M1A2 SEP 3.0

[Lifter 0]

So, how do I get them to NOT carry XM177s?

[Voyager-NO- 1]

This version looks better than previous

[snoops_213 75]

KH after testing the tank rounds over a number of hours, one thing that is getting to me is the STAFF round. At 500-1000m 1st round is a kill but there after is unlikly to hit much else, after 1750m might as well forget hitting anything, only managed to hit 1 target over 1800m with 100 STAFF rounds fired (yes this took a bloody long time) And as for hitting anything behind a hill can almost forget it unless are under 1200m and already know about it. I've had 2 hits behind hills, out of about 32 rounds fired. I know chances of hitting anything are supposedly slim, but the MMW seeker that was incoperated on the XM943 rounds that were made and tested had a large seeker range (I read around 50m either side of the shells trajectory) and in testing it had a very high (90%) probibility of accutally aquiring and hitting its target, but unfortunatly with your shells we cant lob them over a hill suspected (or known) of having an enemy behind it because they dont seem to aquire anything without it being targeted by the tank itself And I really cant anything over 1800m (1 shot i have managed, 1886m, god knows how though ) As for the APAM rounds i love them Question on this is all 1,100 pellets simulated? If not (i highly doubt it) how many are and is there a chance of seeing it increased slightly, 1 can only manage to hit 3 units out of 10 standing huddled in a tight group from 200m, one would assume the whole group would be cut to shreds (sorry for sounding morbid), but apart from that its all good!

On a side note you know that XM943 STAFF was finally cancelled in 2000? The new project TERM is underway with a similar capacity, for the M1A2 SEP, FCS and Styrker MGS but cant find much info right now (to sleepy to go looking atm maybe tommorow ) but from what i gather will be either or both Fire and Forget or Standoff Targeting, would be intresting to see something like this done at a later date (ArmA perhaps?)

Again thanks to all who worked on this awesome project, truely one of the best ever in OFP.

[Guest]

Indeed, people should quit complaining about the over-strengthened M1A2, since the armour proportion is now much more realistic. Besides, it's now much easier to kill the M1A2 on two hits on the turret from a powerfull round, like T80UM1's, or just disabling its gun on two hits from lesser guns -- that was almost impossible before, as the gun was as strong as the turret. Also, it's awesome to know that, after being completely destroyed, up to two members of the Abrams crew remain alive.

But that's not the subject of my post. In fact, I'm pretty concerned about two concept flaws. There might be other, but, lazy me, only today I've taken the beast for tests.

The major flaw in the STAFF method. After killing a T80 on single hit, I took a quick look at the script and found this outrageous code line:<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">_target setdammage 1It means not even my super tank MMK-1, with 10e10 of armour, could survive.

The second regards the creation of the fourth crew member, which is noticeable upon beggining of the mission. Therefore, I'd recommend you to initialise the M1A2 handling systems through a function called from the init EH, instead of a script. That would definately avoid watching that extra unit being spawned.

By the way, if you actually intend to solve these issues, if we can call them that, don't forget Mikero's [freda's] patchpbo! I'd like not having to download 25MB for a couple of script changes.

[king homer 1]

KH after testing the tank rounds over a number of hours, one thing that is getting to me is the STAFF round. At 500-1000m 1st round is a kill but there after is unlikly to hit much else, after 1750m might as well forget hitting anything, only managed to hit 1 target over 1800m with 100 STAFF rounds fired (yes this took a bloody long time) And as for hitting anything behind a hill can almost forget it unless are under 1200m and already know about it. I've had 2 hits behind hills, out of about 32 rounds fired. I know chances of hitting anything are supposedly slim, but the MMW seeker that was incoperated on the XM943 rounds that were made and tested had a large seeker range (I read around 50m either side of the shells trajectory) and in testing it had a very high (90%) probibility of accutally aquiring and hitting its target, but unfortunatly with your shells we cant lob them over a hill suspected (or known) of having an enemy behind it because they dont seem to aquire anything without it being targeted by the tank itself And I really cant anything over 1800m (1 shot i have managed, 1886m, god knows how though ) As for the APAM rounds i love them Question on this is all 1,100 pellets simulated? If not (i highly doubt it) how many are and is there a chance of seeing it increased slightly, 1 can only manage to hit 3 units out of 10 standing huddled in a tight group from 200m, one would assume the whole group would be cut to shreds (sorry for sounding morbid), but apart from that its all good!

On a side note you know that XM943 STAFF was finally cancelled in 2000? The new project TERM is underway with a similar capacity, for the M1A2 SEP, FCS and Styrker MGS but cant find much info right now (to sleepy to go looking atm maybe tommorow ) but from what i gather will be either or both Fire and Forget or Standoff Targeting, would be intresting to see something like this done at a later date (ArmA perhaps?)

