Weapon standards!

[DragoFire 0]

I come across a number of posts lately (last few months), talking about whether some of the weapons being made available are too powerful.

Eg.

Plane# 1 has mounted a set of 5" rocket pods, a 30mm cannon and Mk81 GP (250lbs) free-fall bombs.

Plane# 2 has 20mm cannon and Mk81 GP (250lbs) Free-fall bombs.

Copter has 5" rocket pods and 25mm cannon.

When the same target attacked, the following possible outcomes happen;

Cannons; Copter fire less shots to get kill, Plane# 2 can kill target without direct hits!

Bombs; Plane# 1 can kill all targets within a 50m burst radius, Plane# 2 can kill all soldiers within 25m, kill a tank with direct-hit and damage tanks within 25m brust radius.

This gives you an idea of how badly the CPP can be set for the AMMOCFG.

What I've done is based AMMOCFG setting based on the WEAPON AMMO setting already available from BIS. And then added or subtracted damage and blastradius based on the explosive playload differrance.

As for the models I've found that putting the exact mass to a model has help the flight-path of the weapon, making for a more realistic weapon. This also has effects on the vehicle that is carrying it to (from what I've seem with proxy weapons).

Here's what I've done;

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">

class cfgammo

{ class Default {};

class AT3: Default {};

class Hellfire: AT3 {};

class CarlGustav: AT3 {};

class Maverick: Hellfire {};

class LaserGuidedBomb: Default {};

class GBU_10E: LaserGuidedBomb  //2000lb based on the original from BIS

{

hit=5000;indirectHit=3500;indirectHitRange=15;

minRange=50;

minRangeProbab=0.500000;

midRange=300;

midRangeProbab=0.950000;

maxRange=2500;

maxRangeProbab=0.500000;

cost=20000;

model="Snake";

proxyShape="Snake";

irLock=false;

laserLock=true;

maxControlRange=100000;

maneuvrability=16.000000;

sideAirFriction=0.100000;

simulation="shotMissile";

maxSpeed=100;

initTime=0;

thrustTime=0;

thrust=0;

};

class GBU_12D: GBU_10E //500lb

{

hit=1250;indirectHit=875;indirectHitRange=8;

model= "\DrF_Intruder\GBU_12";

proxyShape= "\DrF_Intruder\GBU_12";

};

class GBU_16B: GBU_10E //1000lb

{

hit=2500;indirectHit=1750;indirectHitRange=10;

model= "\DrF_Intruder\GBU_16";

proxyShape= "\DrF_Intruder\GBU_16";

};

class Mk_82: default //500 lbs

{

hit= 1250;

indirectHit= 875;

indirectHitRange= 8;

minRange=50;

minRangeProbab=0.500000;

midRange=300;

midRangeProbab=0.950000;

maxRange=2500;

maxRangeProbab=0.500000;

soundHit[]= {\LaserGuided\expl2,db40,1};

soundFly[]= {"\DrF_Intruder\bmbfall.ogg",db-30,1.5};

cost= 5000;

model= "\DrF_Intruder\mk_82";

proxyShape= "\DrF_Intruder\mk_82";

irLock= 0;

laserLock= 0;

maxControlRange= 20000;

maneuvrability= 0.01;

sideAirFriction= 0.10;

simulation= shotMissile;

maxSpeed= 100;

initTime= 1000;

thrustTime= 0;

thrust=  0;

};

class MK_81: MK_82 // 250lbs

{

hit= 625;

indirectHit= 440;

indirectHitRange= 5;

cost= 3000;

model= "\DrF_Intruder\mk_81";

proxyShape= "\DrF_Intruder\mk_81";

};

class MK_83: MK_82 // 1000lbs

{

hit= 2500;

indirectHit= 1750;

indirectHitRange= 10;

cost= 7000;

model= "\DrF_Intruder\mk_83";

proxyShape= "\DrF_Intruder\mk_83";

