Jump to content
CUP

Community Upgrade Project - CUP

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Ketchup0434 said:

Just a question which might hopefully be answered here, but I was wondering why the British factions have had their SUSATs and ELCANs taken away from them? Standard procedure is to equip every frontline or deployed soldier with them. Many thanks and loving the new camo and backpacks they got though!

The kit is based on their loadout in A2, where not everyone was equipped with ELCANs and SUSATs. Same goes for the USMC.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote
1 hour ago, Chairborne said:

The kit is based on their loadout in A2, where not everyone was equipped with ELCANs and SUSATs. Same goes for the USMC.

 

Ah right, thanks for the reply. I hope I'm not intruding when I ask why the bog standard infantryman now has a holo sight? If I remember correctly from A2, the rifleman had a SUSAT while there was a Rifleman (ACOG) option as well. Only the specialist roles (AT&AA) got holo sights from what I remember. Sorry, just trying to figure out the decision making behind this. 
Anyhow, best wishes Chairborne and hope you and the CUP team are having a great Christmas/ New Years break!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for the update! Really a lot of tasty stuff. Spetial thanks for MLTB - so widely used in IRL vehichle so rare in games.And for Leo 2 too.

(BTW, it is possible to change german cross to sigh of another country , using Leo (or some fictional country forces, like AAF) with commands like SetObjectTexture? Just interesting)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The MH47E, is this just an update of Konyos original A2 ported to A3 ?

 

By Updated, I mean the bugs that started appearing after APEX hit the scene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, road runner said:

The MH47E, is this just an update of Konyos original A2 ported to A3 ?

 

By Updated, I mean the bugs that started appearing after APEX hit the scene

 

Yes. Konyo was so kind to give us the permission to do so.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, audiocustoms said:

 

Yes. Konyo was so kind to give us the permission to do so.

Excellent, it was long overdue a bit of TLC !!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/12/2018 at 10:12 AM, Chairborne said:

The kit is based on their loadout in A2, where not everyone was equipped with ELCANs and SUSATs. Same goes for the USMC.

According to the same logic, shouldn't US ARMY be equipped with the SCAR L?  Is there a selection principle at work? 

 

- k 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nkenny said:

 Is there a selection principle at work? 

 

Yes: Whoever ported or updated them decided what loadout they have and for most units these are different people :f:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

Does anyone know why, sometimes, after mod updates, in this case CUP Vehicles, the mod shows a red dot in the mod list at the bottom right of the in-game server browser. Version 1.10 Cup Vehicles was a green dot. The previous version was a red dot. And, this current version 1.11 is a red dot. Everything works fine and I only ask because I would suspect that a mod showing red in the server browser might discourage folks from joining the server. Any enlightenment would be much appreciated. Thanks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tuskegee_99th said:

Hello,

 

Does anyone know why, sometimes, after mod updates, in this case CUP Vehicles, the mod shows a red dot in the mod list at the bottom right of the in-game server browser. Version 1.10 Cup Vehicles was a green dot. The previous version was a red dot. And, this current version 1.11 is a red dot. Everything works fine and I only ask because I would suspect that a mod showing red in the server browser might discourage folks from joining the server. Any enlightenment would be much appreciated. Thanks.

 

If I'm not mistaken this may be due to a signature mismatch with the server. In this case if the person joining doesn't have the most up to date version of the mod then it may do this. Since from what I understand that there was a missing or additional pbo. Given t hat the server key didn't change on this last update(as far as I'm aware). Just shooting from the hip here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never trust the ingame server browser. Use the launcher server browser to be save. The ingame browser often shows a false negative.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CrazyCorky said:

If I'm not mistaken this may be due to a signature mismatch with the server. In this case if the person joining doesn't have the most up to date version of the mod then it may do this. Since from what I understand that there was a missing or additional pbo. Given t hat the server key didn't change on this last update(as far as I'm aware). Just shooting from the hip here.

The same version as the server. Some hotfix can be "forgotten" if the server is running for days.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CUP

Speakig about M1A2 TUSK, some model improvements also would be nice realism wise.

First the ERA blocks, the BIS M1A2 TUSK is based on a prototype that lacked 2x frontal ERA blocks.

1200px-Abrams-transparent.png
arma2_vehicles_tracked_M1A2-Tusk.jpg

The series production vehicle, have this drawback solved as ERA blocks are added.

Mounted_Soldier_System_(MSS).jpg

Another problem is placement of the CROWS remote weapon station for a commander. On prototype it was indeed placed just like on the BI model, however series vehicles have CROWS mounted above the gunner primary sight "doghouse".

Strong_Europe_Tank_Challenge_2018_(41870
Decisive_Action_Rotation_15-02_at_the_Na
COMBINED_RESOLVE_VII_160911-A-NY707-005.

It was done such way, because now in case of emergency, TC can use CROWS in manual mode, it also gave some other benefit.

