MAAM: Mutually Accepted Ammo & Magazines addon

[theavonlady 2]

We could always consider adding a one-shot LAW into MAAM, in addition to the existing multi-shot version. That way, existing missions would not be affected.

Away I go! Back tomorrow night.

[calm_terror 0]

oh yes please make an one shot of a weak weapon just to make it completely useless.

lol

hey the AT4 is not reloadable either it is a one shot weapon..

the US does nto use any reloadable AT man portable. yes the Javil;ine cna be "reloaded" wich really means takignt he computer controls off a tube nad puttign on a new tube. the TOW is reloadable but not really man portable.

the main thing is get the damn hit values on the AT weapons right. and techically the AT4 is not used for AA combat.

the RPG is tho but only with an mod makign it air burst.

but there needs to be a better damage setting for all LAW's RPG's and AT4's making each have a different value.

also making mp5 and UZI ammo that is secondry and not jsut primary.

this kinda sucks that BAS needed to be jerks and not let JAM be modified. since thsi will be a bitch to get add-on makers to use this I will not use it till it has been accepted and used more. I will just keep using JAM..

[AdmiralKarlDonuts 0]

You know what would be really sweet? Using Earl's weapon models to replace all the aging BIS ones.

One thing I still don't like about JAM - besides the fact that it used all those ugly BIS models - is that they left out some weapons I think really should have been included, like the RPK74 and the M249 - Earl has both...as a matter of fact the MARPAT guys have got most of these weapons.

Other cool models you might consider asking permission to include:

- Laser's M16A2/M203. He made one for his new Rangers by editing Earl's M16A2 and adding the 203, since Earl didn't make one.

- Inquisitor's M24 - very nice model indeed.

- the M240 Earl reportedly made...AFAIK the Nogovan Armed Forces Project has it.

- King Homer's M1911A1 pistol and his M82A1

- DanAk47's M14 series models, when he finishes them....looking very good.

True it would make MAAM a bigger download, but if you could turn it into a sort of 'one-stop weapons shop' covering all the commonly used firearms (exotic stuff isn't a priority, methinks), I think people would be more inclined to use it.

But that's just my take on things

[Pappy Boyington 0]

You know what would be really sweet?  Using Earl's weapon models to replace all the aging BIS ones.  

One thing I still don't like about JAM - besides the fact that it used all those ugly BIS models - is that they left out some weapons I think really should have been included, like the RPK74 and the M249 - Earl has both...as a matter of fact the MARPAT guys have got most of these weapons.

Other cool models you might consider asking permission to include:

- Laser's M16A2/M203.  He made one for his new Rangers by editing Earl's M16A2 and adding the 203, since Earl didn't make one.

- Inquisitor's M24 - very nice model indeed.

- the M240 Earl reportedly made...AFAIK the Nogovan Armed Forces Project has it.

- King Homer's M1911A1 pistol and his M82A1

- DanAk47's M14 series models, when he finishes them....looking very good.

True it would make MAAM a bigger download, but if you could turn it into a sort of 'one-stop weapons shop' covering all the commonly used firearms (exotic stuff isn't a priority, methinks), I think people would be more inclined to use it.

But that's just my take on things

actualy that was about the ONLY thing i liked about JAM. was they didnt use custom models.

yes i too hate BIS weapon model/textures. but ever since the days of INQ's first release of his weapon pack. i used the config to replace all BIS weapons with INQ's and now with Y2K3, all the "jam" weapons are INQ weapons. if Y2K3 isnt your fancy and EECP is, then you have suchy and earls weapons (if im not mistakin). they did a great job on thier guns, but i like INQ's the best. thier just so... perfect

i know alot of people say "well their too shiney and new, real guns dont look like that" 99.72% of al the pics from afgan and iraq, thier guns look pretty "shiney and new" to me. when i see the pics they make me think of INQ's weapons. so i know he got it right.

if u dont like the BIS weapon models, suggest you look into Y2K3 or EECP. (actualy.. scrub that just look into Y2K3 )

[calm_terror 0]

i hate INQ's guns they are in jpg textures and lag like a mofo..

they ar enice and everytihng but lag way to much.

