smallarms NIArms Release Thread

[Freghar 73]

That's probably the case Robalo, but I still feel blaming you directly, for what was the result of a debinarization error, was definitely unfair. It's one thing to say "the rails on the import G36's are gone, is this intentional" and another to say "the rails on the import G36's are gone, that ASDG guy must have removed them because he doesn't know any better"

Please thread carefuly around this - don't assume the worst possible case by default. This may create a false impression of the other side, which might get unintentionally reinforced by something else and suddenly you get a full-scale flamewar on your hands out of a simple misunderstanding and the evil-by-default principle. Not saying that is(n't) the case here, just that most people aren't "dicks".

I do OS kernel development (substitute any technical work here) and a cool-headed friendly bit of sarcasm as a reply to a false claim works much better. :) (Generally.)

[war_lord 934]

There's not going to be a flamewar. I've said my piece, given my characteristically blunt opinion and I'm not engaging anyone in a debate about it. If anyone has an issue, they know how to PM me. The thread is for stuff related to NIA itself, not commentary on my posting style. Believe me, if you ever need to organize a commission, report a bug at the last minute, or have a question you need a clear answer to, my bluntness will be appreciated.   

[trickshady 55]

Hi war_lord quite a while back i asked toadie about the possibility of adding bi pod compatibility for the AWC-M he said he would consider it. I've downloaded the updated mod and thanks for the work that's been put in :)  i have seen that it was not added could you possibly find out if toadie plans to add it further down the line or if it's not going to happen. Thanks in advance   

[R0adki11 3945]

Please thread carefuly around this - don't assume the worst possible case by default. This may create a false impression of the other side, which might get unintentionally reinforced by something else and suddenly you get a full-scale flamewar on your hands out of a simple misunderstanding and the evil-by-default principle. Not saying that is(n't) the case here, just that most people aren't "dicks".

I do OS kernel development (substitute any technical work here) and a cool-headed friendly bit of sarcasm as a reply to a false claim works much better. :) (Generally.)

 

 

There's not going to be a flamewar. I've said my piece, given my characteristically blunt opinion and I'm not engaging anyone in a debate about it. If anyone has an issue, they know how to PM me. The thread is for stuff related to NIA itself, not commentary on my posting style. Believe me, if you ever need to organize a commission, report a bug at the last minute, or have a question you need a clear answer to, my bluntness will be appreciated.   

 

Before this gets out of hand, please respect the forum rules. If you have an issue please take to PM or use the report feature to alert a moderator. Now lets get back on topic.  ;)

[war_lord 934]

Hi war_lord quite a while back i asked toadie about the possibility of adding bi pod compatibility for the AWC-M he said he would consider it. I've downloaded the updated mod and thanks for the work that's been put in :)  i have seen that it was not added could you possibly find out if toadie plans to add it further down the line or if it's not going to happen. Thanks in advance   

I'll ask him about it. I don't know if it's something he'll implement, but I'll pass the request on and pass on your thanks as well. (There's no need to thank me, I'm just the messenger)

[ViperDriver 33]

It was more to it but good guess ;)

It has already been fixed in the source, wait for next patch.

That sounds great!

 

I don't want to be nitpicky, but it also seems that the position where silencers are attached has been move "forward" on the barrel, at least on G36K's. It makes silencers look somewhat awkward.

Oh, and there is no subsonic ammo for the G36?

 

Still, the best weapons mod out there, period!

[Hvymtal 1251]

Since I didn't have an opportunity to reply before the moderator's post...

I just feel it's totally unfair that he gets to... do that in public over three posts without at least one to defend myself

 

Mate, I think you should retract that comment about Robalo. Not only do I know it's incorrect (because I was party to the conversation about the rails), but it's incredibly rude to paint him as some kind of idiot after he just spent a significant amount of his own time helping Toadie get these patches out in a reasonable timeframe.

