WarGames League v.5 (WGL 5) Full Release

[Stuntman 0]

I would be very pleased if you could import/include theese features in WGL:

1. Less weight you are carrying, means faster movement, and more stamina.

2. more weight you are carrying, means slower movement, and less stamina

3. When not wearing any weapons (no primary and secondary weapon) you will move and run faster then if you HAD wearing any weapon.

4. If you are wearing a weapon, which need to be hold in your arms, you will move and run slower then without.

5. If you are only wearing a weappon on back (like a rocket launcher) you will move and run faster, then if it was in your hands.

If you dont know what I mean, or you're getting confused, please tell me, PM or on a post in this topic

[Jackal326 1158]

I understand what you mean Stuntman, but I don't think its possible as you can only have on set speed for man units whether they're carrying weapons or not. I may be wrong, perhaps an animator could shed some light on the situation as if a way to do this is to be found, its in the way the animations are defined.

[Stuntman 0]

I understand Hope that some animators want to try...while we are on that discussion, does any animator want to find out if it is possible? may someone tell this discussion to guys that maybe can make it possible to have my Ideas

Quote[/b] ]1. Less weight you are carrying, means faster movement, and more stamina.

2. more weight you are carrying, means slower movement, and less stamina

3. When not wearing any weapons (no primary and secondary weapon) you will move and run faster then if you HAD wearing any weapon.

4. If you are wearing a weapon, which need to be hold in your arms, you will move and run slower then without.

5. If you are only wearing a weappon on back (like a rocket launcher) you will move and run faster, then if it was in your hands.

Thanks.

[sanctuary 19]

It is possible to have an unit without weapons to run faster than an unit that has a weapon, it is just a matter of changing the speed values of the different concerned running animations classes.

I don't remember at all what i wrote, but i wish the search function of this forum was more precise, and would not just give a thread with +200 pages as a result instead of the exact posts, as i explained already how to , giving example values for people to test :/

I hope the next forum upgrade will feature a better search function, like in several other forums.

EDIT : it seems there is some good luck there, in fact unlike what i thought, it was not in the 200+ pages thread, so i found it

So refer to this if you want to give a try

[LFA 0]

Hi Strango,

a few years ago we tried a simplified version of this with four players (one crashed pilot, three enemy rangers). Pilot had to try and stay alive for x minutes, e.g. 15 min. Enemy rangers started at a nearby base, and could choose from a M2 jeep or a UH-60 chopper. As a twist, the crashed pilot had to try and prevent the enemy from accessing secret equipment from the crashed chopper (i.e. no running away into the hills). A broad valley with plenty of rocks and bushes was chosen for the (slightly random) crash site to help funnel the action.

Good points:

- a very enjoyable tense mission type.

- hunting for the crashed pilot while in a UH-60 with the door gunner shooting up every bush in sight was pretty fun

- so was being the crashed pilot wetting yourself as the chopper flew overhead trying to hunt you down

- or the unseen sniper taking up position on the ridge...

- pilot having inferior weapon, limited ammo, no binos, etc.

Bad points:

- pilot shooting down the enemy chopper

- pilot having to stay too close to the crashed chopper (I like your idea much better).

So best of luck with your mission design - I would love to play it when you get it working.

[strango 5]

It's working now. We played it a bit last night, but only had 8 people so it was just 4 v 4. I'm just hoping to get more people so we can test it with all the player slots filled and then make the appropriate gameplay changes to the mission design.

[Ukraineboy 0]

I remember awhile back that the FFUR creator said that new AT Animations are possible (i.e. the ability to run and walk with an AT gun out) but since FFUR is a total replacement pack that it wouldnt work. Well I understand WGL is also a replacement pack, but is it possible for you to add in the ability for this for MP? It would help in adversarial missions so much and would be the final step in total realism when it comes to OFP.

[Ukraineboy 0]

I have a question and a suggestion:

On the Mi-24, what is the requirements to have the AT-6C Online? It seems like SOMETIMES when Im under 50 it works, other times it doesnt. What are the requirements, and where is your source on these requirements? i.e. how do you know that these are the requirements for the Mi-24 Hind E?

Also, will you consider replacing the Hind E with the more standard Hind F? The Hind F has a 30mm gun, and there are more of them now then the previous one.

[AtR 0]

I don't really remember but you needed to fly not faster than 30 to have AT6 online. Ah64 was around 100, AH1 had to be still to fire.

[Ukraineboy 0]

I don't really remember but you needed to fly not faster than 30 to have AT6 online. Ah64 was around 100, AH1 had to be still to fire.