[lee_h._oswald 0]

i hate INQ's guns they are in jpg textures and lag like a mofo..

they ar enice and everytihng but lag way to much.

...

Go to INQ's downloadpage and download all the guns with paa/pac texes...

Click here.

INQ's weapons are the best available if you ask me.

MfG Lee

[pajama 0]

when i see the pics they make me think of INQ's weapons. so i know he got it right.

...Ahh don't give him all the credits

Its not like he skined and modeled those weapons.

Any ways...

Yes, pleas keep MAAM as "Plaine Jane" in the customization area as much as possible.  No custom sound, units, or weapons pleas.  Unless it is neccesary for a "new" feature in the mod.

Good job Maam

Woopi! Time to make a MAAM sound pack

[theavonlady 2]

Some comments on the above posts:

1) First and foremost, some of you do not understand what JAM and MAAM are. They are NOT weapons mods. JAM/MAAM are mods that define common types of ammunition and magazines for use with existing weapons. So whether you like the Marpat's M16 or Inq's M16, you can define separate files for these and other weapons addons that will let you equip them with common magazines and ammo. The main benefit is that no matter whose M16 you use, their firepower and other attributes will remain the same when eqipped with JAM/MAAM magazines - which is the way it should be. To quote the JAM/MAAM documentation:

Quote[/b] ]Mutually Accepted Ammo and Magazines project (MAAM) is a

magazine standard, originally developed and know as JAM, by

BAS and Digital Grenade, for use with all our units. Other addonmakers/mods

are invited to use MAAM to improve compatibility between similar

version of weapons made by different people. It is impossible to code for

every single weapon/magazine combination, we have included the most

common and therefore the most likely to be shared between different units.

Some specialised magazines do not need the commonality that MAAM provides

so can be coded separately in each addon.

2) CalmTerror, I do not understand your post. Is a realistic one-shot LAW/AT4 a good or bad idea? If good, how do you see it needing to be defined to be realistic, assuming realism is what you're interested in? Keep in mind how such definitions would affect the AT weapon's effectiveness against various addons, from BIS' standard armor to those of popular addon teams.

3) I'm already in touch with someone on the BAS team. If we can show some serious work here, adding new definitions, teaking older ones and expanding the JAM concept in the direction it was created to go in the first place, BAS will see no problem with MAAM reverting back to using JAM's original tags. That would mean that we can produce, with BAS' permission, a JAM3 that will be 100% compatible to JAM2 but more encompassing and better.

As such, I ask you all to look at MAAM as a beta version for a true JAM3 release. Anything produced for MAAM can easily be converted to JAM tags when the time comes to release this as JAM3.

If you want to see this happen, hop aboard!

Raedor from the RHS team was on here the other day, hoping to see suggested changes. Yet I haven't heard anything since his single post here a page or 2 back.

Same with the one-shot LAWs/AT4s. Details, please!

And I need help! I am not an addon maker. I suggested that the community - especially existing addon teams - pool together their ideas on making this addon truly Mutually Acceptable to the maximum proportion of the OFP community.

I would like to thank those BAS members who have been participating on this thread and I hope they will continue to add their input here on how we can improve MAAM further.

Thanks to all of you who are participating but let's move to more practical talk that will lead to real changes and getting things done.

[shinRaiden 0]

Would it be possible to part out the config.cpp into #include files and stuff those into Amore as well? That could help organizing feedback from the community, if you want to focus on EAST weps you only have to dig through a few small files relating to those specific weps.

However, that brings me to my main question. Can the content in Amore be MP validated? If not, what is to prevent someone from replacing the silenced sounds with not-so-quiet ones, eliminating the effect of the silencer client-side? And so on with textures, models, and scripts.

