A question to bas addon studio

[soul_assassin 1750]

Well, thanks to Tigershark for pointing me here. I see the discussion is going in the right direction. I think cooperation between MODs and teams is essential not only because of the standards but also because of standarnization, e.g. BAS makes a M1A1 Abrams and RSS makes a T90, apart these models rock and are widely used, but i takes the Abrams 1 shot to destroy the T90, and it takes the T90 6 shots to destroy the M1. What happens then? These addons are practically useless in the same mission, so working between mods to see that ballistic values are being generalized is an essential thing.

As a representative and founder of Red Star Studios i want to say that we are more than happy to be able to cooperate with BAS. Sadly I will be away on from tommorow for a week, so all the talking will be probably done through Stalker as he is our PR manager.

[Tigershark 0]

Excellent point Soul Assasin...never thought of the added extra there regarding values for tanks and such.

So...looks like we have a new era of co-operation here.

The discussion should continue...but I think Soul and myself will take the BAS and RAS stuff offline.

[Guest]

Just a thought...and shoot it down if you like (or modify it) but it's my $0.02.

What about each of the addon/mod teams having one or two representives on a specially created forum, where ideas, future projects, standards etc can be discussed/planned. That way only the "leaders" of teams would be involved, and reduce any "real or perceived" security risks, and some good discussion about what everyone is making can be co-ordinated.

Perhaps a few "solo" addon makers, plus some other leading lights (thinking Avon Lady here ) would be invited to participate. Perhaps even BIS and a moderator or two.

The idea would not be to make a "secret society" or anything like that, just a forum where only a few people could post, without loads of spam/useless threads etc, and ideas could be discussed a bit more freely, without information being sent out all over the net. Also as it would be the leader (s) of each mod, they would represent all of the members of their team, and could report things back to them as was deemed necessary (ie: stop making that M1A1 skin...so-and-so is already making one etc).

Any thoughts?

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tigershark @ Feb. 20 2003,08:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ooookay....I assume you don't want to contribute to the letter then.<span id='postcolor'>

I'm a consultant. I don't do that secretarial stuff.

[Schoeler 0]

Damn!!! Leone, you beat me to it! I was just going to say that. Establish a commission,with the leaders of all the top mod teams on it. Only a few to start, and then as more mods come on-line and show they meet the standards of the commission, they take a vote and admit them. Sort of a council of justice or UN of mod making teams. They could interact on a special board on the forums and come up with joint ventures. Image a joint BAS/DKM project or a Tales of War/RSS project. Also, they could standardize capabilities/coding/model qualities. Once an addon is created that meets commission standards and is approved, then it could be offered to the community at large for their own use. That way if some small potatoes mod decides to make their own M4 pack or something, eveyone would simply ignore it because they know the committee already approved what is considered a standard addon for the community. This would cut down on a lot of time spent re-making the same weapons again and again as well as the massive number of PBO's which are causing my game to crash. I'm sure a lot of the major sites that host addons and post news would cooperate with this effort. Get OFPEC, CZ, RU etc.. to designate the addons they host as approved by the committee. This way we get the community thinking as a community and not a bunch of individuals. If your addon doesn't get the seal of approval then you know nobody is going to want it or to want to host it, it only generates incentive to produce the very best. Just a few thoughts anyway.

[theavonlady 2]

Here's an example of where cooperation would help the community right now.

Head on over to Operation Code Blue's Mod site. More picture's can be found at on the news section of the mod's sponsoring site, OFP.org.

It would be great if the BAS and OCB teams could coordinate their efforts.

Who knows? Maybe they will. It could allow OCB to incorporate better technology in their mod through BAS existing and future addons. This could save the OCB team lots of time on addon production and concentrate on the mod's missions and campaigns.

Don't shoot the matchmaker!