Is this realistic? It sounds odd that a helicopter, designed specifically not to hover for long periods of time (it could only hover for 200hrs) as well as having formidable forward speed, and designed based on experiences by Russian Shturmovik's in WWII, would only be able to fire one of their main weapons at 30km/h? Sounds like a made up number for "balance".

[Marco.A.Aguilar1 0]

Also, will you consider replacing the Hind E with the more standard Hind F?

The thing is and what I recently found out is that WGL-OFP1 takes place in 1985 just like OFP1 itself. What I really admire is that they didn't remake everything entirely, making OFP1 a different looking game. They added features and kept the models the same with small modifications. Now if/when WGL goes to ArmA, you [might] be able to expect up to date military technology.

Edit: Also remember that WGL doesn't want to sacrifice gameplayability to realism even though it still maintains the 'most realistic' MOD status.

[Ukraineboy 0]

Also, will you consider replacing the Hind E with the more standard Hind F?

The thing is and what I recently found out is that WGL-OFP1 takes place in 1985 just like OFP1 itself. What I really admire is that they didn't remake everything entirely, making OFP1 a different looking game. They added features and kept the models the same with small modifications. Now if/when WGL goes to ArmA, you [might] be able to expect up to date military technology.

Edit: Also remember that WGL doesn't want to sacrifice gameplayability to realism even though it still maintains the 'most realistic' MOD status.

The Hind F is more standard, I didnt say modern. In Afghanistan they were used. It has a 30mm fixed cannon. Or if this is "too" modern, then you can add the dual (or was it quad? can't remember) 12.7mm gun

Also, I would like the source that states Hind can only fire AT-6C at 30km...this just doesnt make sense.

[xawery 0]

I think you're right, Ukraineboy. I've done a couple of searches about this (rather annoying) feature, but were unable to find any direct confirmation of this claim. However, I did find this:

Quote[/b] ]The missile's speed (estimated at 450 meters per second) pushes the missile out to 5000 meters, during which time the helicopter must maintain the target in its sight. During the flight time of the SPIRAL to the target (estimated at approx. 11 seconds at maximum range), the target has an opportunity to take evasive action, but the helicopter launch platform has limited ability to take evasive action itself since the SPIRAL operator must keep the target in his sight.

Perhaps the developers wanted to simulate this vulnerability by forcing you to fly at a low speed when firing the AT-6?

[Stuntman 0]

Is it possible to switch off/swith on configs ingame? I mean: ingame, in a campign mission for example, where you are not in the editor. Is it possible to disable the "ATGM speed limit" for example?

Hope you understand

[strango 5]

Is it possible to switch off/swith on configs ingame? I mean: ingame, in a campign mission for example, where you are not in the editor. Is it possible to disable the "ATGM speed limit" for example?

Hope you understand

You would need to unPBO the campaign, edit the missions and add the appropriate WGL gamelogics to disable the features you don't want. Then recombine them back into a single PBO again and play through the campaign.

[mechastalin 0]

Would it be a bit rude if I asked to get my BRDM pack implented in WGL? Assuming they accept user submissions of course. It also couldn't hurt to replace the default BIS BRDM with the OFPL one.

[Ukraineboy 0]

Perhaps the developers wanted to simulate this vulnerability by forcing you to fly at a low speed when firing the AT-6?

What? But it doesnt say anything about speed. If they wanted to simulate that vulnerability they should just...do it! Make it so the gunner has to keep his sights on the target.

I want to know why WGL has sacrificied realism for "balance" or do they have actualy proof of this absurd speed limit?

[dslyecxi 23]

What? But it doesnt say anything about speed. If they wanted to simulate that vulnerability they should just...do it! Make it so the gunner has to keep his sights on the target.

I want to know why WGL has sacrificied realism for "balance" or do they have actualy proof of this absurd speed limit?

Maybe there's an engine limitation involved, same thing as why the Cobra TOW is not actually gunner-guided but is instead fire-and-forget?

Why don't you stop busting the WGL guys' balls over stupid little things like this? They clearly state that they try to go for realism and gameplay. There are several obvious places where WGL5 avoids hardcore realism for the purposes of fantastic gameplay.

[killswitch 19]

Perhaps the developers wanted to simulate this vulnerability by forcing you to fly at a low speed when firing the AT-6?

Yes, this is why that speed limit was put in. Helicopters using the AT-6 (The Hinds) launcher and the TOW launchers (the AH-1 Cobras) need to move slower than 22 km/h to be able to use their ATGM:s.

This is to simulate the fact that these weapons need to have their gunners concentrate on them during the entire flight time.

What? But it doesnt say anything about speed. If they wanted to simulate that vulnerability they should just...do it! Make it so the gunner has to keep his sights on the target.