[Pappy Boyington 0]

when i see the pics they make me think of INQ's weapons. so i know he got it right.

...Ahh don't give him all the credits

Its not like he skined and modeled those weapons.

Any ways...

Yes, pleas keep MAAM as "Plaine Jane" in the customization area as much as possible.  No custom sound, units, or weapons pleas.  Unless it is neccesary for a "new" feature in the mod.

Good job Maam

Woopi! Time to make a MAAM sound pack

your right they are CS imports i know and he took alot of shit for "stealing" them. honestly idgaf

calm_terror, like lee siad get the paa/pac ones. Y2K3 uses his Paa/Pac textured weapons with a few added bonus'

my thoughts on the one shot AT4/law is bad bad bad idea. in order to make that work you would have to make the round over powered. if u made it realistic then gameplay wise your squad would be defensless agasint even a t55

[theavonlady 2]

Would it be possible to part out the config.cpp into #include files and stuff those into Amore as well? That could help organizing feedback from the community,

That's sounds like a good idea for testing. Now let's see something that justifies deploying this.

Quote[/b] ] if you want to focus on EAST weps you only have to dig through a few small files relating to those specific weps.

I take it this is just an example of the advantage of parceling out the work. Because I do not want to focus on EAST ammo more than WEST. Every ammo and mag type should be considered.

Quote[/b] ]However, that brings me to my main question. Can the content in Amore be MP validated?

I'm guessing no. Does the validation method allow for checking for a non-PBO file in a fixed folder location? If it does, then it should work.

Quote[/b] ]If not, what is to prevent someone from replacing the silenced sounds with not-so-quiet ones, eliminating the effect of the silencer client-side? And so on with textures, models, and scripts.

I have thought of this concern. We may have to revert back to placing all of these in an addon PBO file and eliminate the use of AMORE. Note, however, that textures and models are not in AMORE. They remain in the MAAM_Magazines.pbo file. The only pics in AMORE are the ones that display in a mission's weapons inventory page in the briefing notebook.

[theavonlady 2]

my thoughts on the one shot AT4/law is bad bad bad idea. in order to make that work you would have to make the round over powered. if u made it realistic then gameplay wise your squad would be defensless agasint even a t55

OK. I had a feeling someone would say that.

[calm_terror 0]

yeha one shot weaposn are realistic but in game they are completely useless you miss your well you know

lol

I am all for realism but some tiems game play needs to be before. and in real life infantry don't go tank busting alone. usual they have helo's jets cruise missles and/or armour. etc..

so yeah make them reloadable.

but my other point was the actual damage ratings for each LAW,RPG,AT4 ammo type needs to be adjusted. like the AP verision should have a lower hit ratign but a larger blast area to simulate scrapnal, the AA verision should nto evne be in there with out a timed detonation, the ALL should be normalish damage, and the AT verision should be a ass whooper, liek the RPG-7VR is a veyr powerful AT round but the "PG-7VR" in JAM is the same as the ALL and AP verisions wich is bull..

you get what I mean?

[dm 9]

but my other point was the actual damage ratings for each LAW,RPG,AT4 ammo type needs to be adjusted. like the AP verision should have a lower hit ratign but a larger blast area to simulate scrapnal, the AA verision should nto evne be in there with out a timed detonation, the ALL should be normalish damage, and the AT verision should be a ass whooper, liek the RPG-7VR is a veyr powerful AT round but the "PG-7VR" in JAM is the same as the ALL and AP verisions wich is bull..

you get what I mean?

You do realise that "all" the AP, AA, AT and ALL codes mean is what type of target the gunner will primarily target?

I.e. In JAM the "AP" warhead is EXACTLY the same warhead as the "AT" warhead, just coded to be used to attack people rather than armoured vehicles. This is so that you can have some control over what the AI will shoot at, which is not bull

[SelectThis 0]

AT damages is one of the areas it is hard to get any consensus, game play v realism, disagreement about what the actual RL levels are, different types of armor in RL, actual deployment of weapons etc.