I guess I'll stop trying to contribute positively then <_<

Whatever you thought I was trying to do, I was only trying to be helpful and friendly based on the information I had at the time. I had no way of knowing it was an unintentional error until you told me so, overriding Robalo in the process even while admitting that I might not be a terrible person. You could have just told me exactly what the error was and moved on, instead you antagonized me and insinuated that I was an impatient, whiny jerk when I was simply trying to be helpful, you really didn't need to and "blunt" is not an excuse for it, that was just outright rude and absolutely unnecessary

And thank you for informing and reassuring me/us it's fixed robalo :)

 

​I PM'ed war_lord, any further discussion on the matter will be done there. I implore everyone to talk strictly about the mod and not make any accusations of any kind, that just goes nowhere except here :P

[war_lord 934]

It wasn't strictly an unintentional error. Toadie had put those rails in, because otherwise people would have started asking for them. At some point in the binarisation process, there was a error that stripped them from the current version. So the decision was made (Not by me, I'm not involved in that process) to leave it as-is in order to get the patch out faster, because it wasn't considered a major issue. (I believe the game industry term is "known shippable.") Generally, I don't "insinuate" anything, people need to stop thinking I'm saying anything more then what I type. If I had strong negative opinions about someone, I'd tell them. 

[R0adki11 3945]

Since I didn't have an opportunity to reply before the moderator's post...

I just feel it's totally unfair that he gets to... do that in public over three posts without at least one to defend myself

 

I guess I'll stop trying to contribute positively then <_<

Whatever you thought I was trying to do, I was only trying to be helpful and friendly based on the information I had at the time. I had no way of knowing it was an unintentional error until you told me so, overriding Robalo in the process even while admitting that I might not be a terrible person. You could have just told me exactly what the error was and moved on, instead you antagonized me and insinuated that I was an impatient, whiny jerk when I was simply trying to be helpful, you really didn't need to and "blunt" is not an excuse for it, that was just outright rude and absolutely unnecessary

And thank you for informing and reassuring me/us it's fixed robalo :)

 

​I PM'ed war_lord, any further discussion on the matter will be done there. I implore everyone to talk strictly about the mod and not make any accusations of any kind, that just goes nowhere except here :P

Rather than replying, you could have just taken it to PM. I did ask quite politely to stay on topic, i can understand you wanted to put your point across. But please do heed the request to stay on topic. As i really don't want to issue forum penalties. 

[war_lord 934]

In more on topic news, Going by the polls, it looks like the work order (not including commissions) for the foreseeable future is going to go SG550's, SCAR's, Lee-Enfield's. 

 

[Hvymtal 1251]

Rather than replying, you could have just taken it to PM. I did ask quite politely to stay on topic, i can understand you wanted to put your point across. But please do heed the request to stay on topic. As i really don't want to issue forum penalties.

I apologize for knowingly going against your request and I fully accept any repercussions of doing so. The matter has been resolved and you'll hear nothing further out of me or war lord about it

Glad to see the 550s in first, definitely my favorite platform in terms of modern military rifles. Will the 556 be included as well or just the 0/1/2/3?

[SuicideCommando 333]

Can't wait for the MK20 SSR, and all the other MK16/17 variants.

 

 

-edit-

 

 

Really looking forward to the new MG3/42 mod as well.

[war_lord 934]

Glad to see the 550s in first, definitely my favorite platform in terms of modern military rifles. Will the 556 be included as well or just the 0/1/2/3?

Definitely the 0/1/2/3, I'm not sure about the 556, I haven't seen it mentioned and as far as I can tell SIG-Sauer doesn't actually produce a Military model. It very much depends on what Toadie wants to do with it.

[Chaingunfighter 103]

Glad to see the 550s in first, definitely my favorite platform in terms of modern military rifles. Will the 556 be included as well or just the 0/1/2/3?

 

Definitely the 0/1/2/3, I'm not sure about the 556, I haven't seen it mentioned and as far as I can tell SIG-Sauer doesn't actually produce a Military model. It very much depends on what Toadie wants to do with it.

