L85A2 Release

[kiory 405]

I've just had conformation that you would get a black eye if you did put your eye any where near the susat, some guys have even had their brow slit open in some cases. This is information from people who have served or who are serving, maybe you have mixed your scopes up?

Not looking to cause an argument here but it doesn't seem safe to put your eye against something that would do that.

[markh7991 10]

Reference the light reflecting on the lens, it's not limited to Kiorys' SUSAT; the FHQ ACOG is a prime example and I'm sure other 3D sights will be the same, probably to do with the game engine. (By default, the in-game sights are also 3D but there is a mod for 2D sights, not sure if you're using it.)

As for fitting the sight to HMG; the sight picture probably would be alright, although the reticule would be wrong (since it's the SUSA that's used on the HMG.) And this is where having your eye to the sight whilst firing is definitely not recommended!

Kio, apologies for the slight thread hijack!

Ah. so the .50 uses a SUSA. Never new that. I must have a 2D thing on asd the FHQ ACOG looked ok. Or maybe its not the FHQ one I'm running......too many mods.

Kiory, if you jammed your eye right in there, yes you'd get a black eye. But trust me when I say the rubber was on the top of my eye socket at all times. I remember rubbing off black marks from around my eye after live firing exercises vividly. I had an old rifle and sight and the rubber wasn't exactly tip top shape. Theres little kick off the rifle if you hold it like a man LOL.

As a point of interest (or not :P) if you're too far from the sight you cannot ensure the outside circle of the sight picture is all solid. If its solid and not blurred your sight picture is perfect which is a big deal at 400m. I'm prob paraphrasing here but "Ensure sight alignment i.e sight picture is correct" this is the point in a rifle lesson you'd go through the eye relief distance and position on the cheek piece.

To be fair I've seen some odd and basically bad habits on the range but the shooter do very well indeed. Usually though they had an odd collimator (spelling?) reading to zero but I always bore sighted. Fore grips are something of an enigma to me also as you were told to rest the foregrip on your palm and not grip it. I can only really see an advantage as extra control while shooting standing for extended periods.

Totally off topic now so I'll stop there.

Edited March 8, 2014 by markh7991

[da12thMonkey 1943]

but you have to remember that in game, having it so close to the character model can potentially lead to clipping errors, especially with a helmet model.

Having the eye memory point too far behind the eyepiece is what tends to cause that. Pulling it too far back is what causes the shoulder to occlude the sight picture in some of the crouched stances, as described here. Placing it close to the eyepiece is actually better in that respect, but you get all sorts of shitty "tunnel vision" through the sight due to the game's FOV angle.

Frankly, 3D scopes are shite to make :\

Regarding making the reticle illumination less bright during the day, make the red, illuminated part a separate object with a red procedural texture and apply this .rvmat

That way, the red illumination will go bright or dark (near black during the day) depending on ambient light levels. Actually works better on 3D sights than 2D ones.

[scrim 1]

LOL

1st one isn't even British. 2nd one the guys are wearing glasses and the 3rd is correct however he hasn't even cocked the rifle so is posing for the pic.

Trust me on this. It wasn't that long ago and I frequently came top in IBSR shoots and APWT's as a regular soldier. Point is you don't get any adverse light effects on the glass looking in while aiming.

You know, you'll probably get your point, whatever it is, through better to any given addon maker if you're not rude to him. Like, common sense?

[MacA 1]

As a point of interest (or not :P) if you're too far from the sight you cannot ensure the outside circle of the sight picture is all solid. If its solid and not blurred your sight picture is perfect which is a big deal at 400m. I'm prob paraphrasing here but "Ensure sight alignment i.e sight picture is correct" this is the point in a rifle lesson you'd go through the eye relief distance and position on the cheek piece.

What you're talking about is Parallax error and it happens when you're too close to the objective too, not just when you're too far away. The human pupil can only accept it's own size in light, which is why the exit pupil for the SUSAT is 6.3mm. Go too close to the objective and you'll have a parallax error, which means each shot placement will be completely different at 400m, unless you can re-place your eye in exactly the same place, with no error (physically impossible as human beings). Go too far away and exactly the same will happen.

I never had my eye resting on the rubber surround of the sight unit, I always observed it as a bad habit - but if it worked for them, why not? It is however, an incorrect principle.;)

Mac.

[markh7991 10]

Eh. ok. Point is pretty obvious. pretty clever guys on this forum so I shouldn't need to spell it out. Common sense.

---------- Post added at 14:43 ---------- Previous post was at 14:39 ----------

What you're talking about is Parallax error and it happens when you're too close to the objective too, not just when you're too far away. The human pupil can only accept it's own size in light, which is why the exit pupil for the SUSAT is 6.3mm. Go too close to the objective and you'll have a parallax error, which means each shot placement will be completely different at 400m, unless you can re-place your eye in exactly the same place, with no error (physically impossible as human beings). Go too far away and exactly the same will happen.

I never had my eye resting on the rubber surround of the sight unit, I always observed it as a bad habit - but if it worked for them, why not? It is however, an incorrect principle.;)

Mac.

