Community Upgrade Project - CUP

[drdetroit 77]

19 hours ago, dragon01 said:

It is, but that's what the Hellfires are for. Neither rockets nor the cannon of the Apache are particularly good at damaging tanks, especially since IIRC, the ones we have have HEDP ammo loaded. This can detrack a tank or kill its gun (chancy shots), but it won't penetrate the armor. Remember, it's more or less all HEAT, and 30mm isn't much for that purpose. Rockets probably could have disabled it, but again, I wouldn't expect them to explode a tank by themselves. A-10, with its mix of DU and HE rounds, is a whole different story, even the shells it uses are larger, despite being the same caliber (and even then, "cutting tanks in half" is an exaggeration. It's mostly supposed to use missiles to deal with them).

 

A proper way to deal with a tank is an ATGM of some sorts, or large caliber guns. Other weapons can damage tracks, optics or armament, maybe cause some spallation, but don't expect an autocannon to punch through tank armor. Even an old, monkey-model T-72 has good enough protection to stand up to them. HEDP rounds, like the ones used by Apache, should work against APCs and older IFVs. 

 

Thanks for the info dragon and setting me straight.  I assumed too much of the Apache's 30mm cannon, or was calling to memory my decades old military books w outdated info...I need to upgrade the library soon!

[sputnik monroe 102]

  Interesting. I'll have to try some more test out in the editor.

 

  In the past I've pitted various RHS tanks against various CUP tanks to see if they were compatible and had strange results. For example I've had RHS T72s battle CUP M60A3s and the T72s were not able to hurt the M60s other than their tracks but the M60s were killing the T72s in one hit.

 

No, we don't...

http://www.rhsmods.org/w/afrfarmor

 

  Maybe system wasn't the correct terminology, but it is definitely slightly different. What I find amusing is that I was complimenting RHS and their armor system/formula/behavior/philosophy whatever you want to call it. However, some people in RHS cannot even take a compliment without snapping off some barbed comment. Chill out yeesh.

 

 

 

[deathwatch4 89]

28 minutes ago, sputnik monroe said:

  Interesting. I'll have to try some more test out in the editor.

 

  In the past I've pitted various RHS tanks against various CUP tanks to see if they were compatible and had strange results. For example I've had RHS T72s battle CUP M60A3s and the T72s were not able to hurt the M60s other than their tracks but the M60s were killing the T72s in one hit.

That's exactly the issue I'm having. Another example is I pitted an RHS M1A2 vs a CUP T-72. Abrams did little damage except for the treads, whilst the T-72 blew it to shreds instantly.

[ballistic09 241]

2 hours ago, sputnik monroe said:

Maybe system wasn't the correct terminology, but it is definitely slightly different.

I think you're missing a key point from that page: "Other armor systems completely replace or interfere with the ARMA engine, however we believe in working with the engine for maximum performance and compatibility."

 

The title of the page definitely makes it somewhat ambiguous, but if you dive into the nitty-gritty of that page, you'll see that what's different isn't our armor, but actually our ammunition; more specifically, how we handle HEAT rounds. There's a script that runs when an RHS HEAT round hits any vehicle, which spawns a secondary (non-explosive) projectile which is meant to represent the molten penetrator that is formed when a HEAT round detonates. Other than that, RHS has to use the same fireGeometry and hitpoint system as everyone else.

 

If RHS and CUP vehicles don't seem like they're mixing together perfectly, it's probably because armor and ammunition values are interpreted differently by both teams. That's not to say they're incompatible, it's just that you probably shouldn't expect them to work perfectly together, especially when armor penetration is something that's so precise that it's measured in millimeters...

 

2 hours ago, sputnik monroe said:

What I find amusing is that I was complimenting RHS and their armor system/formula/behavior/philosophy whatever you want to call it. However, some people in RHS cannot even take a compliment without snapping off some barbed comment. Chill out yeesh.

It wasn't intended to come off as snapping or barbed at all. You claimed RHS uses it's own armor system, and I simply said that wasn't the case... You're reading waaayyy too much into it.

[sputnik monroe 102]

1 hour ago, ballistic09 said:

It wasn't intended to come off as snapping or barbed at all. You claimed RHS uses it's own armor system, and I simply said that wasn't the case... You're reading waaayyy too much into it.

