude and to damage its systems.

Even BMP-2 does not shoot helos even though one of the reasons it has so good elavation in its gun is that it could shoot helicopters.

Some minor details: Backblast for LAW, RPG. Frontblast of MBT's main gun can be lethal up to 50 meters.

These are first issues that came into my mind. Especially ability to move fast by leaping and some resistance against helos from ground units would be somewhat important changes.

[N.o.R.S.u 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Some minor details: Backblast for LAW, RPG. Frontblast of MBT's main gun can be lethal up to 50 meters.<span id='postcolor'>

Exactly, adding this as a difficulty option would be very good idea, because it would make LAWs & RPGs much more tactical.

[Legion5 0]

well most of those things are prety much usless in game but the main thing that would be important would be the inflatabel raft for the pilots. The second would the mortar. Third the harrier. Fourth the assult ship. Fifth the EA-6B and lastly the SA-6 SAM.

these would all be cool aditions to the game and would enhance SP ME and MP

[LordZach 0]

SA-6 is not built for the OFP environment

EA-6B would only be useful for the AI jamming a shilka's radar or something

[m79 0]

good call on the backblast.

I would like to see more accuratly modelled ATGM's like an AT-4 or 7 and a tow or even a Super dragon if they want to keep it simple to implement.

Being able to dig in would be cool as well , oh and a way to CLEAR mines , an engineer can lay emm but you cant clear them , also there is no way of warning of mine presence to incoming armour to avoid, a bit lame really, you can pick up sachels but not the mines , can anyone fix this?

[Darkhawk 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (LordZach @ May 22 2002,04:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">SA-6 is not built for the OFP environment

EA-6B would only be useful for the AI jamming a shilka's radar or something<span id='postcolor'>

it would be good for jamming all radars because you then are blind and dont know where the other aircraft are so you cant shoot them down

[LordZach 0]

yeah but what kind of challenge would that be?

i don't know if the EA-6B can jam an entire island tho

you could disarm a minefield with mines placed in the editor with a very simple script but i don't know about engineer layed mines without making a mod

[lonesoldier 0]

Yeah

[Legion5 0]

The EA-6B would be used to jam tank radars to give you an advantage vs the enemy. It also can be outfited to be a ground assult plane. The SA-6 would be used for credibel AA. Shilkas just arent enough to be a threat and that mission where u had to take out 3 of them was a joke because when I fly my planes I almost never get hit by their AA and usualy take them out. The SA-6 would make missions like that more relistic.

[hellfish6 7]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Legion5 @ May 22 2002,19:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The EA-6B would be used to jam tank radars to give you an advantage vs the enemy. It also can be outfited to be a ground assult plane. The SA-6 would be used for credibel AA. Shilkas just arent enough to be a threat and that mission where u had to take out 3 of them was a joke because when I fly my planes I almost never get hit by their AA and usualy take them out. The SA-6 would make missions like that more relistic.<span id='postcolor'>

Tanks don't have radars. An EA-6B CAN'T be outfitted as a ground attack plane because it's way too expensive and too rare. They carry HARM anti-radar missiles and that's it. No bombs or anything. And they wouldn't use HARMs against ZSUs. That's what cluster bombs and Mavericks are for. HARMs are for the big radar/SAM systems like SA-11s, SA-10s, SA-12, etc.

Airplanes in OFP are, frankly, pointless. I love the Hawk and AMX models, but that's because they aren't really too big for the islands. F-16s, F-14s, Mig-29s, Su-27s, etc. would be totally pointless except as scenery at an airport. There simply isn't enough room to play with them. OFP is an INFANTRY simulator, first and foremost, not a FLIGHT simulator.

Besides, if BIS or anyone else put in an F-16, people would complain about it constantly because it won't be any fun to play with. Why have an aircraft with missiles that have a range of anywhere from 6-50 km when the island itself is only 10 km wide? Why waste time on that when there are so many other weapons, vehicles and helicopters to add to the game (like RPG-7s, RPKs, BTRs, BMDs, TOWs, Dragons, AT-4, AT-7, AT-3, SAWs, etc.)?