Rules of a addon

[dkraver 1]

There once where talk about making a rule set for addons, but i dont think it was ever put to life. After some of the last couple of post where people are afraid that there will be alot crap addons coming out when the O2 tool is released (and yes i know theres no date yet but this is something that could be put to use now) and sites talking about they will make rules for the addons posted on there sites, i think it would be a good idea to make a joint set of rules for addons, where the addon will get some kind of aprove mark to it, so people will know that it follow this set of rules. This will ensure that modmakers have a quality standard to aim at and that the community will get a better addons.

So who should decide what the rules are?? From reading some of the post it seems there already is some kind of rule set on the breathe forums but since i havent seen it i cant tell. But if i where to choose i would say people like Kegetys, Fliper (though it seems he is leaving the community) and the guys from Ballistic Addon Studio's who have shown that they stand for quality.

What should the rule set cover?? I would say all that is possible to cover. From previous post there where talk about:

-How many LODS there should be(Cant remember if it the right word, but the post with the info was deleted by mistake by Denoir  )

-Max polycount for the different kind of vehicles

Believe there where more but cant remember or see if there where more there (again thx to Denoir ), but would also see things like this to even addons

- Damage ratio by caliber.

Should be made a list of calibers being used and what damage it should do.

Example  7.62x51mm Nato = X damage

               7.62x39mm = X damage

- Damage/health in vehicles/men.

Should be made a list with a armour thickness (real life) to Damage/health ingame where also the size of the vehicle should have something to say. And maybe start this from the original models not to make them over/under powered. Also mentioned men if people decides to make player models with visible Fragmentation vests/bulletproof vests.

- Vehicle Speed

Also something with a RL speed to game speed.

Hmmm cant up with more right now but feel free to add more and pls dont get this post moved because of chit chat that can be done else where.

Maybe make it a sticky post??

Surgestions to Approved markings

[Ludovico Technique 0]

One thing that should be included with an addon is a list of what other addons are required to make it run.

[VXR 9]

i made this for ofpec

-The model of the Addon must have 4 distance lods or more.

-all the 4 or more lods may not be the same model as the 1 lod

-the polylimit for the first lod is 4500 polygons for the 4th lod it has to be 300 or less (useable for shadow)

-all the Distance Lods must have been skinned totaly.

-the model must have Geometry and Hitpoints lod to make it hitable.

-it must have a totaly skinned interior (so no BETAs)

-using models or skins of other people is not allowed without permission of the maker

so no saying i give him credit no you must have permission!

[Eviscerator 0]

the ingame speed is in kph in the config, so no need for a set rule there, anyway armour comparisons to ingame:

BMP-1 = 19/22mm (hull/turret) armor=200;

M1A1 = (no definate figures, but i did read once it had 720mm of armour on the front which was chobham armour) armor=900;

M113 = (figures from 3/4 of an inch to 1 1/2 inches, so going from 2.6cm to an inch its about 19mm to 39mm) armor=150;

T72 = (520mm/950mm against HEAT) armor=400;

(armour thickness found from various sites)

[Major Fubar 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (dkraver @ Aug. 22 2002,22:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">- Damage ratio by caliber.

Should be made a list of calibers being used and what damage it should do.

Example  7.62x51mm Nato = X damage

               7.62x39mm = X damage<span id='postcolor'>

I think a better standardized formula would be:

Bullet Weight (grains) * Muzzle Velocity (FPS) = X damage

or

Bullet Weight (grains) * Energy (Joules) = X damage

But the idea of creating standards for addons is an excellent one!

[KTottE 0]

Great that people actually wants to get involved in this =)

All this info will be available for all new addonmakers in a nice format (I'm not so sure I can tell you more) so that you don't have to dig up these posts everytime you need to check something.

I will personally try and contact all the major OFP sites, and have them all join in on this. So that any addons that doesn't follow these standards won't get hosted anywhere. Except on personal sites and so on. But that is fine, we can't censour addons, but we can put forth standards which we think all addons should follow. To ensure quality for the OFP Community.

But first we need to formalise it all.

Minimum number of LOD resolution levels: 4

Polycounts (not O2 counts)

Highest res LOD: 4500

Lowest res LOD: 300

NO BETAS All addons must be version 1.0 and fully modelled, skinned and functional. It is possible to have public beta-tests of course, but addons which are not completed will not be hosted on any of the major OFP sites (in our vision anyway)

Armor rates: These are here to give you guys an idea on how strong each vehicle is. Now you'll look at how many hits a M1A1 can take and set your armor value for your tank proportionally. Did anyone get that?

