Community Upgrade Project - Weapon Pack

[semiconductor 309]

Thanks for reply, Alwarren! :) Hopefully BI will do something about this problem.

[rcmw 10]

Nice work on the upgrade, the models look awesome and I have yet to find any big bugs but...

Is there any way the CUP weapons can be upgraded/configured to work with the Jarhead sound scripts?

I know this is a lot to ask, but the distance/indoors sound variations, along side the high quality sounds that modification introduces adds so much to the game that CUP weapons don't stand up well next to Vanilla weapons running Jarhead and its making me reluctant to use them.

I notice he already helped you with the sound, is compatibility with Jarhead 3.0 on the cards for the future? Or are your priorities elsewhere?

Thanks for your hard work :)

[malcom86 33]

Is there a specific PBO that can be removed from the CUP weapons pack to remove the units that have been setup with the weapons on them. Trying to help prevent cluttering up the MCC/editor menus.

I quote for something like this too. As I understand all thos cluttering units now are boring but will be replaced by proper units with custom uniforms, this project is going to be so huge it would be only better to have 2 pbo, one for the weapons and one for the uniforms/units so it will be easier to manage for the editor in future.

[Alwarren 2765]

I quote for something like this too. As I understand all thos cluttering units now are boring but will be replaced by proper units with custom uniforms, this project is going to be so huge it would be only better to have 2 pbo, one for the weapons and one for the uniforms/units so it will be easier to manage for the editor in future.

Not likely to happen. It's either all or nothing. There is too much interdependency to do what you propose, and unwrangling it is way too much work.

So I'm afraid it isn't up for vote unless our numbers magically grow tenfold.

[Gunter Severloh 3949]

Anyone mention yet that G36k has no reload sound?

[Jackal326 1158]

Not likely to happen. It's either all or nothing. There is too much interdependency to do what you propose, and unwrangling it is way too much work.

So I'm afraid it isn't up for vote unless our numbers magically grow tenfold.

Alternatively, just change the 'scope' value of all the units to 0 or 1. They should still allow the uniforms that use them as an inheritance base to function and they wont clutter the editor. Maybe as an optional config.

[Alwarren 2765]

Alternatively, just change the 'scope' value of all the units to 0 or 1. They should still allow the uniforms that use them as an inheritance base to function and they wont clutter the editor. Maybe as an optional config.

Well the units are part of CUP. The vehicles, static weapons, and every other bit will be part of CUP. It's not meant to be used just as a weapon pack, just like e.g. RHS isn't. And it is not meant to be modular, as pointed out before.

Maybe calling this release 'weapon pack' was a bad idea since it seems to imply it is meant to be standalone, but it really isn't.

[serjames 357]

Alwarren, how is the update coming along (loud M60, Fuzzy Scopes etc).

Really keen to get that fix rolled out so I can stop telling players off for deafening everyone with the "pig/autocannon" :-)

[evromalarkey 150]

I think that it would be cool to optionaly split it as weapon pack, vehicle pack and units pack. Weapon pack certainly could be used standalone, even vehicles could be standalone. And only units could be dependent on both. This could be better approach and most people would welcome it, I guess. Modularity is a good thing, because you can combine it with other mods with less problems.

[Alwarren 2765]

Alwarren, how is the update coming along (loud M60, Fuzzy Scopes etc).

Really keen to get that fix rolled out so I can stop telling players off for deafening everyone with the "pig/autocannon" :-)

At the moment, I didn't do much work on the pack, and I haven't checked how others fared.

Not feeling overly motivated at the moment. I had around 8 months of work on the weapons, and from what I can see, that is even going to be the smaller part compared to e.g. the units.

I think that it would be cool to optionaly split it as weapon pack, vehicle pack and units pack. Weapon pack certainly could be used standalone, even vehicles could be standalone. And only units could be dependent on both. This could be better approach and most people would welcome it, I guess. Modularity is a good thing, because you can combine it with other mods with less problems.

Yeah, I agree it would be nice. But, as I repeatedly pointed out, doing that will create even more work. As it is now, the amount of work still to be done is staggering. Having to maintain 200 models and around, what, 400 config entries for the weapons alone is already a gigantum task without introducing additional complexity by trying to make things modular. We don't have enough people for that. Right now I am one of the few modellers in the team and I spent most of my time doing configs. While I do configs, other things like the static weapons, the units, and all that stuff is just lying around.

Unless we get more people that ACTIVELY work on the project, this is how it is going to be. It's going to be a monolithic, all-in-one package with everything in it that was in Arma 2 and DLC's/Expansions. If we had a sudden influx of people that might change, but that is unlikely to happen. And as such, I'm afraid modularity will not happen.

[Varanon 892]

Unless we get more people that ACTIVELY work on the project, this is how it is going to be. It's going to be a monolithic, all-in-one package with everything in it that was in Arma 2 and DLC's/Expansions. If we had a sudden influx of people that might change, but that is unlikely to happen. And as such, I'm afraid modularity will not happen.

Quoted for emphasis.

CUP needs people to drive it. And don't worry if you think you don't know enough to help, we need help in all aspects, and we're prepared to help get you started.

[Gunter Severloh 3949]

Would like to ask what types of units and vehicles are being planned to be released?

I ask as we already have marines, army, Russians, all the opfor, insurgents and then some, imo and no pun intended just curious why is there even a need

to release new units when all the other mods out already have it covered, same for vehicles, just wondering whats being released that Arma3 dont already

have through the game itself and through the many mods out?

Imo I think the weapons pack should be the main focus as all those guns aside some in Massi's pack and another we dont have.

[serjames 357]

Hmm I was gonna ask the same thing, just really cautious not to kick off a "scope of your mod... vs my greedy expectations" kinda argument....