 

  The Hell I am... you want to fight about? J/K  

 

  I think we are just arguing over semantics. What I was trying to explain  is that something in how RHS armored vs armored combat works differently, and I actually quite dig it. I thought it was the armor system, but it sounds more like it's the way the weapons are simulated.  It doesn't really matter what it is to be honest, the discussion was that someone was asking if RHS and CUP tanks have peculiarities when interacting with each other during game play. The answer to that is, yes. It's nothing negative or positive, it just is.

 

  Sometimes it's hard to tell intent or demeanor online. Things that are not meant as snark occasionally come across as such when they weren't meant to.

 

 

[Valken 622]

Would it be possible to write a config so when CUP and RHS is loaded, CUP vehicles would inherit the RHS values so it would baseline both mods? Wouldn't that solve any perceived armor and ballistics discrepancy?

[ballistic09 241]

5 hours ago, Valken said:

Would it be possible to write a config so when CUP and RHS is loaded, CUP vehicles would inherit the RHS values so it would baseline both mods? Wouldn't that solve any perceived armor and ballistics discrepancy?

No. Ammunition values could be changed via the config, but a lot of armor related things (mainly, armor thickness) are handled in the model itself, rather than the configs.

[FlyingVolvo 13]

1 hour ago, ballistic09 said:

No. Ammunition values could be changed via the config, but a lot of armor related things (mainly, armor thickness) are handled in the model itself, rather than the configs.

 

In addition, and feel free to correct me if I am wrong, I do remember reading about RHS vehicles having different hitpoints on components to simulate the damage a penetrative projectile would do more realistically. This is my recollection from reading a Reddit post from one of you RHS lads one or two years ago, so take what I say with about half a kilo of salt. 

[ballistic09 241]

36 minutes ago, FlyingVolvo said:

 

In addition, and feel free to correct me if I am wrong, I do remember reading about RHS vehicles having different hitpoints on components to simulate the damage a penetrative projectile would do more realistically. This is my recollection from reading a Reddit post from one of you RHS lads one or two years ago, so take what I say with about half a kilo of salt. 

Yeah, that was posted by me with regards to refuting this same issue. We don't use different hitpoints, but we do use HitHull hitpoints in a manner slightly different than what they're intended for, with respect to tanks. Rather than representing overall internal damage to a tank, we use HitHull to represent ammo storage because they automatically cause a tank to explode once HitHull damage reaches a certain value. So rather than having hull hitpoints spaced evenly throughout the interior of the vehicle, on RHS vehicles, hull hitpoints are clustered tightly together where ammo is stored. The net effect of this is that rather than having every round that penetrates the interior doing a slight amount of damage to the overall vehicle health, rounds that penetrate RHS tanks need to hit the ammo storage to cause serious damage, and that damage will be greatly amplified compared to normal hits to the interior. So again, not really a custom armor system... It's just a slightly different way of doing the same thing as everyone else, using the existing systems within Arma.

[FlyingVolvo 13]

Right. Thank you for clarifying. It is a rather nifty way to deal with it.

[lex__1 422]

Sorry for the possible repetition, did not find this question in the branch. After the last update of ARMA3, the tanks of CUP Opfor got the problem of maximum speed. Strongly affects the balance of the game in CTI mode. Especially suffered T-72 and T-90. At the maximum speed the uneven rotation of the left and right tracks is played, this leads to an uncontrollable fall in speed, which is already low. When is this planned for correction?  

 

[R0adki11 3949]

8 hours ago, lex__1 said:

Sorry for the possible repetition, did not find this question in the branch. After the last update of ARMA3, the tanks of CUP Opfor got the problem of maximum speed. Strongly affects the balance of the game in CTI mode. Especially suffered T-72 and T-90. At the maximum speed the uneven rotation of the left and right tracks is played, this leads to an uncontrollable fall in speed, which is already low. When is this planned for correction?  

 

 

I would imagine if this needs to be fixed, it will be when the CUP Mod team have the time to do so, remember they are providing free content. Also if you consider it an issue, perhaps log it on the CUP tracker.