 

Talked with toadie about it in a casual conversation a little while back - he said it's a maybe, depending on how far into the 0-3 series he goes (i.e. whether he stays with base guns or also includes more specialized variants like the 550 SR and 551 SWAT, making railed variants distinct from non-railed ones, and including grenade launchers like the GL 5040 [For base variants] and M203 [For RIS handguard variants])

 

There actually are select-fire SG556s according to some SIG catalogs, information about them is just difficult to find. Also, the SIG 556 upper is compatible with a 550 lower, so it's possible to create nearly identical firearms. Either way, they exist.

 

 

Personally, I'd prefer to see them done at some point as a separate future project. Under time constraints, doing the 556s means less time for the specialized 550s and 556s, and I'd rather see a fleshed out variety of both in the long run even if it means half of them come out later. The semi-auto only versions would actually be pretty cool for civilian, militia, and/or law enforcement scenarios, and there are special 556s with .22LR, 7.62x39, and 7.62x51 lowers that would almost certainly not get implemented if all were done together. That's just my two cents.

[irving_mainway 105]

Personally, I'd prefer to see them done at some point as a separate future project. Under time constraints, doing the 556s means less time for the specialized 550s and 556s, and I'd rather see a fleshed out variety of both in the long run even if it means half of them come out later. The semi-auto only versions would actually be pretty cool for civilian, militia, and/or law enforcement scenarios, and there are special 556s with .22LR, 7.62x39, and 7.62x51 lowers that would almost certainly not get implemented if all were done together. That's just my two cents.

 

I agree with you, I think the 556 is a nice gun and I'd look forward to seeing it in A3 at some point, however there's a whole lot of ground to cover even if you are just talking about calibers and barrel lengths there's nearly as many versions of the 556 as there is with the whole rest of the 55x family.

[Eagle1992 373]

Oh yes an I can back him up on the G36V thing

It's not that there's no attachment rails, it's that there's no attachments. I think the guy who cleaned up ASDG for this pack looked at it and thought "wait how can you attach when there's no rails" and removed all of the attachments form the G36V, G36KV, G36CV, G36V GL, and G36-MLI© GL

 

Well the LLM-01 is mostly mounted on the 6 o'clock rail so the right rail to attach it is still there.

 

And on G36s with AG40 it would be mounted on the Side with that rail: 

 

[toadie2k 799]

Definitely the 0/1/2/3, I'm not sure about the 556, I haven't seen it mentioned and as far as I can tell SIG-Sauer doesn't actually produce a Military model. It very much depends on what Toadie wants to do with it.

I agree with you, I think the 556 is a nice gun and I'd look forward to seeing it in A3 at some point, however there's a whole lot of ground to cover even if you are just talking about calibers and barrel lengths there's nearly as many versions of the 556 as there is with the whole rest of the 55x family.

Talked with toadie about it in a casual conversation a little while back - he said it's a maybe, depending on how far into the 0-3 series he goes (i.e. whether he stays with base guns or also includes more specialized variants like the 550 SR and 551 SWAT, making railed variants distinct from non-railed ones, and including grenade launchers like the GL 5040 [For base variants] and M203 [For RIS handguard variants])

There actually are select-fire SG556s according to some SIG catalogs, information about them is just difficult to find. Also, the SIG 556 upper is compatible with a 550 lower, so it's possible to create nearly identical firearms. Either way, they exist.

Personally, I'd prefer to see them done at some point as a separate future project. Under time constraints, doing the 556s means less time for the specialized 550s and 556s, and I'd rather see a fleshed out variety of both in the long run even if it means half of them come out later. The semi-auto only versions would actually be pretty cool for civilian, militia, and/or law enforcement scenarios, and there are special 556s with .22LR, 7.62x39, and 7.62x51 lowers that would almost certainly not get implemented if all were done together. That's just my two cents.

Echoing Warlord, 550/1/2/3 for certain, Tactical and stock iterations definite. Sniper 550 probable also. 556... I actually already have done(old source engine project, linkylink), but I'd rather redo it than shove that off, and it and the 556R and XI are probably going to be bottom of the list for priority purely out of their comparative non-use, Don't be shocked if those don't show up.

