Russian apc pack

[benu 1]

I just tried it again:

putting the addon into the addons folder works, putting it into a modfolder (on dedicated server) does not work. v0.8 did work in a modfolder. So i guess something in 0.9 is broken. As no one replied here i will try to fix the addon myself. Thanks for your constructive post Oswald

[killswitch 19]

Checked the config... yep, there's a few bugs/quirks in the ammo and weapons configs. (Sneaky dependencies on other addons, among other things). I'll continue digging and report my findings...

The linux deddy is a wonderful addon testing tool. It reflects a little saying of mine rather nicely - "You either do it right or you use Windows" 

Perfect is good enough. We'll get there...

[lee_h._oswald 0]

Thanks for your constructive post Oswald  

I´m not looking every 5minutes in this thread.

Do you know what a pm is?

MfG Lee

[benu 1]

Sure, but my answer belonged here as you stated here that it would work, which it doesn't. You could have done that by pm too...

Do you know what a general statement is? When i report a bug, then you can only say that there is NO bug when you test ALL scenarios and do not find a bug. Which you obviously didn't. But you took your time to disagree with me, without as much as an argument consolidating your case. But you did not seem to have the time to answer any of my questions. In other words: you have time to be unconstructive, but not to be constructive. That leaves me thinking what would be the cause for your posting.

When i say there is a bug i could of course be wrong. If you know that i am wrong and what my mistake is it is ok to correct my error. But just posting a reply like yours is like writing "it works for me, you must be too dumb to do it." Written in another way that would have been ok too, IF you had been right.

Doesn't matter anyway, i already fixed the addon myself, just tested it on my server.

[nyles 11]

Some time ago, I asked about an RPO-A. Back then I was told that AKM would be working on one. What has become of it? I'd really love to see that thingie with proper eyecandy flame effects, someday. Would be great if you could add one to the APC pack in an upcoming release.

[lee_h._oswald 0]

Keep cool...

My post was an information that it runs on our linux server.

I have tested the apc pack with a cti version and everything works fine.

MfG Lee

[Chris Death 0]

Benu, i think you do not right blaming Lee here.

You said:

Quote[/b] ]with v0.9 the addon does not work anymore on dedicated servers (or at least 1.92/1.93b linux dedicated servers

And Lee answered:

Quote[/b] ]0.9 runs fine on 1.92 linux dedi.

I understand this as a straight and correct answer to your post. You didn't mention the mod-folders before, you just

said that it doesn't work anymore. And Lee just said that

it works (at least for him, however he did it).

btw - i don't wanna get involved into any kind of flamewar

now, just tried to get yer both asses closer together again

~S~ CD

[benu 1]

I just came back to edit my posting (in dubio pro reo) but it seems it is too late already. Well then....

Don't take it personal, but i have seen projects die because someone made untested general statements and people believed and relied on that. So i find it very unconstructive to make such a general statement, without testing it, ESPECIALLY when you do not follow the discussion afterwards.

This is a really cool addon and i would hate to have to take it from my server or fix every version myself and distribute them among my players because of a bug which does not get corrected because YOU SAID SO WITHOUT TESTING IT. I mean, it is ok to not believe me, test the issue, find he is right and write that i am wrong. But i get really pissed when someone just pulls the "you are wrong dumbass" thing without verifying his claims in any way (and being wrong with it).

Formulating your statement a little less general would have helped to interpret it in the way it was meant: that it works FOR YOU.

Sorry if i overreacted.

[killswitch 19]

Yep, just like DV Chris put it, in the beginning stages of the dialog, you both expressed yourselves a bit too general. This left the door open for possible wrong interpretations to be spread, just like benu says above. One has to be careful both when reporting problems and when answering them, so as to not state something that is ambigous or won't cover all possible cases. But enough of that.

Anyway, the addon dependency and ammo config quirks have been reported to DKM/ AKM74 so everything should work out for the best in the end.

[benu 1]

Glad to hear that. I would have reported the modfolder issue earlier if i had found out about it earlier. But my possibilites for "modifying addons, uploading it to the dedi server, restarting the server to load the new addon and get some people together for mp testing" are very limited in the last few days.

Norsu gave me a hint to first check for addonrequired[]={"bis_resistance"}; in those addons giving warning messages on player side before checking any other dependencies and most of those can be fixed by just adding that line to the config.cpp (but sadly it's not always that simple). I noticed that this line is missing in some more of the v1.75+ dkm addons i use. Iirc it is present in the new version of the rah66 (v1.2 iirc), but was missing in the older one. So i guess this is a well-known issue at dkm anyway.

[lee_h._oswald 0]

To make it clear:

"0.9 runs fine on 1.92 linux dedi." <- That does not mean: "Benu is an idiot and not be able to test things."

And it does also not mean that I tested under every conditions.

Please don´t make a BIG PROBLEM of a few words.

Everyones fine?

Ok, lets stop here!

MfG Lee

[Guest DKM-jaguar]

For the love of god, please return to intended topic....

