BWMod

[Guest]

The Armaholic mirror has been updated with the new version:

 

 

BWMod v1.5.1

BWMod ACE comp v1.5-1

 

Community Base addons A3

[Tittoffer 6]

On 19.12.2016 at 6:48 PM, kickapoo0 said:

@Tittoffer

never forget to ask for permission, to make sure, you stay out of trouble!

If you want to reskin our content, you can do so.

If you want to publish your reskins, don´t forget to make the (whole)BWmod a dependency for your

skins and give credit for the BWmod Team.

 

Late post, but still: Our modpack is dependant on the BW mod (We like to use the german units as Nato forces). Also our mod is not shared anywhere else, hopefully it will not create any issues :) Again, thank you for a great mod and not to mention the fix that worked wonderfully! :) 

[lionhawk123 20]

It seems that sometimes the PARS 3 from the Tiger will not lock on to ground vehicle targets. So far it seems totally random, I can't figure out any pattern. It's more reliable with human gunners than AI but it still happens sometimes, so I assume it's a problem with the Tiger. Has anyone else experienced this?

[fourjays 27]

Are the engines of the vehicles you are targeting turned on? Since 1.70 it seems that the thermal signature of a vehicle is actually taken into account, so cold targets aren't lockable.

 

We're having a problem with laser locking though. Can turn the laser on, can lock onto it, but the missile will not follow the lock and instead goes straight ahead. Almost every laser-capable missile in Arma has the issue since 1.70 - in the case of RHS it is because the hellfire inherited from a class that was changed in the Jets DLC update (although the RHS helicopters can't even lock without a fix). Could it be something similar here?

[heavygunner 179]

Will the Tiger be updated to use the dynamic loadout system?

[marc_book 95]

3 hours ago, heavygunner said:

Will the Tiger be updated to use the dynamic loadout system?

We would like to do that but we are not able to do that unfortunately. Currently we have animations in our weapon models and they would be lost if they are in a proxy.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

32 minutes ago, marc_book said:

Currently we have animations in our weapon models and they would be lost if they are in a proxy.

 

The Jets DLC update has support for various animations on the pylon magazine proxies as part of dynamic loadouts. revolving, ammo and reload sources all work on those proxies.

The new pylonpod proxy simulation type is a little different to other proxies in that regard.

 

Also, rocket warhead models and things are individual ammunition proxies inside the magazine pod proxy model, so they disappear the same as maverickWeapon simulation when fired. So you don't even need to animate those anymore.

 

Understandably it's quite a lot of work to update these things though.

[marc_book 95]

5 hours ago, da12thMonkey said:

 

The Jets DLC update has support for various animations on the pylon magazine proxies as part of dynamic loadouts. revolving, ammo and reload sources all work on those proxies.

The new pylonpod proxy simulation type is a little different to other proxies in that regard.

 

Also, rocket warhead models and things are individual ammunition proxies inside the magazine pod proxy model, so they disappear the same as maverickWeapon simulation when fired. So you don't even need to animate those anymore.

 

Understandably it's quite a lot of work to update these things though.

Thanks a lot for this information. Never heard that. Maybe we will be able to reduce our section count with this. I will check this in the near future. I have a lot to do at the moment.

[heavygunner 179]

I'm glad  I could help. :p

 

More seriously, thanks for all the hard work.

[lionhawk123 20]

Are there any plans for the Dynarange device for the PzF 3? It's a lazer rangefinder that is integrated into the optics of the PzF. In real life it calculates range and lead depending on the warhead being used. As far as Arma goes, I doubt it would be easy (or even possible) to make it calculate lead without some serious tweaking, but I think it could be possible to integrate a range-finding optic, no? Just a thought. Thanks for all the great work!

[commy2 188]

No. I have some scripts for it (proof of concept for the functionality / scripting) on my hard drive, but no one made a model, party because there is no suitable references (high quality pictures of details - not images from google) available.

[lionhawk123 20]

Is the model the only thing you would need? A friend of mine is getting into modelling, I could possibly work with him to get you a good model, but I don't know anything about texturing or anything like that.

[Damian90 697]

BWMod team, a question, were you thinking about adding Leopard 2A7V through modification of your Leopard 2A6M model?

 

 

Leopard 2A7V is a final version of Leopard 2A7 upgrade, besides what A7 variant added like improved sights, APU etc. It also adds addon armor for front hull and mounting points for addon armor for hull and turret sides, so vehicle can be also uparmored. So it can look more or less like that fully uparmored altough with less changes to the model, like external sights are the same shape as in A6M, it lacks RWS etc.

 

 

It would be a really great addition and would fit perfectly in to 2020-2030+ time frame of the current BWMod.

 

 

 

[Bayern_Maik 9]

Edit:

Nevermind

[lumnuon 295]

On 9/12/2017 at 4:00 PM, Damian90 said:

BWMod team, a question, were you thinking about adding Leopard 2A7V through modification of your Leopard 2A6M model?

