*boom* m109 for download @ ofp.info

[vade_101 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Guys from the Polish site -f-p-p o-f released addon of great M109 Palladin. It looks very good and it works well.

:-)

<span id='postcolor'>

*edit* looks like it is a DKM Mod leak.

[edc 0]

Its nice but I think I like the Gulf War Mod one a little better.

[PFC_Mike 2]

sweet. Thank you very much.

[mads bahrt 0]

Does anyone have an idea whether it might be possible to make heading and/or elevation of the gun show in the HUD?

If that could be done tou could make firemissions beyound visual range guided by a spotter.

[OFPunk 0]

I think its pretty good, I only have 2 problems so far 1. wtf do mod makers put the pbo in folder??? then we extract it to the addons folder and it doesnt fucking work and we have to go move it out of the folder, is there a point? and 2. I wish it didnt use its own sounds so that the shells would sound cooler on satchels sound mod when they come in. Other than that Its pretty good.

[blackdog~ 0]

Answers:

1: Because, most of us just put it in by hand instead of unzipping it...

2: Because it sounds better not using the same sounds as everything else.

I hope this answers your questions

[OFPunk 0]

1: even if you put it in by hand the folder is still useless.

[edc 0]

I would agree that it just wastes everyones time, but is it that big of deal

[miles teg 1]

I just tried the addon. Is it just me or can the gun not be lowered in order to use it for direct fire? That pisses me off.

Also the shells are WAAAY too powerful. In real life they would not destroy a tank just by landing next to it. Only a direct hit would do that. Also that means you can't take cover if you are infantry. No matter where you hide you're dead. They really need to make this addon much more realistic by lowering the dammage levels, and more importantly allowing for direct fire capability. Other then that it's a very sweet addon and the inside and outside textures are just superb. I just wish they used satchels tank gun sound where you hear the whistle of the shell coming in.

Also the armor on it should be very light (like a M113).

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[MAsta_KFC 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (edc @ Nov. 19 2002,00:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Its nice but I think I like the Gulf War Mod one a little better.<span id='postcolor'>

Where can i get the gulf war one?

[joltan 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Miles Teg @ Nov. 19 2002,06:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Is it just me or can the gun not be lowered in order to use it for direct fire?   That pisses me off.<span id='postcolor'>

At least for the machine gun - it is impossible to engage infantry with it now. I don't care about direct fire capabilities for the main gun - that's not what these buggers are meant for anyways. But then I think that this can't be seperated as turrets are modelled in OFP right now.

[ZIKAN 0]

Yes its a very good representation of a M109, but i think it needs to have the direct fire option. These 'buggers' do have the capacity to engage tanks in a 'anti tank scenario'. But to lower the barrel they need to fold down the barrel support onto the deck of the engine. Maybe there is too much swing left and right also.I dont like the aiming reticle for the gunner, i think it should be a vertical bar gradutated in meteres (like the commanders view),(x5,x10 etc), not a AA aiming sight. As for the shell being overpowered, yes it is slightly, but in Artillery terms a near miss is considered a direct hit, and a couple of 155 shells are devastating when grouped together. Infantry have no chance if its an air burst. Some of the textures didnt show when i zooomed out and revolved around it.

I wish that AI would lock on to your choosen target and fire at it until told to stop, maybe we need a script or something for that. But it would be nice if you didnt need a direct line of sight to fire and could shoot over hills and woods and engage an area blind except for the radar at the top of the screen. Maybe give a grid reference by a spotter and the AI will pound away until its told to stop.

This add on really rocks!

[pzvg 0]

Umm, seems to be some question as to authorship,

I wish these websites would start holding releases for a day or two until they check the facts,

In the past month, I've seen 5 "addons" that were ripped from 3Dcafe, and 2 that were outright stolen from other mod sites.

Pathetic way to style oneself.

[dkraver 1]

Agree that its way to powerfull. It should only do enough damage to destoy a jeep at the impact area but then have a large damage area.

And also agree that the gun should be able to go lower. Cant hit anything if you are on a hill. So maybe just have barrel support lowered as when ready to fire.

Dont know how it works RL but also seems a little strange that turret cant go 360, but only 90 to each side. Can anyone tell if thats normal RL??

Another problem is when you are firing via the radar it always misses (unless target is within visible range, might be a game engine problem) and it hits the same spot each time. Also they should put a variation in the config so it will scatter the shot more just like real artillery. Also if possible they should add a range meter when in "sight mode" ("v" button default), that changes with the elevation of the gun.

Cool thing would be to only have a little forward view hole (maybe 20% of the screen in sight mode) that doesnt go up and down with the gun, and then two instruments/gauges. One with compas direction other with range/elevation.

That way you could make fire missions in multiplayer maps, where you use the compas heading, elevation/range meter, the map and a spotter to fire at non visible targets/areas.

If this isnt possible they should make a aiming reticle with horizontal bars with range in meters (and take the time to test those ranges) so if you wanted to fire lets say 3000 meters you would take the Bar with that range number and level that with the ground. Only problem with this is that you can raise the gun so much that you wont have the ground to level with, unless you have the reticle zoomed out so much that the sight shows more of the ground, which i would think would be ok.

[PFC_Mike 2]

any reaspn why it says DKM on the outside? And has outside textures that seem awful familiar?

[advocatexxx 0]

Shells are infact far far too powerful. More like a blast from a 2,000lb bomb than a 155mm shell. The engine noise is also awful. Think it's the same one DKM mod used on their Patria. Such a terrible loop that static pinches each time it's replayed.

Is it possible to implement some sort of a gauge/indicator in the cannon optics view that would tell (in realtime) the heading and range at which the shell will fall once fired?