Again thanks to all who worked on this awesome project, truely one of the best ever in OFP.

Well, I really do not know why you can't hit anything. We've tested the STAFF round plenty times on different islands and between ranges of 500m and 2000m. Larger ranges would mean a too high angle for the gun and the shell would be to far away, so the script is disabled at 2000m for playability's sake (yeah we wanted a STAFF round as realistic as possible too, but our scripting capabilities aren't that good, I'm sorry). For testing purpose try the STAFF shell on Desert Island and see if it works properly there.

About the APAM round, we reduced the number from 1100 to 150. Creating that many small bullets in that small amout of time would cause very low FPS and bad lag and a CTD as worst.

I'm sorry we can't increase the number of pellets, again due the playability factor.

Oh, and there's no further update planned for OFP. Next update (4.0) will be for ArmA.

Indeed, people should quit complaining about the over-strengthened M1A2, since the armour proportion is now much more realistic. Besides, it's now much easier to kill the M1A2 on two hits on the turret from a powerfull round, like T80UM1's, or just disabling its gun on two hits from lesser guns -- that was almost impossible before, as the gun was as strong as the turret. Also, it's awesome to know that, after being completely destroyed, up to two members of the Abrams crew remain alive.

But that's not the subject of my post. In fact, I'm pretty concerned about two concept flaws. There might be other, but, lazy me, only today I've taken the beast for tests.

The major flaw in the STAFF method. After killing a T80 on single hit, I took a quick look at the script and found this outrageous code line:<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">_target setdammage 1

It means not even my super tank MMK-1, with 10e10 of armour, could survive.

The second regards the creation of the fourth crew member, which is noticeable upon beggining of the mission. Therefore, I'd recommend you to initialise the M1A2 handling systems through a function called from the init EH, instead of a script. That would definately avoid watching that extra unit being spawned.

By the way, if you actually intend to solve these issues, if we can call them that, don't forget Mikero's [freda's] patchpbo! I'd like not having to download 25MB for a couple of script changes.

About the STAFF round and its damage capability: I guess at the moment there's no tank which wouldn't be destroyed by this round. I'm sure you know how that shell works and it's armor penetration. Due to the fact the Abrams does carry a maxium of 4 shells it shouldn't be a tragedy if it is to powerfull

On the loader script: We had it working like that before, but we changed it for multiplayer compability. In MP the Abrams is crewed with 3 men only. I guess it's not a real problem seeing the 4th man spawned into the tank in contrast to less MP problems

Thanks for your replies guys.

With kind regards

King Homer

[Gedis 0]

so why don't we set Reflex to _target setdammage 1 ?

[Przezdzieblo 0]

Gedis, don`t you see the difference between rounds like Reflex and STAFF? And possible effectiveness?

But I guess every addonmaker can set for his weapon whatever he want to. setdammage=1 this, setdammage=1 that, for maingun rounds and MG bullets.

I do not know if this setting is needed for proper script working, however maybe some high dirdmg value would be better. M1A2 SEP addon is a model of high-end configuration and could be imagined that some addonmaker would make even newer tank. F.e. I could imagine that DKM`s "Black Eagle" with new compatible to RHS and SEP config might survive STAFF hit.

[king homer 1]

Well, I ask myself why nobody told me about this before we released the 3.1 version? Now it's too late for changing and why do you care now? Before it didn't interest you either...

[Gedis 0]

yeah...

...if you see a flash(addons scripting values), it's already too late(addon was fixed, no updates planned)...

yeah, when i didn't knew that, it felt the update was great, when i saw this, i thought, wtf? why?

i don't ask for update, it's seems pretty unfair to have no values... like Reflex is said:"maybe it will not cut Abram's armor from first hit, but second hit - will"...

and with staff, it sounds like "you will cut any armor, everything is under tank's tracks(you are god)"

staff has to got some limitations...

[king homer 1]

Listen Gedis, I'm not gonna discuss about this now. You know OFP has some limitations we can't break. I'm sick of this "East vs West" talk. As said before, I never doubt it that Russian technology isn't as effective as the American one, but you should accept that it is impossible to change it now.

[sv5000 127]

Well, i like the tank how it is...It looks hot and kicks arse.

Thanks to the team that gave us this tank

[Shadow NX 1]

Talked to KH yesterday about the STAFF just to notice that i read about it but forgot that it isnt as normal ammo that hits directly.

The Staff is designed in a way that it will try to hit the top of the turret of the target wich is a very weak spot on every tank.

Btw our Reflex atm are bit weak, should do more dammage than a normal Round but Kenji said something about a limitation for the guided missile or something.

[Gedis 0]

ok! i didn't want that KH got angry and didn't want to start dabates about staff, sorry if you understood me wrong

ok, i'm not saying my oppinion anymore... only technical stuff...  

sorry guys  

P.S. it's the 3rd post when i say i like these updates(3.0, 3.1)...