 

 

 

Leopard 2A7V is a final version of Leopard 2A7 upgrade, besides what A7 variant added like improved sights, APU etc. It also adds addon armor for front hull and mounting points for addon armor for hull and turret sides, so vehicle can be also uparmored. So it can look more or less like that fully uparmored altough with less changes to the model, like external sights are the same shape as in A6M, it lacks RWS etc.

 

 

 

It would be a really great addition and would fit perfectly in to 2020-2030+ time frame of the current BWMod.

 

 

 

 Please correct me if I am wrong because you are way more knowledgeable in regards to tanks then me, but as far as I know the Bundeswehr isn´t using the Leopard 2A7V but the 2A7 (not the same as the Rheinmetall designation 2A7 since not optimized for UrbOps). Furthermore the Bundeswehr is considering the 2A7+ which would then be the most advanced MBT in the Bundeswehr arsenal.

[Belbo 462]

37 minutes ago, lumnuon said:

 Please correct me if I am wrong because you are way more knowledgeable in regards to tanks then me, but as far as I know the Bundeswehr isn´t using the Leopard 2A7V but the 2A7 (not the same as the Rheinmetall designation 2A7 since not optimized for UrbOps). Furthermore the Bundeswehr is considering the 2A7+ which would then be the most advanced MBT in the Bundeswehr arsenal.

Currently the Bundeswehr has 155 A6s, 50 A6Ms and 20 A7s at their disposal. In the next years they're acquiring more Leopard 2s (in different variants) and will change over 104 Leopard 2s to A7Vs. Or at least that's the plan. The 2A7+ is currently no longer considered.

[lumnuon 295]

1 minute ago, belbo said:

Currently the Bundeswehr has 155 A6s, 50 A6Ms and 20 A7s at their disposal. In the next years they're acquiring more Leopard 2s (in different variants) and will change over 104 Leopard 2s to A7Vs. Or at least that's the plan. The 2A7+ is currently no longer considered.

 

Ah thx. I didn´t know that. Certainly very interesting :) 

[Damian90 697]

On 24.09.2017 at 8:50 PM, lumnuon said:

 Please correct me if I am wrong because you are way more knowledgeable in regards to tanks then me, but as far as I know the Bundeswehr isn´t using the Leopard 2A7V but the 2A7 (not the same as the Rheinmetall designation 2A7 since not optimized for UrbOps). Furthermore the Bundeswehr is considering the 2A7+ which would then be the most advanced MBT in the Bundeswehr arsenal.

 

As it was said, Bundeswehr at the moment changed the order from A7's to A7V's. Which is kinda funny because A7V is what originally was intended for A7, but budget did not allowed for it at that time for some odd reason.

[Ir0n1E 24]

Some new screenshots.

gallery: https://imgur.com/a/snjby

Leo sound ingame: 

 

[marc_book 95]

 

In the course of the preparations for version 1.6 we’re changing from Ghost's Workshop to our own Steam account (bwmod) and release a new ACE compatibility PBO. Since - according to Steam support officials – it’s not possible to give other users rights to edit the files or to change the owner, we have to create a new Steam Workshop submission.

The change to the new account will be done in 3 steps.

1. [13.11.17] Upload of the current versions (BWMod 1.5.1 and ACE3 - BWMod Compatibility v1.5-2)
2. [no release date planned] Release BWMod 1.6
3. [several weeks after Release 1.6] Deletion of Ghost's BWMod submission to the SWS

We will inform you about the next steps. Please switch to the new Steam Workshop entry as soon as possible. We also inform the owner of large mod packages in order to finish the upgrade as soon as possible.

The new entries can be found under:

BWMod v1.5.1: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1200127537

ACE3 - BWMod Compatibility v1.5-2: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1200145989

 

Changelog:

Spoiler

added: ACE Scopes Framework

added: ACE buddy reload

added: Converted almost all actions to ace_actions

changed: Launcher overpressure values

changed: ACE overheating - updated to new system

 

[Damian90 697]

Not matters, double post. :D

[lionhawk123 20]

Hey guys,

 

On the topic of vehicle radios when using BWMod in conjunction with Task Force Radio, is there a way to set an additional channel when using vehicle radios? Asking specifically for the Leopard, haven't tried it in other vehicles. Thanks in advance!

[Belbo 462]

9 hours ago, lionhawk123 said:

Hey guys,

 

On the topic of vehicle radios when using BWMod in conjunction with Task Force Radio, is there a way to set an additional channel when using vehicle radios? Asking specifically for the Leopard, haven't tried it in other vehicles. Thanks in advance!

There's no link between TFAR and BWmod. This kind of question solely belongs in the TFAR thread. The answer thouh is: yes, as every LR radio from TFAR can use an additional channel. This is also true on every vehicle LR radio.

If the vehicle hasn't got a radio on its own, use this code in the init-line of the vehicle:

this setVariable ["tf_hasRadio", true, true];

[kickapoo0 88]

@lionhawk123 You are right. Our vehicle radio does not have this function. We might be adding this in the future.

[lionhawk123 20]

On 11/28/2017 at 11:17 AM, kickapoo0 said:

@lionhawk123 You are right. Our vehicle radio does not have this function. We might be adding this in the future.

 

Glad to hear it! I can't wait for that beautiful new Leopard update.