Like this:

Hdg: 340.5 degrees

Dst: 8,943 meters

Everytime you move the cannon vertically/horizontally these values would update. This way you'd know precisely where/how far you're shooting, and once aimed you could just exit the optics view and fire away, shell after shell.

That in my opinion would really be remarkable.

[miles teg 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ZIKAN @ Nov. 19 2002,10:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes its a very good representation of a M109, but i think it needs to have the direct fire option. These 'buggers' do have the capacity to engage tanks in a 'anti tank scenario'. But to lower the barrel they need to fold down the barrel support onto the deck of the engine. Maybe there is too much swing left and right also.I dont like the aiming reticle for the gunner, i think it should be a vertical bar gradutated in meteres (like the commanders view),(x5,x10 etc), not a AA aiming sight. As for the shell being overpowered, yes it is slightly, but in Artillery terms a near miss is considered a direct hit, and a couple of 155 shells are devastating when grouped together. Infantry have no chance if its an air burst. Some of the textures didnt show when i zooomed out and revolved around it.

I wish that AI would lock on to your choosen target and fire at it until told to stop, maybe we need a script or something for that. But it would be nice if you didnt need a direct line of sight to fire and could shoot over hills and woods and engage an area blind except for the radar at the top of the screen. Maybe give a grid reference by a spotter and the AI will pound away until its told to stop.

This add on really rocks!<span id='postcolor'>

True, but really the barrel support issue is a minor one. The fact of the matter is that it is VERY important for a M109 to have the capability to fire in a direct fire mode in order to defend itself if enemy armor comes into range as well as against attacking infantry where the coaxial or rooftop machine gun just might not cut it. I absolutely HATE it when addon makers limit addons like that. Also a direct hit from an artillery round is exactly that...a direct hit meaning that the shell contacts the target. The target may be a general area or it may be a point target as in a tank. Nevertheless we are not talking volley fire, but an individual M109 which does not fire in a volley all by itself. It simply would NOT destroy a main battle tank or even most APC's with a indirect hit. A truck, jeep, or other soft targets yes, but not armored targets unless they only have very light armor. Also as far as infantry go, these rounds are NOT airbursts nor do they attempt to simulate that. Infantry can very easily escape normal artillery simply by taking cover either in trenches (not possible in OFP unless you got GFX-707's trench addon) or you get behind some addons. Unfortunately, the OFP engine has a damage system where it doesn't matter if you have cover usually. That is why the addon maker needs to make these artillery rounds MUCH less powerful in the game engine...to be realistic, more like the 73mm BMP-1 rounds in OFP dammage wise. Yes I know the M109 is 155mm, but to get a similar damage radius either the 73mm round or maybe at the most, the 120mm tank round should be used as a template for dammage levels. Lowering the dammage levels would also deter players from trying to use the M109 as a big tank. Lowering the armor levels on the M109 would also help in this. So far I've found the M109's controlled by AI to be highly effective at ranges beyond that in which regular AI tanks can engage. Getting a platoon of these together results in some very potent volley fire.

Interesting debate about the originators of this addon however. I guess some DKM beta-tester decided to give DKM the finger and release it themselves? But the next question is... If DKM had it working this far why didn't they release it? If the problems with indirect fire, and unrealistic lethality (and armor levels) were fixed, it would be as perfect an artillery piece as can be made within the limitations of the OFP engine. But I guess now it will never see the light of day.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Rastavovich 0]

This addon is not our M109 Paladin but it seems they used our ADATS as basic.

[dsawan 0]

Could someone please give me the link or website address for the Gulf War M109? Thanks

[VXR 9]

yeah i was thinking like huh its the DKM M109 as i had the early beta of dkm also, but they used the Adats basic

[Gen.Carnage 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">any reaspn why it says DKM on the outside? And has outside textures that seem awful familiar? <span id='postcolor'>

BECAUSE THE F******* BA*****S STOLE THE M109 PALADIN ALLRIGHT!

A- they did NOT get permission to edit the adats

B- it is NOT the M109ADATS, but the real thing, modified so it would appear to be a remade adats.

C- Im sure one of our ex-member leaked this model.

want proof? look at our screenshots page at the pictures that are there of the paladin for 4 or 5 months!

what i cannot understand is them trying to take the credit for it as if they made it themselves, all the #^%#@# did is adit my months of hard work a little and tell people they made it?

makes me want to vomit, thats all i have to say to this, before i really say something that gets me banned

[VXR 9]

hmm thats why i was thinking its the M109 Palladin and not just a edit on the ADATS

but Carnage i didnt leak the m109 i dont have it for 3 months now

[Guest]

I strongly suggest that you work these things out in private.

While I think that everybody agrees that stealing somebody elses work is contemptible, it is very hard to ascertain who is telling the truth. It would be for the best if it can be handeled in an hornorable way, without involving the public. Throwing accusations at each other can do very little good.

I know that it must be frustrating for those who see their work stolen (or think that their work has been stolen), but try to take the higher road. The truth about these things always comes out and you will be getting the credit you deserve for your work while the ones that stole it will be contempted by the community.

[Forrestal 0]

Hawk realeasing his addon didn't ask the authors for permission to use some their works in some parts of "his" Paladin. Doing so he made quite big argument on some of the german's services. By the fact that Hawk was ocasonally working for of.fpp.pl as our associate, I would like to announce that he was removed from our service. Untill the case will be solved, or both sides find the sollution to this situation, he won't be writting for us.

I would like to send appology in My own name and in the name of whole of.fpp.pl team to the creators of DKM mod for the whole situation. I promise that I'll do whatever I can to avoid such situations in future.

[Forrestal 0]

The same text is on the our wesite, and our sit isn't the MOD SITE, its only a OFP SERVICE. Hawk isn't in our team now, Sorry for the problem. We must stopped the plagiarism!!!