};

class MK_84: MK_82  // 2000lbs based on LASERGUIDED BOMB from BIS

{

hit= 5000;

indirectHit= 3500;

indirectHitRange= 15;

cost= 14000;

model= "\DrF_Intruder\mk_84";

proxyShape= "\DrF_Intruder\mk_84";

};

class AGM_65F : Maverick  // Navy version of Mavrick based on the original from BIS

{

proxyShape="Maverik_proxy";

reloadTime=1.0;

maneuvrability=20.0;

irLock=true;

airLock=false;

laserLock=false;

initTime=0.5;

maxleadspeed=4000;

ThrustTime=5.5;

visibleFire=40;

audibleFire=32;

visibleFireTime=50;

minRange=200;minRangeProbab=0.30;

midRange=1600;midRangeProbab=0.80;

maxRange=27000;maxRangeProbab=0.50;

maxControlRange=27000;

thrust=700;

maxSpeed=980;

hit=1900;indirectHit=800;indirectHitRange=2.5;

model="Maverik";

};

class AGM_45 : Maverick // Strike

{

proxyShape="\DrF_Intruder\AGM_45";

reloadTime=1.0;

maneuvrability=15.0;

irLock=true;

airLock=false;

laserLock=false;

initTime=0.5;

maxleadspeed=4000;

ThrustTime=5.5;

visibleFire=50;

audibleFire=32;

visibleFireTime=50;

minRange=200;minRangeProbab=0.30;

midRange=2000;midRangeProbab=0.80;

maxRange=4000;maxRangeProbab=0.50;

maxControlRange=4000;

thrust=700;

maxSpeed=900;

hit=1500;indirectHit=600;indirectHitRange=2.5;

model = "\DrF_Intruder\AGM_45";

};

class AGM_84 : Maverick // Harpoon

{

proxyShape="\DrF_Intruder\AGM_84";

hit=1900;

indirectHit=800;

indirectHitRange=2.500000;

laserLock=0;

maxleadspeed=4000;

ThrustTime=5.5;

visibleFire=50;

audibleFire=32;

visibleFireTime=50;

minRange=200;minRangeProbab=0.30;

midRange=10000;midRangeProbab=0.80;

maxRange=60000;maxRangeProbab=0.50;

maxControlRange=60000;

thrust=700;

maxSpeed=900;

model = "\DrF_Intruder\AGM_84";

};

class LAU10: Hellfire // 5inch rocket (unguided) based on the original from BIS

{

hit=700;

indirectHit=300;

indirectHitRange=3;

minRange=50;

minRangeProbab=0.200000;

midRange=250;

midRangeProbab=0.200000;

maxRange=1000;

maxRangeProbab=0.050000;

maxSpeed=1000;

simulation="shotRocket";

simulationStep=0.050000;

cost=2000;

soundHit[]={"Explosions\expl1",100.000008,1};

model="ZUNI";

irLock=0;

laserLock=0;

maneuvrability=0.000000;

maxControlRange=0;

initTime=0.050000;

thrustTime=3.500000;

thrust=500;

};

class LAU61 : Hellfire // 2_75inch rocket (unguided)

{

soundHit[]={"Explosions\expl2",100.000008,1};

hit=400;

indirectHit=250;

indirectHitRange=3;

};

};<span id='postcolor'>

What I hope is other addon maker look at this and start to set a standard, base on BIS's AMMO setting or talk with others to set a standard.

As most of us don't want some making a great addon that can't be used, due to it's weapons being too powerful and making OPF unplayable.

These are my thoughts, but I like forward to read others thoughts on the subject.

DragoFire

[hellfish6 7]

Outstanding, Drago! This is just what we need to bring the addon making community together! Keep up the great work!

[Schoeler 0]

Actually, I was just saying in another topic that we need to start standardizing things. Not only weapon specs, but models. Its really getting ridiculous how many SAW's, M4's are out there. There are obvious community approved addons that have set the bar for quality. For instance, Fliper's M4 pack, or TOW's SAW. No others need be made. People should just ask for permission to retexture or slightly modify these existing models. Its already starting to happen, I believe that BAS used TOW's M249 in their ranger pack with a few personal touches added to it. This kind of cooperation insures we get the highest quality addons without a zillion different PBO's. Once all the possible variants of a particular weapon are complete, then the teams can assemble them into one pbo and have say a multi-mod M249 pack or M4 pack for example.

