M1A2 SEP v.2.0

[hitsqdzulu 0]

Hi fellas ....Luv the tank ...but we are having a problem with it on a linux dedicated server. I just put them on Fraghaus and updated a mission I made aready with the new tanks. Now when 3 tanks were driving by each other they would warp alittle as they moved. So I guess I asking If you already know about this and is this addon dedicated server tested.

Would there be any chance to make it so it wouldnt warp.....I really luv these babies and would really like to have them on the server ....thx for any help you can give and if your to busy ....then thx alot for a great tank ...I will use it on my own server cause its great

[king homer 1]

What do you mean with warp and why does this happens only with 3 tanks?

[hitsqdzulu 0]

What I mean is I was watching the 3 move out to the target .....as they were moving you could see each 1 while it was moving would jerk alittle like it was desyncing. I rebooted the server to make sure It was running good before I tried the tanks out. Also the mission I put them in has been played with the default Bis tanks and runs great. It only seems to be your tanks. Is anyone else seeing this on a dedicated server

[Pappy Boyington 0]

Quote[/b] ]COMPABILITY

===========

This addon is tested with following mods:

FlashFX 1.9

FDF Mod 1.3

Y2K3 7.0

actualy there was one itty bitty tweak that needed done to make them work (with the eventhandlers) Y2K3ers please check the Y2K3 topic page 22 for a download link to the fixed config to make this work, as well as the new version of the AH64 by marco polo (its a combined fix)

this message applies to ONLY people that play with the Y2K3 total conversion mod

[king homer 1]

What I mean is I was watching the 3 move out to the target .....as they were moving you could see each 1 while it was moving would jerk alittle like it was desyncing. I rebooted the server to make sure It was running good before I tried the tanks out. Also the mission I put them in has been played with the default Bis tanks and runs great. It only seems to be your tanks. Is anyone else seeing this on a dedicated server

No, I didn't noticed this yet. Maybe your dedicated Server has just not enough power and the tanks are lagging or you have some other other addon which is not compatible with the addon.

[-DsO- ShapeShifter 0]

Another Mirror  

Nice work ! One of the best M1 Addons ive ever seen

[hitsqdzulu 0]

Its not the server ...I can guarantee its not the server. Do your scripts have alot of loops. Our server can handle 32 people on it.

[Bobcatt666 0]

I be happy if the chicken-sh*t AI didn't unass the track with the first mobility kill.. Unable to call in repair units to fix the tank cause the AI have abandoned the vehicle. Then get smoked as the next hit slams into the disabled vehicle which still didn't destroy the tank, the player can't easilly request support for repairs.

[FerretFangs 0]

I be happy if the chicken-sh*t AI didn't unass the track with the first mobility kill.. Unable to call in repair units to fix the tank cause the AI have abandoned the vehicle. Then get smoked as the next hit slams into the disabled vehicle which still didn't destroy the tank, the player can't easilly request support for repairs.

Sounds pretty real to me... as long as we aren't talking about BS RPG hits.

[Bobcatt666 0]

It isn't if your tank is hit once by a t64 or t72, the BIS M1A1 the crews do not run away like cowards fist hit on their vehicle. You can order repairs and send the track to the support units for repairs fairly easilly. I often can get into the Spe and drive it back to a repair truck to get it fixed. The AI bail out way too quickly the gun still works, its only track damage and its still driveable.

The tank is great in MP missions because players can operate it proporly, AI stink in these tanks most engagements with SIG's T80s Over large open areas usualy end poorly for the M1s. Due to chicken AI.

[king homer 1]

I don't have these problems while engaging any RHS tank. Got hit 2 times by T80UM and the crew didn't bail out. After third hit the whole tank blowed up.

[FerretFangs 0]

Well, I do admit that the crew bailing after a single hit is a little silly. Unfortunately, this is a limitation of OFP's bog-standard AI, if I'm not mistaken. I also believe that various mods have tweaked or modded the AI's behaviour. Perhaps the AI can be modded for these top-end armor addons, to perform better/more realistically when combatting OPFOR armor?

[Gedis 0]

King Homer,

Your SEP's are realy good, great chalange for T tanks, but... i can took out undefeatable Abrams... (T-90 with one reflex-m missile, but it's only in game... )

In internet i foung new version of abrams...

info about it

Sorry, maybe i sound really angry at abrams, no offense, it's just DU fault... and maybe you could upgrade Sig all Abrams pack? It would be realy nice, to see them like SEPs or FEPs(also FEP should be added)...

[stgn 39]

King Homer,

Your SEP's are realy good, great chalange for T tanks, but... i can took out undefeatable Abrams... (T-90 with one reflex-m missile, but it's only in game... )

In internet i foung new version of abrams...

info about it

Sorry, maybe i sound really angry at abrams, no offense, it's just DU fault... and maybe you could upgrade Sig all Abrams pack? It would be realy nice, to see them like SEPs or FEPs(also FEP should be added)...

I don't think that is enything official that picture more a creation of someones mind.

I was right:

its homepage

M1C1 MCV

STGN

[stgn 39]

SEP upgrade:

This is the TUSK upgrade permanantly for city operations not so much normal tank vs tank as the Abrams here is a bit tall with the new shilds and remotly controled M2.