[Shadow NX 1]

I think its ok if people post their opinions, thats what  aforum is for.

I guess a lil explanation about how STAFF works might have solved this issue lot sooner and would have keept the flames down.

I summarize: the M1A2 is one of the best tanks but its the STAFF rounds that really makes it so deadly in OFP

[akab 0]

Welcome

I thing the more version of M60 (A2 A3) M48 wil be nice

You have in plans some of them in the Future

[StealthTiger 0]

Why don't you PM them and ask? It has nothing to do with this thread...

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Btw our Reflex atm are bit weak, should do more dammage than a normal Round but Kenji said something about a limitation for the guided missile or something.

Huh? Kenji said that? Hmm...

As for the STAFF, it will indeed destroy anything (it will do 100% damage regardless of the armor value of the target).

It's not exactly what I would have done but hey the STAFF works and thats pretty cool, and good script work.

You aren't going to release anymore updates, ok, I won't argue about that. Though, I guess you won't feel to good about someone else taking a shot at editing it either, would you?

Anyway, overall the M1A2 SEP is a good example of an excellent standalone addon. Nothing was left out, and everything looks, sounds, and feels great.

[SILESIAN 0]

Okay the update is almost done. We're just waiting for the new track textures made by M9ACE. After implenting them we'll have some betatesting on a Linux server and if everyhings works correctly it's ready for release.

Homer I don’t remember any ocassion when I used nick M9ACE  

When I sended you my textures for this tank I include track for desert version too.

Topic from Dec. 2004.

Is all this guy’s work it use my tracks backside tex. for both tracks sides ?

[Pathy 0]

I have to say i'm sickened. All this hard work and effort into this beautiful addon, KH bending over backwards to accomodate people, and this (ie, what has been said in this thread) is the reward he gets

Yet again, i am made to wonder why we(addon makers) dedicate our time for this sort of thing.

Anyhow;

A suggestion for you:

"Low res" pack - reduce the texture sizes, shift the lods about to make it lower poly - maybe delete the 1st lod and move the 2nd up into its place, shift everything up behind it. Everything else remains the same. Should end up totally compatable with the current version, just gives people with lower spec machines a choice. If done correctly of course  

Just an idea for you  

[wipman 1]

Hi, i haven't try myself yet this version 3.1 of the M1's A2, but by the screenshots they look great; will be possible to add by scripts or something, cargo proxyes?, so you could carry 8 or 6 Marines over the tank to some hot area or just for short the distances of the patrols that go back to base and are already in the perimeter of the base?. I think that then this tanks will be even greater. I also hope to see some USMC versions, if were possible... with a big "General Lee" in a side of the turret, or some of those rebel flags or something like that ala Vietnam. Let's C ya

[king homer 1]

Okay the update is almost done. We're just waiting for the new track textures made by M9ACE. After implenting them we'll have some betatesting on a Linux server and if everyhings works correctly it's ready for release.

Homer I don’t remember any ocassion when I used nick M9ACE

When I sended you my textures for this tank I include track for desert version too.

[im]http://silesian.akcja.pl/FORUM%20FOTO/ABRdetx1.jpg[/img]

[im]http://silesian.akcja.pl/FORUM%20FOTO/ABRdetx4.jpg[/img]

[im]http://silesian.akcja.pl/FORUM%20FOTO/ABRdetx5.jpg[/img]

Topic from Dec. 2004.

Is all this guy’s work it use my tracks backside tex. for both tracks sides ?

As far as I understand what you want to tell me, I can say, Inquisitor made the new track texture from scratch, with your texture as model for correct proportions. M9ACE did send us some real high detailed textures but they didn't fit well on the whole tank. No textures from you are used anymore.

Hi, i haven't try myself yet this version 3.1 of the M1's A2, but by the screenshots they look great; will be possible to add by scripts or something, cargo proxyes?, so you could carry 8 or 6 Marines over the tank to some hot area or just for short the distances of the patrols that go back to base and are already in the perimeter of the base?. I think that then this tanks will be even greater. I also hope to see some USMC versions, if were possible... with a big "General Lee" in a side of the turret, or some of those rebel flags or something like that ala Vietnam. Let's C ya

It is not usual that troops are transported via tanks, that's why we didn't add any cargo proxies and aren't going to add them. American transport methods include jeeps and trucks or APC's but no tanks.

USMC does not use M1A2 tanks, and we have no permission to release a M1A1 and we didn't planned to do it. No more updates before ArmA. Sorry.

[echo1 0]

Ok - I was playing around with those APAM rounds and noticed that alot of the time they didnt work the way they should - is there some special condition that you need for them to work (eg. distance)?