Yep I've heard the term before.

I'm not being rude here for what its worth but it would appear I was taught incorrectly and have taught incorrectly myself following that then in that case (basic training, 1st class private and NCO's cadre) however the 3rd picture Kiory put up is the better one for an example of what is correct. My point was if the eye relief is 25mm the depth of the eye piece must have been at least 20mm from the lens.

---------- Post added at 15:04 ---------- Previous post was at 14:43 ----------

Having the eye memory point too far behind the eyepiece is what tends to cause that. Pulling it too far back is what causes the shoulder to occlude the sight picture in some of the crouched stances, as described here. Placing it close to the eyepiece is actually better in that respect, but you get all sorts of shitty "tunnel vision" through the sight due to the game's FOV angle.

Frankly, 3D scopes are shite to make :\

Regarding making the reticle illumination less bright during the day, make the red, illuminated part a separate object with a red procedural texture and apply this .rvmat

That way, the red illumination will go bright or dark (near black during the day) depending on ambient light levels. Actually works better on 3D sights than 2D ones.

Yes, this sounds promising. I need to learn more about how this is all done clearly before I make assumptions and give this kind of input :P

[MacA 1]

I'm not being rude here for what its worth but it would appear I was taught incorrectly and have taught incorrectly myself following that then in that case (basic training, 1st class private and NCO's cadre) however the 3rd picture Kiory put up is the better one for an example of what is correct. My point was if the eye relief is 25mm the depth of the eye piece must have been at least 20mm from the lens.

Just out of curiosity, what Reg' were you in?

Mac.

[markh7991 10]

1rhf '97-'03

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

I honestly think we need a RIS L85 more then we need Arty atm. :L Just what I think.

[markh7991 10]

@ MacA.

Best summary ever: http://www.arrse.co.uk/wiki/Royal_Highland_Fusiliers

And FYI page 14: http://www.rnrmra.org/Documents/PASARA/P&SACST_Marksmanship_Notes-A5C.pdf

"With the head in this position the right eyebrow should lightly touch the edge of the SUSAT eye piece. This will give optimum eye relief. A clear circular view of the target should be obtained. It may be necessary to move the head slightly to correct any eclipse. Care must be taken to ensure that the front lip of the combat helmet does not press down on the rear of the SUSAT."

I see what you mean by the reflection on the FHQ ACOG. Its a little distracting. If it was a bit more transparent it would be better.

Edited March 9, 2014 by markh7991

[doom_sharpe 10]

Please increase the damage, or show us how to do it manually, because now it takes an entire clip just to kill 1 guy.

[hannibal2210 1]

Please increase the damage, or show us how to do it manually, because now it takes an entire clip just to kill 1 guy.

Damage values are determined by the ammo not the weapon, you need to change the value of the ammo not the L85.

There are several mods on the forum that handle that.

[mihikle 2]

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?171382-NATO-5-56-and-7-62-adjustor

That should help you out mate :)

[denco 16]

The download link seems to be dead.

[Guest]

Both links in the first post work fine form me, but if you continue to have issues you can of course get it from here too :

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=23169

:)

[denco 16]

Both links in the first post work fine form me, but if you continue to have issues you can of course get it from here too :

http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=23169

:)

Thanks Foxhound :)

[.kju 3245]

Can you please state clearly the dependencies/required addons so that armaholic and play withSIX can state them:

- Added support for Iansky's and FHQ optics on the picatinny version.

Thanks a lot!

[mihikle 2]

^ I don't think there's any dependencies mate, just running Vanilla with this mod I get no errors or anything.

[doom_sharpe 10]

I think Kiory is right actually, there is a definite lack of artillery to the game, and the m119 would make a nice (and necessary) addition. Can't wait to see the GL and LDS, Any ideas of a release date (ish?)

---------- Post added at 14:51 ---------- Previous post was at 13:58 ----------

Also, whenever i place the ammobox, i get this error?

no entry bin\config.bin/cgfweapons.iansky_rds

Why does this happen?

[doom_sharpe 10]

Also, I would like to request an L129A1.

[p_siddy 58]

I have already pestered Kiory to death about the L129A1, I think he's added it to the long list of things to do.

[doom_sharpe 10]

I am so excited for the GL

[doom_sharpe 10]

Need to see an l86a2 also. Trixie did one, but the textures are not that great.

[bravo93 37]

Need to see an l86a2 also. Trixie did one, but the textures are not that great.

The model for Trixie's L86 is pretty good. Like I don't see anything being mindbogglingly better if it's made from scratch. The textures on his newest version I did and they took about 10-15 minutes and I only did it to get some similarity between Kiory's L85 and the L86 because in real life I think 80% of the parts are exchangeable. I didn't really touch the barrel etc as that looked kind of fiddly. I when I say I did, that's basically me chopping up bits of Kiory's and sticking them on ;) Point is it's free for anyone to retexture (along with the L85 I believe) so don't see much point in a new model especially as the British have been phasing them out for years in real life. The L129 is what I wanna see!!! ;)

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

Kiory should really finish this: http://www.twitch.tv/kiory123/b/512458748