BMP-1 = armor=200;

M1A1 = armor=900;

M113 = armor=150;

T72 = armor=400;

Bullet damage

Undecided as of yet

Vehicle speed

Undecided as of yet

More on LODs:

All LODs must be finished. Exactly which LODs you need will be explained to you guys in greater detail once you get O2.

If even one LOD is missing, the addon will be counted as a BETA and will not be hosted on any major OFP site.

Notes

A lot of this info is still to be decided on, but when the info gets in I will edit this post to reflect that info. And like I said, in the end this will all make a neat and tidy info thingy for you guys to read.

And I would like to add my vote to that "Approved" sign.

Maybe add something like:

"This addon was approved by the OFP Community blah-blah"

Anyway, I'm off now. Catch ya guys later

[KKB 0]

I think the 300 for lowest poly count is too much (as 4500 is too much for highest), but why should other ppl suffer from me having still an Athlon 700

As much as I am in favour for a standard like this implemented by all major sites, I don't think it will happen because they would have to remove some popular addons.

[VXR 9]

ever seen a shadow that is made by using less 300 polys?

it does not look so good

useing a 300 poly lod as shadow gives a better shadow

[Rhubarbman 0]

Whast the point, ill just get my addons from Ofpec, as always there will be Rules for addons to be hosted.

[KKB 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ever seen a shadow that is made by using less 300 polys?

it does not look so good

useing a 300 poly lod as shadow gives a better shadow<span id='postcolor'>

I haven't read anywhere that it is not allowed to have more then 1 LOD with less than 300 faces.

[VXR 9]

you can have more than 1 lod doh but if you are using a lod with 300 polys u can better use that one for shadow

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Whast the point, ill just get my addons from Ofpec, as always there will be Rules for addons to be hosted. <span id='postcolor'>

the rules i post some posts above are the new rules of ofpec for a o2 addon submitting

[-CCCP-HAZARD 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">These are here to give you guys an idea on how strong each vehicle is. Now you'll look at how many hits a M1A1 can take and set your armor value for your tank proportionally. Did anyone get that?

BMP-1 = armor=200;

M1A1 = armor=900;

M113 = armor=150;

T72 = armor=400;

<span id='postcolor'>

Definate figures are

M60A3 250/600(with ERA)250(without ERA)

M1P1 360/550

M1A1 480/710

M1A1HA 590/1020

M1A2 750/1360

Leopard1A4 140/300(vulnerable to 30mm gunfire(!!!)

Leopard2A4 700/850

T-72BM1 520/950 (export version, the one used by Iraq forces)

T-72BM 710/1030

T-80U 780+/-20/~1400

T-90S rated from 710 to 830 KE and 1100 to 1450mm

Since modern armors are far more resistant to HEAT munitions(there is just one exception) then they are to KE penetrators it would be a good idea to work out a formula to handle the damage done by HEAT munitions in game. IMHO it should be something like <ammount of damage>/1.7 But also since IRL the armor on the sides is a lot weaker then up front but it's not the case in OFP the damage should slightly increased.

Rate of fire should also be decided upon, autoloaders are faster then manual loading their r.o.f. should be 8 for T-90 T-72, 9 for T-80, 10 for Lecklerc, 12 for Strv. 103(if anyone is planing on making one) 105mm manual loading tanks should have 7-8 rpm, 120mm manual loading tanks should have 6-7: Leopard should have 7 (its combat compartment houses 15 shells) Abrams should have 6 cuz his combat compartment houses only 8 shells, Challenger2 should probably have even less cuz his gun bored and there fore you have to combine the sabot's fin with the bores in the barrel.

[AirwolfPL 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KTottE @ Aug. 23 2002,11:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Great that people actually wants to get involved in this =)

(...)<span id='postcolor'>

Hello!

Great idea about standarizing addons. It's not a question if we should set some rules for addon makers, but what rules will be set. I just want to add some comments.

Minimum number of LOD resolution levels: depending on addon (for example - choppers or more complicated objects requires mor LODs (I think at least 5) when simple objects (for example soldiers or simple 'cubic' cars) needs only 4.