(ps interesting link: T-80U and T-90 Protection Trials)

Another area is the 5.56 v 7.62 v other caliber discussions. Joules v Terminal Velocity v "Stopping Power" v fragmentation...a truely messy area with no real answers.

Couple of articles by Fackler:

Military rifle bullet wound patterns

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE WOUND BALLISTICS LITERATURE, AND WHY

If you have ideas of how to implement these items, then you should include actual cpp values, this makes it easier for the people coding to compare how your suggestions would work in OFP.

SelectThis

[korax 4]

i thought the law couldnt be reloaded and was a throw away weapon?

Search The FAQ for "law".

BIS' LAW is environment-friendly.

Eep, I did the search for "law" but accidentally clicked the second entry! I was confused for a bit there  

[pajama 0]

Woohoo their Biodegradable!

Can I eat em?

[calm_terror 0]

yes I understand what the "AP", "AT", "All", and "Air" mean. and why but you should not have called the AT verision PG-7VR since it is a pussy weapon compared to the real PG-7VR..

[theavonlady 2]

but you should not have called the AT verision PG-7VR since it is a pussy weapon compared to the real PG-7VR..

So let's discuss changing this. You think JAM's defintions for a PG-7VR round are underpowered? What should be changed then?

EDIT: As SelectThis stated above:

Quote[/b] ]If you have ideas of how to implement these items, then you should include actual cpp values, this makes it easier for the people coding to compare how your suggestions would work in OFP.

[calm_terror 0]

well the PG-7VR is a tandem warhead that HAS disbled an M1a2 in 1 shot from the side.

I have to look at the code again but I would say atleast double what it is now. let me see what i Have for my edited JAM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">

class JAM_AT4ammo : LAW

{

//thrustTime=0.300000;

//thrust=680;

//maxSpeed=300;

//initTime=0.1;

thrustTime=0.200000;

thrust=1000;

maxSpeed=150;

initTime=0.0;

hit=500;

indirectHit=250;

indirectHitRange=2.100000;

soundHit[]={"\JAM_Sounds\sounds\JAM_boom.wss",31.622778,1.0};

soundFly[]={"\JAM_Sounds\sounds\RPG7Flyby.ogg",31.622778,1.0};

};

class JAM_AT4AAammo : JAM_AT4ammo

{

hit=125;

indirectHit=75;

indirectHitRange=3.100000;

airLock = true;

};

class JAM_AT4APammo : JAM_AT4ammo

{

thrustTime=0.200000;

thrust=1000;

maxSpeed=150;

initTime=0.0;

cost=10000;

hit=400;

indirectHit=300;

indirectHitRange=5.100000;

irLock=false; // lock on soldier

};

class JAM_AT4ALLammo : JAM_AT4APammo

{

hit=425;

indirectHit=75;

indirectHitRange=3.100000;

cost=10000;

irLock=false; // lock on soldier

airLock = true;

};

class JAM_M72ammo : JAM_AT4ammo

{

hit=250;

indirectHit=100;

indirectHitRange=2.100000;

};

class JAM_M72AAammo : JAM_AT4AAammo

{

hit=125;

indirectHit=75;

indirectHitRange=3.100000;

airLock = true;

};

class JAM_M72APammo : JAM_AT4APammo

{

cost=10000;

irLock=false; // lock on soldier

hit=200;

indirectHit=175;

indirectHitRange=4.100000;

};

class JAM_M72ALLAmmo: JAM_AT4ALLammo

{

hit=275;

indirectHit=75;

indirectHitRange=3.100000;

cost=10000;

irLock=false; // lock on soldier

airLock = true;

};

class JAM_rpg7ammo : JAM_AT4ammo

{

model="\JAM_Magazines\JAM_rpg7rocketF";