Definitely not trying to drive any decisions. Just curious.

My instict was that Weapons and Vehicles were the key things missing. With UK troops, for example, now covered off with a couple of different packs or Re-skins that has got BAF sorted. RHS has done a brilliant job with Modern Russians, EVW could cover the more historic look, etc etc etc.

What's the demand behind CUP units themselves I wonder.

Again, please don't be disheartened by the questions, I'm genuinely interested in what the plan is for them ?

SJ

[cyruz 103]

*snip*

They have their focus already which is a unified standardized vehicle / weapons / unit pack that can be run on mass scale, not 24 separate mods that all update independently and conflict with each other etc.

[Alwarren 2765]

Would like to ask what types of units and vehicles are being planned to be released?

I ask as we already have marines, army, Russians, all the opfor, insurgents and then some, imo and no pun intended just curious why is there even a need

to release new units when all the other mods out already have it covered, same for vehicles, just wondering whats being released that Arma3 dont already

have through the game itself and through the many mods out?

Imo I think the weapons pack should be the main focus as all those guns aside some in Massi's pack and another we dont have.

Well the purpose of CUP is not only to provide these things in a usable state, but also in a way that can be used as a modder's resource. So while yeah, technically there is no real need for more Russians, USMC or Army guys, the point is that if someone wants to e.g. go and make their own 1985 scenario, CUP assets can be used as a starting-off point for that.

Also, we are aiming at making things compatible across the board. That means that for example, we're actively working on a system that will allow all CUP vehicles to use the same unified ammo/weapon systems, meaning you can pick what combination of Hellfires and Hydras you want on your Apache, and you can pick the same pods for the AH-1Z and maybe even the Little Bird.

Finally, while mods like e.g. RHS do provide a large stretch of content in a single package, most stuff so far requires you to at least have six to ten different addons. As a mission maker, I shy away of asking people to install so many addons, especially with non-campaign missions. OTOH, if you can tell people "this requires RHS: Escalation and CUP", they will be much more inclined to go through the hassle.

I hope that answers the question :)

[Jona33 51]

Well the purpose of CUP is not only to provide these things in a usable state, but also in a way that can be used as a modder's resource. So while yeah, technically there is no real need for more Russians, USMC or Army guys, the point is that if someone wants to e.g. go and make their own 1985 scenario, CUP assets can be used as a starting-off point for that.

Also, we are aiming at making things compatible across the board. That means that for example, we're actively working on a system that will allow all CUP vehicles to use the same unified ammo/weapon systems, meaning you can pick what combination of Hellfires and Hydras you want on your Apache, and you can pick the same pods for the AH-1Z and maybe even the Little Bird.

Finally, while mods like e.g. RHS do provide a large stretch of content in a single package, most stuff so far requires you to at least have six to ten different addons. As a mission maker, I shy away of asking people to install so many addons, especially with non-campaign missions. OTOH, if you can tell people "this requires RHS: Escalation and CUP", they will be much more inclined to go through the hassle.

I hope that answers the question :)

I'd agree with the last statement, I make some missions (badly :D) and really hate the idea of the a massive mod list, 2 like RHS or CUP + AiA TP are about normal requirements (they kind of go hand in hand) but I'd certainly never play a mission which requires downloading about 10 mods. That's why projects like CUP seem to be such a good thing, big mods like this work so much better I feel.

[Gunter Severloh 3949]

Yes thanks Alwarren makes more sense, I do agree it is a burden when you see a mission released or even a mod you want and it

requires a bunch of addons, like and especially this mission

so ideally CUP would be the way to go when a mod or even mission releases as CUP will have everything it needs to be playable.

@cyruz yes i know this already but I really wanted to know what "types" of units rather, so I suppose i was somewhat not sure or confused and thought that units being

released were to be something different then what we already have, which tbh would be what.. aliens? So I can see the point of having weapons, vehicles, and units

all compatible without requiring extra or other addons to play a mission or even use a mod. So for this project.

[chortles 263]

@ Alwarren: With All in Arma no longer being supported by kju, your replies make it sound like @CUP is now meant to supersede/obsolete AiA, at least on the (non-terrain) assets side of things...?

[Alwarren 2765]

@ Alwarren: With All in Arma no longer being supported by kju, your replies make it sound like @CUP is now meant to supersede/obsolete AiA, at least on the (non-terrain) assets side of things...?

Unless someone picks up AiA, yes, I suppose so.

[hcpookie 3770]

AiA was meant to be an interim solution. CUP is the "native" solution. It is unclear to me in what form CUP will continue... I suppose that remains to be hashed out.

[Varanon 892]

AiA was meant to be an interim solution. CUP is the "native" solution. It is unclear to me in what form CUP will continue... I suppose that remains to be hashed out.

Please note that kju was managing CUP, but there is a "large" workforce behind it, and we are all determined to continue with CUP under a new leadership.

[malcom86 33]

I think it would be better for all of you proud modders if AiA team focus only on the terrains ( btw I always used ony AiA TP like many others I know do) and the CUP team cover the units/weapons aspect.

Off course I always hope more people will join both projects to help you. Especially you from the CUP team, seen the amazingly huge project you're still going to carry on^^

Thanks will never be enough for what you're doing ;)

EDIT: damn, I just learned kju left AiA project.....

Edited January 15, 2015 by Malcom86

[domokun 515]

I think it would be better for all of you proud modders if AiA team focus only on the terrains ( btw I always used ony AiA TP like many others I know do) and the CUP team cover the units/weapons aspect.

This.

But isn't this already the case?

[malcom86 33]

This.

But isn't this already the case?

Oh well, "officially" is not.

But it's like this yet, I too would say :)

[fabio_chavez 103]

btw guys...