Polycounts

Highest LOD - 4500 is a good value,

but proposed Lowest LOD (300 polys) isn't good - in fact it should be much lower - 100 or even less. You can only create LOD with highest polycount for projecting shadows

(I'm used to create 8 LODs for choppers - 0.75, 1.5, 3.0, 6.0, 9.0, 12.0 (used for shadows), 16.0 and 22.0 - polygon drop-down varies from 1000 for first three LODs, through 500 and 100 for 16.0 and 22.0)

NO BETAS - I agree, but remember, that some beta add-ons looks (and works) better than other final add-ons...

------------

Textures - creating good textures is very important thing, but remember that, textures should be prepared to be technically correct - it means, that there shouldn't be wasted space in the texture file - if you have empty space on a texture - use it to place some other textures there instead of placing them in the separate files. Creating 512x512 textures for small details (for example reflectors, wipers etc) is also unacceptable.

readme.txt - It should include standarized header,

describing addon's title, version, author's name, e-mail, homepage. There should be also list of addon-s which are required to use this addon (including file names, and perhaps some URL). This file should also contain copyright notices etc.

Only acceptable format for readme file is a pure text, no lame-docs, pdf-s, html etc. One image (screenshot) of addon, included in the addon archive.

PBO File - standarized name for the file. For example:

MOD_UNIT_vX.pbo

or AUTHORINITIALS_UNIT_vX.pbo if it's not part of a MOD.

PBO file shouldn't contain any junk like duplicated (backed up) p3d files, model source-files (3ds, dxf etc), duplicated cpp files, unusable textures etc etc.

It's all for now ;-)

[KTottE 0]

Thanks, I hadn't even thought about textures, readmes or PBO's.

Great that you pointed that out. I will start creating some sort of compiled rules out of this, when I am nearly done I'll show it to other ModMakers and see what they think. If they say OK, then it will be distributed in a suggestion e-mail to all the major OFP sites.

[Rhubarbman 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Vixer @ Aug. 23 2002,11:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">you can have more than 1 lod doh but if you are using a lod with 300 polys u can better use that one for shadow

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Whast the point, ill just get my addons from Ofpec, as always there will be Rules for addons to be hosted. <span id='postcolor'>

the rules i post some posts above are the new rules of ofpec for a o2 addon submitting<span id='postcolor'>

Yes but it still has to get past a certain quality before u post it up?

[Eviscerator 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote ([CCCP]HAZARD @ Aug. 23 2002,11:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">[snip]<span id='postcolor'>

you also have to take into account the type of armour, modern day Chobham 2 used on the challenger 2 is going to be a lot better than the armour used in ww2 of the same thickness

and for reload times there are normally figures around on the internet or on tv programs that will give the information

[Matthijs 40]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Major Fubar @ Aug. 23 2002,06:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (dkraver @ Aug. 22 2002,22:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">- Damage ratio by caliber.

Should be made a list of calibers being used and what damage it should do.

Example  7.62x51mm Nato = X damage

               7.62x39mm = X damage<span id='postcolor'>

I think a better standardized formula would be:

Bullet Weight (grains) * Muzzle Velocity (FPS) = X damage

or

Bullet Weight (grains) * Energy (Joules) = X damage

But the idea of creating standards for addons is an excellent one!<span id='postcolor'>

Ratio by caliber would be more realistic.

Although NATO caliber has a harder punch and reaches much further than .223, the .223 projectiles have a more devastating effect on a human body. This is mainly because the projectile is lighter, and thus prone to yawing/tumbling at impact.

By the way, mass*velocity=(kinetic)energy

mass*energy would be quite unlogical...

The most realistic would be to create a table for caliber+projectile. Then again, let's stick to FMJ for simplicity. I vote for a caliber table. Just make sure it incorporates full info. A .50 for the IMI Desert Eagle does not equal a .50 BMG...  not by far!

No doubt, I've been a professional.

[Eviscerator 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote ([CCCP]HAZARD @ Aug. 23 2002,11:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Rate of fire should also be decided upon, autoloaders are faster then manual loading their  r.o.f. should be 8 for T-90 T-72, 9 for T-80, 10 for Lecklerc, 12 for Strv. 103(if anyone is planing on making one)  105mm manual loading tanks should have 7-8 rpm, 120mm manual loading tanks should have 6-7: Leopard should have 7 (its combat compartment houses 15 shells) Abrams should have 6 cuz his combat compartment houses only 8 shells, Challenger2 should probably have even less cuz his gun bored and there fore you have to  combine the sabot's fin with the bores in the barrel.<span id='postcolor'>

actually some manual loaders can load about twice as fast as an auto loader, take the T-72/T80 and abrams for example, the auto loader takes about 8 seconds while the manual loader can load in 3-4 seconds

oh and the SABOT rounds look similar to the HEAT rounds, they only discard the casing and deploy the fins once they are fired:

