Wargames addpak 4.0 released

[ZiRo 0]

/me looks at the WGL team slowly being put off the idea of 5.0

Your asking for stuff that is pretty hard to do - they already have a ton of stuff they want to impliment in 5.0

They're good ideas though.

Also the addon thing - yeah ok, but do you really think addon teams are going to jump at it? "im going to make this addon for WGL especially". - Nah

And the comment about my confg- yeah it overwrites, but thats only because i really couldnt be arsed to have extra bugs to sort out :P

that and i was told you couldn't inherit from other pbos' cfg's.

-ZiRo

[-=BT=- Matty R 0]

pleaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaase FOR love for god !!!

make a version only for sp !!!!!!!! a new config just for sp please

Why the hell u asking that. its good in SP already and anyways its suppost to be for MP.

[the wolf 0]

no I'd like a new config who replace the old one...

because i wanna play sp missions and ofp campaigns with their mods...

if it's already exist tell me how can I do...

[ZiRo 0]

You uhm, add the units with the mission editor, create a mission, then play it?

ZiRo

[the wolf 0]

it's impossible to have a config with can I play???

[AngusHeaf 0]

Wolf is asking that we setup our config.bin file (the one in \wgl\bin) to use the WGL stuff as default. Right now we left the standard BIS units alone and they still exist with their own values and whatnot. I think what wolf is saying is that he would like to, say, play the default OFP campaign with WG stuff.

We're working on it wolf! Hehe. We just need to do the configging and also make sure that it generally works. Plus we have to figure out a few issues with inheritance and whatnot. There's a few issues that need to be worked out from a technical standpoint. But we'll do it sooner or later, most likely for the next major release.

Everyone else.... I do like your ideas and I think a lot of them have good solid thinking behind them. As for getting bogged down in the minutia, we try not to. Between myself, Tactician, and Phaeden, we've all had the ownerous task of saying "this doesn't work right yet, so cut it or scrap it". We won't spend absurd amounts of time on something small. Either we can crack the secret to making it happen in a few days or we can't and it's shelved. This keeps us moving forward and has kept us from getting too tied up like you're worrying about. I appreciate the concern though.

But then again, some things are really REALLY easy to do and we'll be bored one night and just do them. Differing speeds for soldiers would take me about 10 minutes. Different sounds would take about another 10 minutes.

Ziro... You can inherit from another MOD's configs just fine. All you have to do is get the names right for the classes. You could create a bridge PBO for certain stuff fairly easily as Tactician described with a bit of config hacking and making your own configs. It's similar to how BAS did the JAM compatible Deltas and Rangers.

[the_shadow 0]

is there any chanse that you´ll add more units/vehicles in the future???

[PhilippRauch 0]

hehe.. takes you guys 10min.. me on the other hand... ;)

well at least i will die trying..

I have one important question.. is the Arty from UA ok(=realism) in means of strenght(munition effects not vfx) to be used with WGL units?.. i understood that the UA is striving for realism as well..

they look good together...

[the_shadow 0]

next UA relese will (as ive been told) be compltely comatible with WGL (they even cooperete)

[AngusHeaf 0]

Yes we're looking at adding units and things to the next release. I've received confirmation from a couple of big label mod groups that they would like to cooperate. Just which mod groups is still just for us to know right now, because I don't make it a point to announce specifics until I know it will happen. But there will definitely be new stuff in WG5.

CoC UA is a great system currently. What we're working on for the future are WG FX for UA and also balancing the rounds a bit. We've been doing a lot of cooperative work with CoC and so far the fruits of the combined effort are pretty nifty. I think UA will add a tremendous amount of flexibility in making missions, which in the end is all that really matters isn't it? I mean, this stuff (WG, UA, whatever) is really fun but only really matters if you can make good fun missions with it. And I think UA will bring that to WG. Conversely I think WG will bring a bunch of cool stuff to UA as well.

[the_shadow 0]

this sounds great

wgl just get´s bigger and bigger then

pretty soon i might be able to throw all addons out the window and just use wgl ;) (well, maybe not, but you get my idea) ;)

[JdB 151]

I don't know if this has been said before, but I installed 4.10, then patched to 4.11, and it gives me an error:

Quote[/b] ]DX8 required

I have OFP version 1.94, using Direct 3D (not using the Hisky).