[Eviscerator 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Feb. 20 2003,08:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Its already starting to happen, I believe that BAS used TOW's M249 in their ranger pack with a few personal touches added to it.<span id='postcolor'>

Thats not true, we made our own from scratch, the base M249 we made is in the pack but not equipped to soldiers (so it can be used in non recent conflicts), the weapon name/ammo name can be found in the readme/code snippets.

Also, i dont think the BIS LGB damage values are actually for a 2000lb bomb, it doesnt make sense if a FFAR with a 10lb (or so) warhead has 750 damage and a 500lb bomb has 1250, i think BIS' LGB is simulated after a 500lb bomb, one big giveaway is that it has the model of a mk82, also the other damage values point to this (like the maverick with a, i think, 160 or so lb warhead doing 1900 damage).

Also BIS' FFAR's are the 2.75" versions, not the 5" Zuni's as they are called in the cpp, i dont believe you can get the zuni's in 19 shot rocket pods as they are too big/heavy

[Schoeler 0]

Well, I stand corrected, but both teams made excellent M249's, so this illustrates our point. If we could get the teams working together on certain things, then it would have saved both teams some time. The addon would of course have to be approved by both teams prior to release. Or, we could get that little committee of top mod teams started as suggested in another thread.

[Skaircro 0]

DragoFire, I like your thoery, I tried to config my gbu's and mk's as close as possible from the BIS one as well.

Though I think the indirectHitRange needs to be increased a bit.

I personally think the BIS one is a bit under rated in that area.

[FW200 0]

actually the WW2 teams wanted to have a meeting about it in january .. but people have personal lives etc etc.. and we still havent had the meeting..

[DragoFire 0]

Quote[/b] ] Eviscerator;

Also,i dont think the BIS LGB damage values are actually for a 2000lb bomb, it doesnt make sense if a FFAR with a 10lb (or so) warhead has 750 damage and a 500lb bomb has 1250, i think BIS' LGB is simulated after a 500lb bomb, one big giveaway is that it has the model of a mk82, also the other damage values point to this (like the maverick with a, i think, 160 or so lb warhead doing 1900 damage).

The mk82/GBU12D (500lbs) bombs only have a Explosive  89 kg / 192 lbs Tritonal, Minol II, or H-6 warhead, and not a 500lbs warhead. The 500lbs includes warhead, Fuze and Stabilizer (MAU-93/B, BSU49/B AIR, MK-15 Snakeye) and for the LGB a Paveway low-level laser-guided bomb kit.

The mk83/GBU16 (1000lbs) bombs only have a 202 kg / 385 lbs Tritonal, Minol II, or H-6

The mk84/GBU10E/GBU24 (2000lbs) bombs only have a 945 lbs H-6 or Tritonal warhead.

As for the Maverick depending on which version BIS based thier one on the Warhead could have been any of the below:

AGM-65A/B (AIRFORCE) = 125 pounds(56.25 kilograms), cone shaped

AGM-65D (AIRFORCE) = 125 pounds(56.25 kilograms), cone shaped

AGM-65G (AIRFORCE) = 300 pounds(135 kilograms), delayed-fuse penetrator, heavyweight

AGM-65E (MARINES) = 125 pounds(56.25 kilograms), cone shaped

AGM-65F (NAVY) =300 pounds(135 kilograms), delayed-fuse penetrator, heavyweight  

As you can see there's a lot of possible warhead options. I think they used the AGM-65A/B or D personally. It might be a little bit more powerful than it should, being that it's warhead is about 30kg's less than a Mk82.

But the BIS got the A-10's payload completely wrong. It only ever carried a maxium of 4x AGM's with ether 2x AIM9's with or without 2.75" rocket pods. And only ever carried 4x LGB's or 12x Mk82's. Up to 16,000 pounds (7,200 kilograms) of mixed ordnance on eight under-wing and three under-fuselage pylon stations.