APFSDS (Armour Piercing Fin Stabilised Discarding Sabot)

Grey:

Penetrator

Yellow/light green:

Sabot

Blue

Case w/ propellant

Black

Base/Stub w/ igniter

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Matthijs @ Aug. 23 2002,22:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">By the way, mass*velocity=(kinetic)energy<span id='postcolor'>

No,

mass * velocity ^2 = energy

Mass * velocity = linear momentum

[blackdog~ 0]

I watched a show on the discovery channel about tanks and training, and that the tank crews must be able to load missles in at least 7 seconds.

That was for the Abrams, the same loading time as the T80... the game got it pretty well.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Aug. 23 2002,22:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Matthijs @ Aug. 23 2002,22:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">By the way, mass*velocity=(kinetic)energy<span id='postcolor'>

No,

mass * velocity ^2 = energy

Mass * velocity = linear momentum <span id='postcolor'>

Yep, so you should be using mass * velocity ^2 = energy for the damage multiplier

Could also consider the strength of the projectile......

[Major Fubar 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Matthijs @ Aug. 23 2002,22:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ratio by caliber would be more realistic.

Although NATO caliber has a harder punch and reaches much further than .223, the .223 projectiles have a more devastating effect on a human body. This is mainly because the projectile is lighter, and thus prone to yawing/tumbling at impact.

By the way, mass*velocity=(kinetic)energy

mass*energy would be quite unlogical...

The most realistic would be to create a table for caliber+projectile. Then again, let's stick to FMJ for simplicity. I vote for a caliber table. Just make sure it incorporates full info. A .50 for the IMI Desert Eagle does not equal a .50 BMG...  not by far!

No doubt, I've been a professional. <span id='postcolor'>

Cailbre isn't realistic: 7.62 x 51mm (.308 NATO) is the same calibre as 7.69 x 39mm Soviet, but is a heavier projectile with more power behind it.

I don't see what is wrong with my formula. Generally, a heavier projectile flying faster = more damage.

Of course ballistics is more complex than that, but you can't really take things like FMJ/hollowpoint etc. into account in a game like OFP.

Rating by calibre isn't very realistic though. .30 carbine ammo and .30-06 ammo are the same calibre, but you can bet your ass a .30-06 is gonna do a lot more damage to a body.

[KTottE 0]

Couldn't we look at how much damage the actual weapon does.

Like:

M16 does X amount of damage, so that is reflected in the config.cpp.

AK-74 does Y amount of damage, so that is reflected in the config.cpp.

Because even if the M16 and M249 fire the same bullets (which they do) the M249 has a higher rate of fire and a lot of other small things which makes them different.

[-CCCP-HAZARD 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">actually some manual loaders can load about twice as fast as an auto loader, take the T-72/T80 and abrams for example, the auto loader takes about 8 seconds while the manual loader can load in 3-4 seconds

<span id='postcolor'>

No they can't, IRL there is a lot factors such as fatigue, human loaders will become tired after loading 4-5 shells at the rate you described, tanks traveling over rough ground, if the tank is shaking the loader would be able to load them as fast. And the most important thing is that on the abrams for example there are 8 shells in the combat compartment and the rest are in the turet bustle which is basicaly behind the loader and about shoulder level, taking shellls from there and loading the at r.o.f. you say is beyond human efort.

The reason auto loaders were introduced because they are faster then manual loading. The fulll loading cycle on the T-80 takes 6 seconds.

[Major Fubar 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KTottE @ Aug. 24 2002,09:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Couldn't we look at how much damage the actual weapon does.

Like:

M16 does X amount of damage, so that is reflected in the config.cpp.

AK-74 does Y amount of damage, so that is reflected in the config.cpp.

Because even if the M16 and M249 fire the same bullets (which they do) the M249 has a higher rate of fire and a lot of other small things which makes them different.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, but were talking about how to calculate X and Y.

Guns like M16 and AK47 have ingame damage values, but what about weapons that fire a completely different cartridge.

Damage should be based around existing ingame figures, but you still need a formula to calcualte realistic damage figures for new weapons.

Hmm, maybe I could dig up my old Twilight 2000 manuals for some damage figures...