Neither 4.10 or 4.11 worked

Plz help

[rgreenpc 0]

Angus -

Seems my clan have colectivly said they love parts of your pack...

Thing is - we are worried we wouldn't be able to play with other clans if we went with your pack.

What are you thoughts?

Being a military man - I love the Compass and the hummers but other than that we aren't using it much.

Any thoughts of breaking the addons out for others to use as well?

[ZiRo 0]

rgreenpc: you should love the mortars, theyre ace when you know how to use them.

I like using them by estimating and using the compass.

I love everything about wgl its great.

If you have more than like 4 players, playing a search and destroy mission with lots of foliage (titan or gaia) its great to have a mortar set up to provide mortar fire incase large number of enemy encountered or under heavy fire etc.

I just need a squad like that to do it with.

-ZiRo

[rgreenpc 0]

@Ziro - thats our clan... We do everything with proper tactics and doctrine all be it US doctrine.

Overlapping fields of fire, cover and movement, etc.

We just dont want to start using WGL and end up not being able to play many teams.

My clan despises CTF and CTI we play proper objective based missions - Defend an objective - stop the convoy, etc.

CTF is just UT2004 with more real hardware.

I love the mortars but as before - if WGL isnt going to be used then I am getting worked up over nothing.

It boils down to this:

1. Can a clan using WGL play on a server that doesn't ( I know the other clan couldn't play on ours if we use WGL)

2. Can the weapons be broken out ie - Hummer pack, Mortar and Compass?

[ZiRo 0]

Enter the WGL.

Thats gonna be Angus's next post.

I think War Games League has objective based missions - although i could be wrong.

I remember playing with SWAF, a covert group was taken aside to act as an "enemy" it was all secret and we had to pretend we were chinese - lol. One of us was the server host - so he had a ping of about 12 so he nearly got rumbled.

We had sort of a campaign of missions accross everon. It was great, one mission PLA had to attack a base that was guarded by some SWAF, and some more SWAF in a chopper to support, they totally messed up the chopper, they landed in open ground and got slaughtered.

-ZiRo

zpcstrike@hotmail.com << rc contact me

[wOnkEy dOnkEy 0]

I don't know if this has been said before, but I installed 4.10, then patched to 4.11, and it gives me an error:

Quote[/b] ]DX8 required

I have OFP version 1.94, using Direct 3D (not using the Hisky).

Neither 4.10 or 4.11 worked

Plz help

what operating system are you running windoze 98, ME(shudder ),2000, XP

do you know what youre current Direct X version is on youre pc?

do you have other games/programmes that report this error or somthing simaler reguarding Direct X (STOP LAUGHING all you mac users and other gates victims! )

LINK for Direct X hompage

LINK for Windows Update website

[phaeden 0]

Wow,  I have seen a lot of really great ideas in this thread recently.  If you will allow me, I will touch on some of the more significant ones (in no particular order):

1.  SP Specific mode - For the last few months we have spent a large amount of time working out how to get the AI to behave more naturally.  Not to mention how to use weapons correctly and at correct ranges.  We definately plan on catering more to the SP crowd and are constantly looking into new and better ways to attain our goal of a "complete" OFP make-over.  We have come a long way, but that particular road is long and uncharted.

2.  New objects, vehicles, etc. - Here we are also looking into expanding everything we can to make WGL an all-inclusive pack.  As has been said, the only overriding stipulations are: realism must be maintained, CPU use must be as minimal as possible, and a "balance" must be maintained.  Otherwise, we are pretty much open to anything - you want a realistic Dukes of Hazard set, we are willing to looking into it.  Honestly, our goal is realistic squad based combat.  Whatever you can image that will fit into that is open game.

3.  Addon Bridge - Tactician has touched on this, but we would look into the feasibility of this (again staying true to the reaslism).

4.  Aircraft startup - We did it, but never had time to get it in and tested properly, but it is lurking in the WGL "waiting to be implemented" file section.