Quote[/b] ]Eviscerator;

Also BIS' FFAR's are the 2.75" versions,not the 5" Zuni's as they are called in the cpp, i dont believe you can get the zuni's in 19 shot rocket pods as they are too big/heavy

Your right about the number of rockets per pod.

But one thing that I've found hard to find is the Rocket warhead weight, once we've found that we could set the 2.75" and 5" rocket damages correctly.

Quote[/b] ]Skaircro; I tried to config my gbu's and mk's as close as possible from the BIS one as well.

Though I think the indirectHitRange needs to be increased a bit.

I thought the same, but found it you increase the "indirectHitRange", thus increasing the range for the rest of the Mk's and LGB's, you have a problem that you get caught in the blast when dropping the heavier bombs, when flying low.

These are the reason's I think we should be looking for information on the weapons we're adding and start working on a base set of AMMOCFG classes to work from.

DragoFire

[mooncaine 0]

I agree with DragoFire that a listing of base values for weapons and damage would benefit the community--so long as the addon makers openly show that their addon adheres to the agreed-upon base. Otherwise, I'm wondering why we'd bother. I suppose we'd have to rely on reviews by experienced players who've playtested the addons, in that case.

[DragoFire 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (mooncaine @ Feb. 21 2003,09:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I agree with DragoFire that a listing of base values for weapons and damage would benefit the community--so long as the addon makers openly show that their addon adheres to the agreed-upon base. Otherwise, I'm wondering why we'd bother. I suppose we'd have to rely on reviews by experienced players who've playtested the addons, in that case.<span id='postcolor'>

Thanks, that the reason I attached in my first post in this topic, the CPP AMMOCFG setting I've been basing my weapons on. And I'm happy if others use these setting, as it'll be the start of a standard. I'm also happy to supply the models for the weapons I've done already to help.

These models are @99% correct in lenght/diameter/mass.

And yes I also gone and checked other CPP's that out there, Hence the number of addons in my addon directory has dropped (mainly due to poor CPP's).

I hope some of you have the balls to post your AMMOCFG settings

[Skaircro 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Eviscerator:

Also, i dont think the BIS LGB damage values are actually for a 2000lb bomb, it doesnt make sense if a FFAR with a 10lb (or so) warhead has 750 damage and a 500lb bomb has 1250, i think BIS' LGB is simulated after a 500lb bomb, one big giveaway is that it has the model of a mk82, also the other damage values point to this (like the maverick with a, i think, 160 or so lb warhead doing 1900 damage).

<span id='postcolor'>

I agree, it looks as if it should be a 500lb bomb, but you will notice it is called a GBU-24.

There are a number of different types of GBU-24, but they are all 2000lb.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">DragoFire:

I thought the same, but found it you increase the "indirectHitRange", thus increasing the range for the rest of the Mk's and LGB's, you have a problem that you get caught in the blast when dropping the heavier bombs, when flying low.

<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah I noticed that, but that does make it quite realistic, thats why they have the BSU49/B AIR, MK-15 Snakeye and BSU-50 AIR, to be able to drop at low altitude and escape the blast radius.

[Eviscerator 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Skaircro @ Feb. 21 2003,14:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Eviscerator:

Also, i dont think the BIS LGB damage values are actually for a 2000lb bomb, it doesnt make sense if a FFAR with a 10lb (or so) warhead has 750 damage and a 500lb bomb has 1250, i think BIS' LGB is simulated after a 500lb bomb, one big giveaway is that it has the model of a mk82, also the other damage values point to this (like the maverick with a, i think, 160 or so lb warhead doing 1900 damage).

<span id='postcolor'>

I agree, it looks as if it should be a 500lb bomb, but you will notice it is called a GBU-24.

There are a  number of different types of GBU-24, but they are all 2000lb.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">DragoFire:

I thought the same, but found it you increase the "indirectHitRange", thus increasing the range for the rest of the Mk's and LGB's, you have a problem that you get caught in the blast when dropping the heavier bombs, when flying low.