STGN

[Bobcatt666 0]

Funny the M2 always had removet firing ability with remote sighting system TC can fire the M2 from inside the tank, and use the regualer TC sights to track threats. He has a full gunner station for himself and all the controls for the main gune and M2 system. The gunner can track stuff as well while the TC can veiw and selecte targets for the gunner to engage next. Due to the crappy armor value system its a waste of time adding all that junk to the tank, only would be there for looks and bump the polly count up higher making it very laggy if used.

Lots of people have brought up this package at least five times already, still don't give the tank any more protection from IEDs, and the reactive armor will kill any nearby dismounted infantry caught near the vehicle when its hit. The more vulreable areas are still not protected what good is even adding this crap if it fails to do anything gamewise?

The picture of the M1 half tracked is a battle field repair that can be made to get the tank moble again if it is damaged by a AT mine. This is normal combat recovery procedure to get the tank back to someplace where repairs can be made if a tank hauler cant be quickly gotten.

[stgn 39]

Funny the M2 always had removet firing ability with remote sighting system TC can fire the M2 from inside the tank, and use the regualer TC sights to track threats.   He has a full gunner station for himself and all the controls for the main gune and M2 system.  The gunner can track stuff as well while the TC can veiw and selecte targets for the gunner to engage next.  Due to the crappy armor value system its a waste of time adding all that junk to the tank, only would be there for looks and bump the polly count up higher making it very laggy if used.  

Lots of people have brought up this package  at least five times already, still don't give the tank any more protection from IEDs, and the reactive armor will kill any nearby dismounted infantry  caught near the vehicle when its hit.     The more vulreable areas are still not protected what good is even adding this crap if it fails to do anything gamewise?  

The picture of the M1 half tracked is a battle field repair that can be made to get the tank moble again if it is damaged by a AT mine.   This is normal combat recovery procedure to get the tank back to someplace where repairs can be made if a tank hauler cant be quickly gotten.    

The remote firing capability was removed in the M1A2, I think it was because of the CITV and other electronic updates. About poly count, so what I don't think it would be so much that the tank would be unplayable. Does the tank need enymore protection from IEDs? I am not sure but I don't remmember hearing about lots of killed crews = meaning the tank is protected well enough. ERA is there to protect the tank from RPG's and you might remmember that M1A1 which was penetraded in the side and what is more importent in a combat situation a tank or some soldiers which might be killed enyway by the RPG? also the SLAT armor on the rear is better than nothing right?

STGN

[agent556 5]

infantry arent even supposed to be walking alongside the M1A2 when a threat is imminent.

[-HUNTER- 1]

also 80 abrams tanks have bought it in iraq allready!

yes due to hostile activities! Didnt anybody see the uberly pwned abrams by a IED, well I can assure you there wasnt anything left even the whole turret came off!

[stgn 39]

also 80 abrams tanks have bought it in iraq allready!  

yes due to hostile activities! Didnt anybody see the uberly pwned abrams by a IED, well I can assure you there wasnt anything left even the whole turret came off!  

80 hmm totaly dead or just damaged? I think I remmember that diden't the crew survive enyway?

STGN

[Przezdzieblo 0]

Bobcatt666

RPG blow on tanks side is dangerous for soldiers around, if tank is uparmoured with ERA or not - better not stay close.

OTOH I would not be so sure about infantry-unfriendly Abrams ERA. It is said it is similar to those from Bradleys in Iraq. And those from IFV look like this:

http://marvingroup.com/mls/images/mlsproducts/bradley_reactive.jpg

As you can see it is rather complex "device", not simple ERA cell. There were in WWW some photos of Bradley with one cell hit and blowed. It is possible, that those ERA is not so infantry killer and there are not many splinters when ERA works (I think Russian K5 is infantry-friendly in this aspect, too). So more optimism

Vs IEDs there is not much what can be done. Even with uparmoured bottom tanks and tracked vehicles would be vulnerable. The only way to make it invulnerable is to give them wheels and make it much more heavier...

STGN

--> http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/1-2005/ac/us_armor/

and remember, that article`s author mean "taked out of action" instead of translator`s "destroyed".

One question - is it possible to make tanks "shiny" in NV in OFP? Using WGL NVG I saw "shiny" AH-1 (BIS Cobra), what looked ok. Maybe because some texture filters or properties?

[stgn 39]

STGN

--> http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/1-2005/ac/us_armor/

and remember, that article`s author mean "taked out of action" instead of translator`s "destroyed".

Interesting thanks.

STGN

[sputnik monroe 102]

Why do people always go on and on about ERA is stupid and will kill near by infantry? If you're close enough to be killed by the ERA going off you're close enough to be killed by what ever set it off. So the point is moot.

[BigRed 2]

I am trying to use this tank in league play but the Auto Smoke and other scripts really lag up MP is there anyway to disable the scripts in MP like CBT and VIT?

[max power 21]

Hehe that artist's conception of the M1 MCV is so lame. You can really tell the difference in quality where the original plan drawing of the m1a1 stops and the alterations and additions begin. I like the way that the gau-8 is just a bunch of barrels on a spool with no actual chamber or capacity to deliver ammunition into the barrels of any sort. Interesting concept, though.. Although, the reason why the a10 has a cannon with such a high ROF is because it travels at 1000 km/h. Even with the decreased weight (I assume that's what the half track is about, but I don't see it being sugnificantly lighter) I can't really see the MCV moving that fast. Personally, I don't think it would prove very successful but what do I know?.. well, maybe that's an overstatement. I think it would prove very cost innefficient.