[Schoeler 0]

I feel sooo guilty!! OCB still has my name on as a member of the mod team even though I haven't worked on anything for the mod since my brother died. He was a hell of a programmer and helped me tremendously on all my coding. I'm gonna get back to work on my campaign now that some of the new addons I needed have come out. I just need some Al-Qaeda and Iraqi's now. Gonna have to submit an apologetic e-mail to Jimbo.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Feb. 20 2003,09:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I feel sooo guilty!! OCB still has my name on as a member of the mod team even though I haven't worked on anything for the mod since my brother died.<span id='postcolor'>

I'm sorry to hear that.

While you're here, what do you think of my post, above, about OCB?

[mooncaine 0]

As a budding addon maker who has received help from a few kind mod makers, I am watching this topic with interest.

[Schoeler 0]

I would be more than happy to cooperate with BAS, but I really can't speak for OCB since I've been incommunicado for so long. My campaign hinges on half their addons anyway. I still need a decent C-130 and a Wasp class LHD. Other than that, I have all the personnell for the west side. As mentioned before, I need OPFOR troops. My storyline, which I thought was farfetched at the time was about Al-Qaeda and Iraq cooperating to set off an A-bomb in the U.S. Now its starting to look a little too close to actually hapening for me to feel very comfortable about it. I haven't felt like playing the game or making missions since Dave's death. He and I played the game together and he actually usaed to post once in a while too. I have maintained my speech on the boards though

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Feb. 20 2003,09:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My campaign hinges on half their addons anyway.  I still need a decent C-130 and a Wasp class LHD.  Other than that, I have all the personnell for the west side.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, here's the point we're all talking about.

Do you think that the west addons you're using are superior, equivalent or inferior to BAS'?

Or are BAS not appropriate? If not, why? Damage model? Weapons? Disagreement on realism features (uniforms, backpacks, radios, etc.)?

What if the differences in requirements are relatively trivial and BAS would be will to add some new units to their Delta/Ranger line to accomodate real life models that are slightly different that are needed for OCB's mod?

See the potential here? Elimination of redundancy, and more time for the OCB team to concentrate on gameplay more than anything else. It could even give them enough extra time to double the amount of missions and campaigns they originally intended to produce.

If you get back in touch with the OCB team, tell them to have a look at this here thread.

[Schoeler 0]

Actually, I plan on using BAS's rangers in my campaign. I've been waiting for those babies for some time now. I want their MH60 as well.

[Tigershark 0]

Actually..I have already spoken with someone from Codeblue who was very interested in using our M4s.

I'm just not sure that he realises it means referencing them in the units CPP file....not us handing over the M4 for him to modify and create his own with.

[Schoeler 0]

Oh, as for the other question. No, I feel BAS sets the standard for the mod community. I actually asked some of their members to cooperate with OCB a long time back and they said they would, but those guys are so busy I haven't approached them again since. Anyway, they were makeing addons along the same lines as we wanted, so for some things we just decided to wait for their releases. Whatever they aren't making, we will to fill in the gaps. For example, I'm going to use the Lavos project armed HMMVWs when they are done. There is no reason to make another set, as those will obviously set the standard for the community. Hey Tigershark, there are some cool chucks that should be part of that little commission I was talking about. Lavos doesn't play around, they do good work.

[Tigershark 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Feb. 20 2003,17:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Feb. 20 2003,09:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My campaign hinges on half their addons anyway.  I still need a decent C-130 and a Wasp class LHD.  Other than that, I have all the personnell for the west side.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, here's the point we're all talking about.

Do you think that the west addons you're using are superior, equivalent or inferior to BAS'?

Or are BAS not appropriate? If not, why? Damage model? Weapons? Disagreement on realism features (uniforms, backpacks, radios, etc.)?

What if the differences in requirements are relatively trivial and BAS would be will to add some new units to their Delta/Ranger line to accomodate real life models that are slightly different that are needed for OCB's mod?

See the potential here? Elimination of redundancy, and more time for the OCB team to concentrate on gameplay more than anything else. It could even give them enough extra time to double the amount of missions and campaigns they originally intended to produce.

If you get back in touch with the OCB team, tell them to have a look at this here thread. <span id='postcolor'>

Excellently put Avon...and that's what I'm talking about..Hooah!