<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah I noticed that, but that does make it quite realistic, thats why they have the BSU49/B AIR, MK-15 Snakeye and BSU-50 AIR, to be able to drop at low altitude and escape the blast radius.<span id='postcolor'>

But the damage doesnt correlate with it being a 2000lb bomb, infact, all the damages in the game are out, i think it would take a major rewrite to sort it out, sorting out every single damage value, until then you will just make things weaker(or stronger) than they normally are compared to BIS units, i think the only people that could do this and do it well would be bis, otherwise it would have to be an addon and wouldnt change the game as such, as people would still hae the unrealistic damages in thigs like the campaign, but i believe the argument for them not changing it now is that all the missions will need to be checked to make sure they play out the same way, as something like a damage change can greatly affect the outcome of a mission, without a complete overhaul we would be stuck with say a couple of 2.75" rockets with a 10lb warheads doing more damage than a 500lb bomb with nearly a 200lb warhead (2 x 700 damage FFAR = 1400, 1 x 1250 damage Mk82 = 1250)

[DragoFire 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Eviscerator;

But the damage doesnt correlate with it being a 2000lb bomb, infact, all the damages in the game are out, i think it would take a major rewrite to sort it out, sorting out every single damage value<span id='postcolor'>

If I have two other addon-maker and refer with, I'd be happen to sit down over a few days and redo the ammocfg. I think I could do it with-in a 98% realistic balance. Then it's upto the addon-makers and mod-makers whether they want to use this new standards or not.

Each AMMOCFG setting will also uses it's correct real world designation.

I'll even go as far as to do different versions of the weapon's.

eg,

Warheads for Rockets;

High-explosive antitank/antipersonnel (AT/APERS)

High-explosive, general purpose (GP)

Flechette

High-explosive Flechette HE-FRAG

I'll also make sure that every weapon I can get information on has it's ammo already included, so all that's required for the addon is to paste the AMMOCFG setting for the ammo into the CPP and design up the the weapon to fire it.

As a foot note, if the team agrees to continue, I'd be happy to continue on to redo the weapon delivery systems also. I've got loads of information and links to most types of ordnance that is available.

This could change a number of ways the addons use their playloads.

Eg,

Copters and Planes might beable to change the payload they carry to another.

Bombs for Missiles.

MG's for Cannons.

These are possible! (I'm currently working on this myself)

I hope you'll think about this, and I hope that a couple of you would be interested in helping, but I'll wait and see. Anyhow I'll start working on it this weekend, as I've got the inlaws coming and won't beable to make on my addon ,so I'll sit down with the information and CPP's I've got.

Have a good week-end everyone.

DragoFire

P.S. I'll check the forum everyday.

[Guest BratZ]

Please ,please and thanx for the work on this!!

I'm no weapons expert and I am also worried about vehicle armor and speed and such.I will be releasing my Corsair and it will be the fastest fighter I put out,but I'd hate for someone to make a Zero that is faster or whathaveyou

I also notice that the blast area can't be accurate,surely a 1000lb bomb has more than a 50 meter blast radius,but anything more and it will destroy the vehicle that uses the bomb

[DragoFire 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (BratZ @ Feb. 22 2003,09:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Please ,please and thanx for the work on this!!

I'm no weapons expert and I am also worried about vehicle armor and speed and such.I will be releasing my Corsair and it will be the fastest fighter I put out,but I'd hate for someone to make a Zero that is faster or whathaveyou

I also notice that the blast area can't be accurate,surely a 1000lb bomb has more than a 50 meter blast radius,but anything more and it will destroy the vehicle that uses the bomb<span id='postcolor'>

This depends on the warhead type, HE won't have a huge blast radius, where a FRAG will, but at the cost of less direct hit damage, one almost always counters the other.

DragoFire

[r71 0]

This should be what all guns look like from iron sight.. http://www.baconbomb.com/usmc/images/7.jpg I put this in the BAS weapon topic too, in hopes that they would do this. http://www.baconbomb.com/usmc/ Not that theirs looks bad but it looks a bit more real to see the gun and not a shadow.