Of course the difference is that BI model just like the M1A2 TUSK prototype uses M151 CROWS used also on Stryker, while in reality the M1A2SEPv2 tanks, received M153 CROWS-2.

Anyway, hope it is helpfull bit of informations. ;)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CUP

One more thing about tanks. Realistic sights. We assume that both M1A1 and M1A2 TUSK made by BI and used in CUP, are equivalents tu currently used models, so M1A1SA and M1A2SEPv2. In such case such sights they should have.

M1A1SA:
- Gunner : Day sight 3x and 10x magnification, thermal sight 3x, 6x, 13x, 25x and 50x magnification.
- Commander : day sight 3x, 6x and 9x magnification, thermal sight 3x, 6x and 9x magnification. (If we assume that this is M1A1SA with SCWS cupola)

M1A2SEPv2.
- Gunner : Day sight 3x and 10x magnification, thermal sight 3x, 6x, 13x, 25x and 50x magnification.
- Commander : CITV have only thermal sight with 3x, 6x, 13x, 25x and 50x magnification;
- M153 CROWS-2 have it's standard magnification for day and thermal sights.

Note: USMC M1A1 should be M1A1FEP it's direct equivalent of US Army M1A1SA.

Other tanks will be less capable in this departament.

For example:

Challenger 2:
- Gunner : 3x and 10x magnification for both day and thermal sight.
- Commander : 3x and 10x magnification for day sight, it does not have thermal sight, only night vision.

Leopard 2A6:

- Gunner : 12x day sight magnification and also 3x and 12x thermal sight magnification.
- Commander : 2x and 8x magnification for day sight, 3x, 12x and 24x magnification for thermal sight.

T-72A/M1/B:
- Gunner : 8x magnification for day sight, 8x magnification for NVG sight.

- Commander : 7x magnification for day sight, 7x magnification magnification for NVG sight.

Later I will add data for some other tanks and IFV's.

Again, hopes this helps. Cheers!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the loads of information, @Damian90. I cannot promise when/if these changes will make it into CUP, but we very much appreciate your effort!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Alwarren said:

Thank you for the loads of information, @Damian90. I cannot promise when/if these changes will make it into CUP, but we very much appreciate your effort!

 

No problem, always glad to help with informations for entire Arma community. :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/12/2018 at 12:03 PM, Ketchup0434 said:

Ah right, thanks for the reply. I hope I'm not intruding when I ask why the bog standard infantryman now has a holo sight? If I remember correctly from A2, the rifleman had a SUSAT while there was a Rifleman (ACOG) option as well. Only the specialist roles (AT&AA) got holo sights from what I remember. Sorry, just trying to figure out the decision making behind this. 
Anyhow, best wishes Chairborne and hope you and the CUP team are having a great Christmas/ New Years break!

we changed some loadouts in the last patch, they were set up using vanilla a3 nato as reference iirc (and we had to do some cleanup so it might be that some unit configurations got mismatched)

On 28/12/2018 at 2:15 PM, road runner said:

The MH47E, is this just an update of Konyos original A2 ported to A3 ?

 

By Updated, I mean the bugs that started appearing after APEX hit the scene

yes, its his model (thanks for the kind donation!)

On 29/12/2018 at 1:07 PM, nkenny said:

According to the same logic, shouldn't US ARMY be equipped with the SCAR L?  Is there a selection principle at work? 

 

- k 

not equipping everyone with proper optics is less extravagant than using scars for the us army or ak107 for russians, so it made sense to make those changes

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Chairborne:

the FN SCAR is not the standard assault rifle in the US army, nor is the AK107 in the russian federation army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Wiki said:

Agree with Chairborne:

Never thought I would ever see those words in print  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, hcpookie said:

Never thought I would ever see those words in print  :P

did i miss something? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, it's not like the SCAR or the 107 went away. They're there if you want an experience closer to original A2/OA, and of course for special forces. Hell, with the new update, we even get 5.56 and 7.62 versions of the 107, the latter of which almost feels like cheating!

 

I've always found iron sights to be an interesting option. If there's any one category of weapon where it is equally viable to scopes, it's machine guns. You aren't going to be easily hitting point targets at 700m anyways, that's not your job, and the adjustability is nice and means you have to fiddle less with adjustment and hold-overs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Chairborne @NeoArmageddon

Just for the records and the powers that might be. I was poking fun at the apparent inconsistency. I find NeoArmageddon's explanation very fair. And in any case the changes are sensible. If anything it brings the CUP content more in line with ACE2 for Arma2-- which was a wonderful standard. 

 

The seeming lack of organisational principle does offer a challenge. The tension is well illustrated in Damian90's explication on tank variants. In short: Should CUP attempt to model modern day units and gear OR should CUP attempt to model Arma2's 2009 predictions and particular idiosyncrasies. That question is not for me to settle. Indeed, NeoArmageddon's pragmatical approach is a solution.  I am in any case thankful for the vast amount of work that goes into providing this content. 

 

-k 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Chairborne said:

did i miss something? :D

Same, I dunno why he said that ahah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×