If we can easily accomoate such a request it means a simple addition for BAS..and the mod in question can devote themselves to other tasks BAS or some other mods hasn't covered.

Excellent stuff!

[Schoeler 0]

Oh, I should add, with the permission of BAS, Lavos etc.. and with full credit given. No sense making a bunch of addons when they are already done as well as is possible by other teams.

[Tigershark 0]

Yeah...whatever happened to those Lavos HMMVs...we specifically didn't put these on our list of projects for the simple reason, as you said Schoeler...they would be the std. Those do great work.

But they seemed to have died haven't they...what happened to them?

The .50cal HMMV??

[Schoeler 0]

I think they are putting the whole project off until they get the TOW version working, which is a shame because the MG versions would be nice if they were released preliminary to the other one. Also, they seem to be focusing on a lot of WWII addons right now, which is strange because they are just so damned good at the desert/modern stuff.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tigershark @ Feb. 20 2003,10:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Actually..I have already spoken with someone from Codeblue who was very interested in using our M4s.

I'm just not sure that he realises it means referencing them in the units CPP file....not us handing over the M4 for him to modify and create his own with.<span id='postcolor'>

An easier solution would be to just say that the OCB Mod requires the BAS Deltas/Rangers addon pack. . OCB's missions would set the weapons inventory and no CPPs need to be modified.

[Schoeler 0]

That is kinda what I was planning with the campaign. Just issue a readme saying you need the BAS ranger pack etc... Cuts down on redundancy. Plus anyone who doesn't get certain packs has to have their head on backwards.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Feb. 20 2003,10:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think they are putting the whole project off until they get the TOW version working, which is a shame because the MG versions would be nice if they were released preliminary to the other one.  Also, they seem to be focusing on a lot of WWII addons right now, which is strange because they are just so damned good at the desert/modern stuff.<span id='postcolor'>

For those that don't know, here's the Desert OFP site: http://www.volny.cz/marfy_maac/index_english.htm

Go down the page and you'll see why they can't get the TOW Hummer to work.

Would be nice if someone knew of a workaround or if BIS would look into supporting this.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Feb. 20 2003,10:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Plus anyone who doesn't get certain packs has to have their head on backwards. <span id='postcolor'>

I think I've downloaded units with that error.

[Schoeler 0]

LOL , this is kind of an exciting idea though isn't it. It sure would legitimize a lot of the mods in BIS's eyes if we started releasing standardized addons. They might cooperate more with an organized front. I think a committee of standardization should be established. Maybe even have a member of BIS provide input on whether or not the work gets approved for quality. Get DKM, TOW, Lavos, BAS, and some freelacers like Col. Klink, Kegetys in on it.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ Feb. 20 2003,10:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LOL , this is kind of an exciting idea though isn't it.  It sure would legitimize a lot of the mods in BIS's eyes if we started releasing standardized addons.  They might cooperate more with an organized front.  I think a committee of standardization should be established. Maybe even have a member of BIS provide input on whether or not the work gets approved for quality.  Get DKM, TOW, Lavos, BAS, and some freelacers like Col. Klink, Kegetys in on it.<span id='postcolor'>

WARNING: Don't get too bureaucratic. Commitees? Ugh! Online chat sessions? Ah, that's better. Guidelines suggestions. Divvy up the work and realms. Team contact liasons? OK.

The names you mentioned are the ones whose participation would greatly benefit us all.

[Schoeler 0]

Yeah, I couldn't think of a better name for it, but it would be a board where only certain mod teams would be invited to discuss working together on certain projects. For example, BAS could tell Lavos they are planning on using the HMMVW's and maybe Lavos would light the fire again. But there definitely should be a 10 member board or something that approves an addon as a "standard" for the community. Simple submission to one another and a PM with a thumds up or thumbs down with suggestions for improvements would do it. Sorry, I don't mean to sound bureaucratic, I spent too much time working for my Uncle Sam to do that.