};

class JAM_rpg7AAammo : JAM_AT4AAammo

{

model="\JAM_Magazines\JAM_rpg7rocketF";

airLock = true;

};

class JAM_rpg7APammo : JAM_AT4APammo

{

model="\JAM_Magazines\JAM_rpg7rocketF";

irLock=false; // lock on soldier

};

class JAM_rpg7ALLammo : JAM_AT4APammo

{

model="\JAM_Magazines\JAM_rpg7rocketF";

cost=10000;

irLock=false; // lock on soldier

airLock = true;

};

that is what the RPG is based on but even that is kinda low.

(note that is MY edited not the defualt JAM)

as you can see all at4 and rpg are based on the at4 stats wich si messed up every one should be different

[theavonlady 2]

as you can see all at4 and rpg are based on the at4 stats which is messed up - every one should be different

I noticed that. BAS folks lurking here, why were they all coded the same?

Suggestions on implementing new defintions welcome.

[Pappy Boyington 0]

as you can see all at4 and rpg are based on the at4 stats which is messed up - every one should be different

I noticed that. BAS folks lurking here, why were they all coded the same?

Suggestions on implementing new defintions welcome.

my guess would be to even the odds. make it fair for both sides

[theavonlady 2]

as you can see all at4 and rpg are based on the at4 stats which is messed up - every one should be different

I noticed that. BAS folks lurking here, why were they all coded the same?

Suggestions on implementing new defintions welcome.

my guess would be to even the odds. make it fair for both sides

As I already mentioned:

Quote[/b] ]As SelectThis stated above:

Quote[/b] ]If you have ideas of how to implement these items, then you should include actual cpp values, this makes it easier for the people coding to compare how your suggestions would work in OFP.

[Pappy Boyington 0]

actualy i was answering "why did BAS make the AT4 and RPG7 the same"

sorry i shoulda also "input my suggestion" too.

i think the current power of the RPG7 is fine. i use the JAM RPG7 in Y2K3. resistance soldier carries it along with 4 rounds. its just enough to disable or destroy 1 MBT (T80 or M1A1) since the RPG his a high failure rate of detonation, coupled with the "high tech" armor its put up agasint usualy deflects the rounds like ping pong balls its "weakened" strenght seems to ballance that out.

but the AT4 should have a higher kill power. approx 50% its default value

IE:

hit=500;

indirectHit=250;

indirectHitRange=2.100000;

to

hit=750;

indirectHit=375;

indirectHitRange=4.100000;

since its a much more reliable and more powerful AT weapon compared to the RPG7. but again we dnt want it to be over powered. so jacking it up 50% of its current state would make it a perfect ballence between gameplay and realisum

[calm_terror 0]

pappy

that is true of the PG-7 but not the PG-7VR that is a MUCH better AT weapon then the AT4. the OG-7 wich is the AP verision has a smaller HE but a larger Frag.

but the PG-7VR is a tandem warhead that cna beat even most ERA. it was able to burn through the side armour on an M1A2 all the way into the crew area and disable the Tank and slightly injuring the crew.. so the PG-7VR should be ALOT stronger.. it is even now beign promoted as the M1A2 Abrams destorier. lol

also should include Javline ammo based loosy on the MARPAT one

as for balance. everytihng has a balance if you know how to work it.

liek an Ak47 better stopping and killing power means better CQB

the m16A2 better long range and more stable and lighter means better distance.

so they are balanced just not in the same way.

so if you have an M16A2 you try to keep your distance and try for longer range engagements but if you have an ak47 you try to flank and move up and engage at a much closer range or try to trap your enemy.

that is balanced. there is other things that balance these but have very little effect on gameplay..

as for the PG-7 vs AT-4

the PG-7 is larger and heavier, and larger HE but is limited on range

the AT-4 smaller lighter and has smaller HE but has a longer range.

balanced.. funny how in life things are balanced