 

I seem to still be getting some 1.62 errors with the latest release, with compat PBOs, using NIArsenal v6, downloaded from Armaholic.

Tried running it with RHS without compat PBOs and I get

Warning Message: Error: creating weapon UGL_F with scope=private

Trying individual weapon PBOs, each with its own compat PBO, while having RHS enabled, throws

11:08:14 Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWeapons/WeaponSlotsInfo.scope'.
11:08:14 Warning Message: '/' is not a value
11:08:14 Warning Message: Error: creating weapon WeaponSlotsInfo with scope=private
11:08:14 Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWeapons/WeaponSlotsInfo.displayName'.
11:08:14 Warning Message: '/' is not a value
11:08:14 Warning Message: No entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgWeapons/WeaponSlotsInfo.nameSound'.

for ar15 / aug / awc / m14 / M60E4 / mp5, independently.

As sigamt doesn't have a RHS compat pbo, it just throws the UGL_F error mentioned above. The annoying bit is that it pops up an error dialog on every game start, in the main menu.

(Not tested ACE3 compat PBOs, the issue might be there as well.)

Thanks!

 

Yeah the compats specifically are very much use at your own risk, which is why they come with source files shipped, and they're really the only thing that wasn't touched codewise for the patch, so yeah, for the most part they're a little behind. Sig510s don't have an RHS compat because nothing in RHS needs to be made compatible with it (or vice versa), same with the springfields.

 

Regarding the weaponslotinfo warning messages specifically- try removing the SAW pbos, and the main saw PBO itself. IF that gets rid of the WEaponslotInfo errors, then that's two separate sources that confirm I need to re-upload the all-in-one.

Edited September 11, 2016 by toadie2k

[hogthar 295]

I have an issue with your awc & weapon eventhandler framework:

I don't know what mod cause the problem.
I used these mods:
core 1.05 & AWC 1.25
CBA v3.0.0
weapon eventhandler framework 1.1
Do you know what is the problem?

[toadie2k 799]

The problem is actually with the BG Weaponsframework. Kerc's working on an update.

[hogthar 295]

The problem is actually with the BG Weaponsframework. Kerc's working on an update.

Thanks

[war_lord 934]

Speaking of the bolt animations, I've noticed that other weapon mods have managed to make it integral to the weapon, rather then using an outside mod. Is their a technical reason NIA doesn't have that?

[ViperDriver 33]

Well the LLM-01 is mostly mounted on the 6 o'clock rail so the right rail to attach it is still there.

 

And on G36s with AG40 it would be mounted on the Side with that rail: 

 

Yeah, there are multiple rail with a lot of different attachment options. This what I mean:

 

So, grips would be a great addition too! And so would 40mm AG36 grenade launchers for the G36K/KV.

 

 

 

[Eagle1992 373]

Yeah, there are multiple rail with a lot of different attachment options. This what I mean:

 

So, grips would be a great addition too! And so would 40mm AG36 grenade launchers for the G36K/KV.

 

 

I am still hoping for a G36KA4, which would basically be a G36K MLI chambered in 5,56mm, in a perfect world with STANAG PMAG Mags, but normal G36 Mags would be ok too.

 

I would love to see my Service Rifle in Arma.

 

On the Grip Idea, i have to say, it would be a nice addition, but in the german army we are always instructed to hold the rifle on the connection between Magwell and Handguard, this gives great recoil control and it isn't really that tiring for your arm. 

 

Here is a german soldier displaying the aiming position.

[torndeco 128]

Regarding the weaponslotinfo warning messages specifically- try removing the SAW pbos, and the main saw PBO itself. IF that gets rid of the WEaponslotInfo errors, then that's two separate sources that confirm I need to re-upload the all-in-one.

With NIArms Complete

Removing/Replacing the SAW pbo stops the Config Errors

edit:

There is also another config error for the AKs.

class UGL_F; 

Warning Message: Error: creating weapon UGL_F with scope=private

NIArms_AK v2.05 pbo has the same config error

[autigergrad 2034]

Great mod!! Love the variations. Using the AK pack for my Taliban faction.