[Acecombat 0]

Hmm i tested the BTR-80 with a mine and sad to say it dosnt protects the people sitting on top i died everytime

[mr burns 132]

Hmm i tested the BTR-80 with a mine and sad to say it dosnt protects the people sitting on top i died everytime  

What kind of statement is this ?

Of course u die

If not because of OFP logic (btr80 is destroyed), isn´t it at least the purpose of an AT Mine to destroy and to kill ?

[miles teg 1]

In addition to that there is a video floating on the net showing what happens when a BTR-80 hits a big anti-tank mine. The turret flies off, everyone inside is killed and usually everyone on top is thrown into the air and killed by the shock of the explosion. It's a pretty horrific video. To be fair it was probably either stacked AT mines or a large amount of buried explosives because the explosion was huge. Smaller AT landmines might not kill everyone but it would still likely throw everyone off and cause alot of injuries (not to mention the deaths of some those inside).

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Bluesman 0]

Hmm i tested the BTR-80 with a mine and sad to say it dosnt protects the people sitting on top i died everytime  

What kind of statement is this ?

Of course u die

If not because of OFP logic (btr80 is destroyed), isn´t it at least the purpose of an AT Mine to destroy and to kill ?

Actually; The purpose of AT mines is to destroy the Tank not the personnel.

I agree that some protection while sitting on top would be nice but I think this is hardcoded or something.

BM

[miles teg 1]

Have you ever seen a video of a tank hitting an AT mine?  I saw several of these at Ft. Leanordwood, Missouri during my training on landmines and believe me, they definitely kill and injure horrifically the crew inside the tank.  Lightly armored APC and unarmored vehicles are even more vulnerable.  Only a handful of APC's have specially shaped hulls to counter AT mines by challenging the blast away from the center of the hull.  But these are only useful for smaller AT mines and not for stacked AT mines or for the really large AT mines (or large amounts of shape charged/command detonated explosives).

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Acecombat 0]

Beleive it or not, it's safer on the top that inside.

And believe it, it works!

2 times tested, 2 times survived.

MfG Lee

I am talking about THIS

As much as i agree evryone would be killed in real life i thought Lee's post showed that ingame it didnt but apparently i am getting killed everytime

[Bluesman 0]

Have you ever seen a video of a tank hitting an AT mine?  I saw several of these at Ft. Leanordwood, Missouri during my training on landmines and believe me, they definitely kill and injure horrifically the crew inside the tank.  Lightly armored APC and unarmored vehicles are even more vulnerable.  Only a handful of APC's have specially shaped hulls to counter AT mines by challenging the blast away from the center of the hull.  But these are only useful for smaller AT mines and not for stacked AT mines or for the really large AT mines (or large amounts of shape charged/command detonated explosives).

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

Yes but in this case we are talking about people on top of the actual IFV. I don't mean that it's a safe place or anything but crews as well as infantry should have a slight chance of survival imo (and bail out as they call it). At least against normal AT-mines.

Having been in a truck driver in a transport company for a short time I know the only tool you have at your disposal is a prayer and some luck .

Unrelated Q. That picture; Is that with explosions mod installed? I still havent had the chance to try it out.

BM

[edc 0]

It looks like it. Its very good IMO, I just installed it a month or so ago, and can't believe I didn't do it earlier.

[Bluesman 0]

It looks like it.  Its very good IMO, I just installed it a month or so ago, and can't believe I didn't do it earlier.

Really nice. That picture should be in some advertising for OFP .

BM

[akm74 1]

Quote[/b] ]Having been in a truck driver in a transport company for a short time I know the only tool you have at your disposal is a prayer and some luck

In Afghanistan war (1979-1987) Russian drivers put their bulletproof wests on the floor, under their foot. Believe it or not, but many of them saying this really help sometime.

[TheMcDeth 0]

I do not know about BTR-80 but for example Patria XA-185 has top speed over 120 km/h. I would not like to sit on top of that thing while driving full speed. Of course you cannot drive that fast in most roads, but still I would say that in any kind of road / terrain, the speed should be limited if there is someone sitting on the roof. Other possibility is that there is a small propability (1 - 5 % for example) that soldiers dropping off from the roof if speed is more than say 75% of the max speed for each terrain type.

[mr burns 132]

Beleive it or not, it's safer on the top that inside.

And believe it, it works!

http://lee.plankton.ch/itworks.jpg

http://lee.plankton.ch/itworks2.jpg

2 times tested, 2 times survived.

MfG Lee

I am talking about THIS  

As much as i agree evryone would be killed in real life i thought Lee's post showed that ingame it didnt but apparently i am getting killed everytime  

Sorry mate..i had´nt seen Lee´s post

But now that iv´e seen it i guess that surviving-thingie could be caused by Goldmembers Explomod. I think so because sometimes (or usual) the crews of a destroyed tank can manage to bail out or get thrown away a little bit, but survive, until the explosion kills them

[Supah 0]

When you put soldiers on top of the BTR-80 they sit there perfectly still, is it possible to have them wobble about a bit like they do when they sit in cargo on other vehicles? For the rest the vehicles look fantastic