[DragoFire 0]

I've seen this before, but this is something that we're not currently covering. So it's upto the addon-maker/mod-maker to decide on.

I'm/we are talking about the coding of the Ammo and the weapons themselves at the moment.

Sorry R71, I wish I could help you more, but it's the individual model maker that controls the scopes and looks of their addon weapon.

DragoFire

[DragoFire 0]

Thus far I've got/done 89 types of ammo for pistol's, SMG's, Assault rifles, MG's, Sniper rifles, 40mm & 30mm grenades.

These include the following ammo types;

32ACP (FMJ/JHP/AP)

45ACP (FMJ/JHP/AP)

4.7mm caseless (FMJ/JHP/AP)

5.45x18mm (FMJ/JHP/AP)

5.45x39.5mm (FMJ/JHP/AP)

5.56mm NATO (FMJ/JHP/AP)

7.5x54mm (FMJ/JHP/AP)

7.62mm NATO (FMJ/JHP/AP)

7.62mm NATO (reduced load) (FMJ/JHP/AP)

7.62x25mm (FMJ/JHP/AP)

7.62x39mm (FMJ/JHP/AP)

7.62x54mm (FMJ/JHP/AP)

9mm parabellum (FMJ/JHP/AP)

10mm (AP) (for the Alien boys for Pulse Rifle/Sniper/SmartGun)

12.7x107mm (FMJ/JHP/AP)

.50" Browning (FMJ/JHP/AP)

30mm Grenade (HE & HEAT)

40mm Grenade (HE & HEAT)

FMJ= Full Metal Jacket

JHP= Jacketed Hollow Point

AP= Armor Piercing

HE= High Explosive

HEAT= High Explosive Anti-Tank

The one thing I'm still working on is how BIS calulates armor piercing. As some of the above ammo types (mainly AP rounds) have limited armor piercing capablity (10mm (AP),

12.7x107mm (AP),0.50" Browning (AP). If anyone got any ideas on this please post it here. I'll keep trying to figure it out.

I've also got the basics done for bombs and missiles, just now need to get the explosive types and weigths for each.

DragoFire

[DragoFire 0]

Ok here's an example of how bad some of the same weapon can be.

From a new addon from within the last month(*=names of maker removed);

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE"> class *Mk82B : Hellfire

{

hit=5000;indirectHit=3500;indirectHitRange=10;

soundHit[]={\LaserGuided\expl2,db40,1};

soundFly[]={"\*\stores\bmbfall.ogg",db-30,1.5};

cost=20000;

model="\*\stores\*mk82.p3d";

proxyShape ="\*\stores\*mk82.p3d";

irLock=false;

laserLock=false;

maxControlRange=10;

maneuvrability=1.0;

sideAirFriction=0.1;

simulation=shotMissile;

maxSpeed=100;

initTime=10000;

thrustTime=0;

thrust=0;

};

From another addon;

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE"> class *Mk82 : default //500 lbs

{

hit=1400;indirectHit=450;indirectHitRange=8;

minRange=300;minRangeProbab=0.50;

midRange=800;midRangeProbab=0.95;

maxRange=2000;maxRangeProbab=0.50;

soundHit[]={\LaserGuided\expl2,db40,1};

soundFly[]={"\*\bmbfall.ogg",db-30,1.5};

cost=5000;

model="\*\mk82.p3d";

proxyShape ="\*\mk82.p3d";

irLock=1;

laserLock=0;

maxControlRange=20000;

maneuvrability=15.0;

sideAirFriction=0.20;

simulation=shotMissile;

maxSpeed=100;

initTime=1000;

thrustTime=0;

thrust=0;

};

From my addon;

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE"> class Mk_82: default //500 lbs