[lex__1 422]

25 minutes ago, R0adki11 said:

I would imagine if this needs to be fixed, it will be when the CUP Mod team have the time to do so, remember they are providing free content. Also if you consider it an issue, have you logged it on the CUP tracker?

I sent a ticket to the CUP. Did not find any reports on this problem.

https://dev.cup-arma3.org/T2402

[Alwarren 2767]

27 minutes ago, lex__1 said:

I sent a ticket to the CUP. Did not find any reports on this problem.

https://dev.cup-arma3.org/T2402

 

Thanks, we'll look into it. 

(Yay for PhysX)

[pognivet 151]

I will make a suggestion: slightly increase the capacity of the CIRAS team leader vest.

 

Its model has two pistol mag pouches, 3 double stanag pouches (6 mags), two m67 pouches and in addition a general storage alice zipper pack (along with a radio pouch), but it can only hold 6 vanilla stanag mags and two pistol mags and then its totally maxed out and you can't even fit a scrap of paper in there.

[Alwarren 2767]

18 hours ago, pognivet said:

I will make a suggestion: slightly increase the capacity of the CIRAS team leader vest.

 

Its model has two pistol mag pouches, 3 double stanag pouches (6 mags), two m67 pouches and in addition a general storage alice zipper pack (along with a radio pouch), but it can only hold 6 vanilla stanag mags and two pistol mags and then its totally maxed out and you can't even fit a scrap of paper in there.

 

Good point. Please make a ticket, otherwise I'll forget.

[pognivet 151]

23 hours ago, Alwarren said:

 

Good point. Please make a ticket, otherwise I'll forget.

ok i will

[R77 Adder 2]

Need some help with this issue: I have tried to troubleshoot this so much its unreal, When ever I tow the AV-8B harrier from CUP using the Lesh Tow mod the Harrier flies about and explodes in about 2 seconds. This also happens with the V-22 Osprey too. Anyone know how to fix this?

[Rak1445 25]

Hi, 

Is there a list of content remaining to be ported somewhere? Obviously there's the AČR faction missing but I also noticed little things like the U.S. Army UCP Uniform with tee or a cold war Russian helmet with cover. 

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, and thanks for all the work you guys do for the community! 

[Alwarren 2767]

23 minutes ago, Rak1445 said:

Hi, 

Is there a list of content remaining to be ported somewhere? Obviously there's the AČR faction missing but I also noticed little things like the U.S. Army UCP Uniform with tee or a cold war Russian helmet with cover. 

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, and thanks for all the work you guys do for the community! 

 

No, there is no such (public) list. Some stuff will probably not get ported at all but replaced by new stuff, like the helmets. The ACR faction is currently in the works.

[Rak1445 25]

32 minutes ago, Alwarren said:

 

No, there is no such (public) list. Some stuff will probably not get ported at all but replaced by new stuff, like the helmets. The ACR faction is currently in the works.

Thanks for the speedy reply! 

[lex__1 422]

Interests a question. AT NLAW in the riflescope there is no night vision. It so according to the scenario or is planned to make change in the NLAW riflescope, for a possibility of application of NLAW at night?

 

Quote

For better accuracy night vision and red dot sights are available upon request.

 

[Alwarren 2767]

1 hour ago, lex__1 said:

Interests a question. AT NLAW in the riflescope there is no night vision. It so according to the scenario or is planned to make change in the NLAW riflescope, for a possibility of application of NLAW at night?

 

Probably an oversight. Please make a ticket, thank you.

[bars91 956]

Now, this is somewhat weird, but can you (sometime down the road) do a Ceradyne Ranger Body Armor?

It's pretty much the FSBE but w. ALICE for attachment of a butt pack on the back.

 

The reason is there was one in OFP2 (the one BI was making before ArmA was a thing) in M81 Woodland and 3-color desert.

All of the other equipment/vehicles from that project made it's way into Arma1/2 (M16A4, Su34, etc etc)

Technically, the RBA made it too, but as a retextured Marine FSBE in A2 so you could just do a retexture and call it a day...

Spoiler

 

[Phantom Hawk 44]

Whats this BIS OFP2 you mentioned?