5.  Different effects (physical) based on unit - We would never spend a great deal of time on something if it were not in the interest of realisitic, yet playable modification.  The only reason we would implement something like this would be because it would affect gameplay - I think that adjusting the "sprint" speed would be the way to go - leave the run spead the same....  We are also looking into how terrain effects movement (but this is still on the drawing board).

6.  Mortars, Arty, CAS, Naval Gunfire - Let me start by saying I was with ANGLICO, and that is what my time in the Marines was spent doing.  I love these weapons and would love to see them completely and truly implemented.  No modern force enters the battle without addition support.  We are in working with CoC UA to achieve something positive in the future (BTW - UA kicks ***).

7.  Player roles - We are also looking into future defining the roles of specific players.  For example, having the engineer having the ability to fix things - or the radio operator to have a global function (beyond calling in reinforcements).  Think of how AAO tried to simulate this with their "training" cycles where you have to attend class to get a rating, only in WGL, you would "attend class" and then have to use specific skills to accomplish your task (similar to how the mortars require additional knowledge).  For example, an RTO would have to know how to set up a radio to the proper frequency (or something along these lines - again, it would be implemented only if it was truly useful).

8. Missions - This one is more open to individual taste, but the "real" WGL maps will continue to shift from the classic OFP CTF, C&H, A&D to more realistic "Objective" based missions. Of course there is a fine line between keeping things real and gameplay (we obviously will not include an 8 hour patrol when you encounter absolutely nothing but rain, cold, darkness, hunger, and sore feet).

As for the Direct X problem, make sure you have -nomap in your shortcut target line.

[rgreenpc 0]

@Phaeden

Here here... this is my clan's biggest beef with most clans out there.

CTF is extremely boring and redundant. There are only so many ways to skin that cat - so to speak.

We have been content to have A vs B Company matches in my clan as we have ATTEMPTED to play a few clans - only to watch the opposition charge over a hill at us in a BMP when we had a few hasty ambush spots set up....

Imagine their thoughts when they saw a few AT4s flying at them <G>

The one thing I wish you could/would add....

Get permission from BAS/JAM to add a few other weapon classes... and some newer optics.

Also an idea for the next version... a tradeoff....

Body Armour vs extra weapon spots? Take a Level 3 Vest with a steal plate and loose 2 ammo spots.

[Major Fubar 0]

I have a question/request: carrying two rifles.

No, I'm not talking about some Halflife type deal where you carry ten different weapons, with ammo for all...

What I am enquiring about is this -

The ability to carry a second weapon, using the "launcher" weapon slot. Ammo slots would be divided between both sorts of ammo.

For example, a sniper is carrying an M24SWS, and also an M4. He might have 6 mags for the M24, and 4 for M4. He would be able to swap between either rifle...

Is this possible? i believe it is within the realms of reality, I've seen many pics of snipers with a secondary weapon (and not always just a pistol).

[Skewballzz 0]

I agree with major fubar. I have thought about this many times when I'm playing (ie... resistance missions where soldiers need to carry as much firepower as they can. I'm a big res fan...). I know this is not realistic, as I have seen soldiers do this in real life. If it is not possible, o well, but if it is, all the more power to it. I also understand that there are priorities, and compared to other stuff, it is understandable if this is put off 'till much later.

[MSpencer 0]

If you look hard enough you might be able to find pictures of special forces operators carrying perhaps a small sub machine gun and a full rifle, or a sniper rifle.

[rgreenpc 0]

This is a very interesting concept...

I was a pilot in the USAF and on several occasions I had detachements in my plane... I talked with a sniper one time.

He had ( what I think ) was a M24 and he also had a silenced M4.

[-IT-Q- 0]

@rgreenpc

wargames league maps - c&h and a&d only

(and as pheaden stated)

Quote[/b] ]to more realistic "Objective" based missions

[dinger 1]

I don't have much to add to what's already been said.

However, CoC UA has been working with WGL since early in beta (nearly a year ago (!) ). The WGL mortars use a lot of the technologies we developed for UA. The next step, of course, is to bring a lot of the WGL developments into UA.

In short, yeah, we've been talking to each other for quite some time; and we both benefit from our collaboration.

stay tuned...