{

hit= 1250;

indirectHit= 875;

indirectHitRange= 8;

minRange=50;

minRangeProbab=0.500000;

midRange=300;

midRangeProbab=0.950000;

maxRange=2500;

maxRangeProbab=0.500000;

soundHit[]= {\LaserGuided\expl2,db40,1};

soundFly[]= {"\DrF_Intruder\bmbfall.ogg",db-30,1.5};

cost= 5000;

model= "\DrF_Intruder\mk_82";

proxyShape= "\DrF_Intruder\mk_82";

irLock= 0;

laserLock= 0;

maxControlRange= 20000;

maneuvrability= 0.01;

sideAirFriction= 0.10;

simulation= shotMissile;

maxSpeed= 100;

initTime= 1000;

thrustTime= 0;

thrust=  0;

};

It's a major problem when one is equal to a 2000lb bomb;

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">hit= 5000; indirectHit= 3500; indirectHitRange= 15;

A 500lb bomb should be able to destory most targets, but not be able to destory very hard targets (hvy bunkers, etc...) with one hit, thats what the 1000lb and 2000lb bombs are designed for.

I think we need to sort this out. Have a look at the following image. It has weapons of all weights and you can see the size difference. (note these are 99% correct in size with each other and OPF vehicles)

Now tell me how a Mk-82 can every do the same damage as a Mk-84, GBU-24 or GBU-10E?

DragoFire

[Eviscerator 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DragoFire @ Feb. 24 2003,08:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Now tell me how a Mk-82 can every do the same damage as a Mk-84, GBU-24 or GBU-10E?<span id='postcolor'>

The thing is, the BIS bomb is not set up like a 2000lb bomb, the figures just dont match, even the model doesnt, with the damage on 1250 it wont even blow up most of the tanks, at 5000 it does just what you'd expect a 500lb bomb to do (mainly from what ive seen it do in videos from vietnam) the damage seems to match, even a timebomb ingame is:

hit=700;indirectHit=700;indirectHitRange=7;

And you'd be making the Mk81 weaker than that, and the satchel charge looks like about 5-10lb's of explosives, if youre going to rewrite it, rewrite it so it makes sense, start from complete scratch with values instead of working from BIS' figures and names when they have been wrong a lot of times in the past

[Guest ####]

As a general rule if you are trying to figure out blast radius if you want to double the blast radius you need 4 times the amount of explocive to do it. So a 2000lb bomb will have twice the blast radius of a 500lb. This rule will generally apply to same warhead types so 2 HEAT warheads of different yields will follow the same ratio as two HE warheads of different yields.

[DragoFire 0]

Well now we're starting to get somewhere!

Why is it so hard to get people to share info?

I'll looking to this part a bit more over the next couple of days.

DragoFire

[mooncaine 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (R71 @ Feb. 22 2003,03:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This should be what all guns look like from iron sight..             http://www.baconbomb.com/usmc/images/7.jpg  I put this in the BAS weapon topic too, in hopes that they would do this. http://www.baconbomb.com/usmc/ Not that theirs looks bad but it looks a bit more real to see the gun and not a shadow.  <span id='postcolor'>

Although the iron sight picture is off-topic when it comes to weapon config values, I'm glad you mentioned it here. I like the look of that--keep plugging and show it around when you can. It's a good argument; I'm convinced.

[mooncaine 0]

So what vals would you suggest for simulating the 20mm HE grenades/bombs that SAS used in the Gulf War of '91?

I tried an addon that offers a weapon called an HK OICW, and it fires grenades--a couple of soldiers used all of their grenades [i think that's 4 each] twice over and demolished a BMP in a test I made with Mission Editor.

I'm working on a concept design for a light tank intended for counterterrorism and SWAT-type ops. It should have a main gun intended for short-range, with ammo for demolishing buildings but not piercing armor, and maybe another ammo type for fragmentation [anti-infantry]? Would anyone like to suggest values for such a weapon--I'm at a complete loss where to start?

[hellfish6 7]

Various western armies use engineering vehicles armed with very low velocity gun-mortars. For example, the US Army uses the M728 CEV. It's got a 165mm gun with a max range of 900m or so. I believe these tanks were used during the seige of the Branch Davidian cult in Waco, Texas (using their crane booms to breach the building).

The British have a similar system based on the Cheiftain and Centurion tanks. I think even the French have something similar.