[M9ACE 0]

Is all this guy’s work it use my tracks backside tex. for both tracks sides ?

I have to confess that I am annoyed by the fact that you are inferring that I used your textures at all for the basis of the textures that I made.  To be more accurate, it was actually a friend of mine who did 85%-90% of the work with me directing him through the process as he knows much more than I do with regard to using Photoshop.  

I find it a bit presumptuous for anyone to assume that I copied anything when only 4 people in the world have even seen the texture, those four people being my friend who made most of the textures, King Homer, InQUisiToR, and of course myself.  The texture was adapted from T156 artwork I found elsewhere (nothing to do with any video game at all).  Back in the day when I was the researcher for OPGWC I did the same thing for the M60A1 that we had.  I sent the texture as a jpeg to GalcomT as a jpeg.  Unfortunately, he never used it (as far as I know).

As of today, I still have not downloaded and used any program that would be used to create or edit an addon.  However I should note for the sake of completeness that I had created a few models for OPGWC in AutoCAD and then in turn I sent them to a couple other people to bring into OFP.  I do not have a clue as to how I would go about coping your texture even if I wanted to.  If I knew how to do this I still would not as I am a firm believer in giving credit where credit is due.  If I ever wanted to use someone else’s work as a basis of something I would first try to secure the permission of that person first as a courtesy.

Every once in a while I do think about downloading all of the programs I need to make an addon, but to be honest I really rather be playing OFP multiplayer that anything else. Several people in these forums can attest to that.  I do have a good background that would be beneficial to someone making addons, I work with complicated CAD assemblies just about every day using Unigraphics NX2.  I have a few years of experience in manufacturing which has proved to be beneficial as well. I also have been researching military equipment for over twenty years (plus other things).

Lastly, I would like to apologize to the community for not getting all of the textures to King Homer and InQUisiToR in time for the final release.  I am dependant on help with regard to certain things in Photoshop though I am learning slowly how to use more of the functions.  I sent both King Homer and InQUisiToR only the outer texture on the Friday before the release of version 3.1.  I was unable to get any help with the two other textures since Wednesday night of that week.  I am almost done the center guide texture since that one is a little easier for me with my limited knowledge of Photoshop.  When they are finished, I will still send them to King Homer and InQUisiToR in hopes that they will be able to use them in the future.

[SILESIAN 0]

Homer, M9ACE[QSF]

In short:

1. It’s great project and a lot of hard work. Everybody see it - if not that they blind.

2. My textures for this tank I tried painted as looking real as I can. New track textures actually used by you It’s my made track links with inward track shoe. I like proper things at proper places.

I painted it and I define destination place. If you don’t like it no use, want changes my tex.- pm me. Short and clear.

If you like latest Abrams track and don’t like any of my (eg. this )- make quite new.

Don’t listen people who want version of this tank for lower spec machines. ArmA is close and will need better comp. For lower spec machines we have BIS’s addons. Make this tank as great & real as you can.

[M9ACE 0]

SILESIAN, by your response I have determined that you have misunderstood the situation.  I realize that English is not your primary language so therefore some subtleties may have been lost on you.  Note that I am not making fun, I am just pointing out what I have observed.  Only a moron would make fun of something like that.

The track textures I was working on ended up not being used on version 3.1.  This is because the inner track texture (road wheel path) and guide horn are still incomplete.  In short, my track textures did not get used.

Sorry if I came off as being a bit harsh in my last post, I actually respect what you have done in the community and I admire your texturing skills.

----------------------------------------------------------

Time to give the community a very basic education on the subject of tracks for the M1 FOV (Family Of Vehicles).  There are three types of tracks for the M1 FOV; the T156, T158, and the T158LL.  For all members of the M1 FOV, there are 78 links per side regardless of the track type.

This is the T156 (see below).  The T156 has an intergraded rubber pad.  The T156 is lighter than the other models.  The T156 could be considered the “original†type and still is in use today.  The problem with the T156 is the low track life of about 700 to 800 miles (1126.5km to 1287.5km).

The second type of track that was developed and placed into production for the M1 FOV is the T158.  The T158 adds more weight to the M1 series but this type has a longer life than the T156.  The track pads on the T158 are replaceable.

The latest type of track for the M1 series is the T158LL (refer to the picture below).  The T158LL utilizes the exact same track pads as the T158.  The T158LL is basically an attempt to reduce the weight of the T158.  This type is most easily distinguished from the older T158 by looking at the guide horns (also known as center guides).  The guide horns on the T158LL are open in the center as opposed to having a “web†in the center.  Compare with the above (T158) example.

There is more to know on this subject but I am too lazy to write anymore and I feel this gives someone enough information to understand the basic differences.

Edit: Replaced "subtitles" with "subtleties" in first paragraph lol.