OFP cannot simulate manual control of heli-fired missiles. They are all lock on and then fire-and-forget magic missiles. This is also a factor in why the very low speed limits were put in place for wire (or otherwise manually) guided ATGM:s in helicopters.

Quote[/b] ]I want to know why WGL has sacrificied realism for "balance" or do they have actualy proof of this absurd speed limit?

See above. Likely, it was done somewhat for realism, somehwat for balance. (I wasn't involved with WGL when this was done).

If someone can find out more about how real Mi-24:s use/employ/fire AT-6 missiles, I'll try to make it more "real", within the limits of OFP.

For now, however, you can remove this feature by placing a utility game logic called "Disable heli ATGM speed limits" found under "#WGL Logic" in the mission editor. You can also script it away by

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

[.kju 3239]

MechaStalin pm me plz

[Jinef 2]

Hi, 2 years ago me and terox from Zeus started work on a Zeus mod which eventually was scrapped and re implemented into WGL to make WGLZ.

One of the things we had in Zeus mod and not in WGLZ was several classes of soldier.

(These classes and speeds were based on British Infantry SOPs and CFT results)

Light/Recce - These soldiers are just carrying a rifle, no head protection, and light webbing. They can move quickly and quietly over ground.

Running Speed - 7 mph

Sprinting Speed - 11 mph

Assault - These soldiers are carrying basic combat load, a helmet, rifle, full webbing, rations, water etc. They are not carrying rucksacks. They can still move fairly quickly but are noisy and tire quickly.

Running Speed - 5 mph

Sprinting Speed - 9 mph

Heavy - These soldiers have a lot of kit with them. Helmet, rifle, full webbing, rations, water, 50lb rucksack. Soldiers are responsible for carrying MMG ammo, light mortar rounds, AT missiles etc. They cannot move quickly, can hardly sprint and stick out like a dog's bollocks.

Running Speed - 3 mph

Sprinting Speed - 5 mph

(3 mph is very generous. In Afghanistan the US light infantry had an average movement speed of 1mph, while the expected enemy movement was in excess of 4mph.)

There are some severe limitations to this system. If a recon soldier picks up a rucksack he will not slow down. This is fixable by taking away the secondary weapon slot, but then you have no recon AT or whatever. If a heavy soldier drops all his load, he will still be slow.

It is like this because we made seperate move classes for each class.

[Ukraineboy 0]

What? But it doesnt say anything about speed. If they wanted to simulate that vulnerability they should just...do it! Make it so the gunner has to keep his sights on the target.

I want to know why WGL has sacrificied realism for "balance" or do they have actualy proof of this absurd speed limit?

Maybe there's an engine limitation involved, same thing as why the Cobra TOW is not actually gunner-guided but is instead fire-and-forget?

Why don't you stop busting the WGL guys' balls over stupid little things like this? They clearly state that they try to go for realism and gameplay. There are several obvious places where WGL5 avoids hardcore realism for the purposes of fantastic gameplay.

Now now, don't overreact, i'm not busting their balls, I am merely showing this odd limitation. I understand they go for realism and gameplay. Also, Dsylexci, come on, this is not a little stupid thing. If WGL had a feature that forced the AH-1 to do ground attack fly overs or something instead of hovering and popping out, dozens of other players would complain. But because it has to do with Russian equipment I cannot make a suggestion?

My main gripe is not that you are sacrificing realism for balance, I'm fine with that. What my suggestion is that if it's an engine limitation, then maybe add a different balancing limitation one that's more realistic? The problem with this limitation is that it forces an Mi-24 pilot to do something that Mi-24 pilots don't do. Hover and fire. As stated earlier, Mi-24 has only 200hrs of hovering Heck, even when they take off, most of the time the pilots did rolling take offs because of this limitation. So the problem is is that we cannot recreate even basic tactics with the Mi-24 because we are forced to do this.

So all I am suggesting is rethink this limitation and possibly have a different limitation that enables the Mi-24 to use it's speed, armor and turning capabilities versus their hovering. USA Helicopters are designed to pop up, shoot, pop down. The Mi-24 was designed based on experiences with WWII Shturmoviks, and uses NOE flying, with turning behind terrain and group tactics to attack enemy targets....

I agree with a limitation though since we cannot implement what happens in real life, but all I am saying is to find a limitation that is the most realistic one possible, as well as balancing. Forcing the Mi-24 to have to do dangerous ground attacks instead of hovering is what should be done for balancing.

But, if no other idea exists or possible change then I'm fine with it, but don't overreact and think im a realism zealot bent on attacking WGL over small things...

[lightzout 0]

I want to echo what so many others have already said here before. WGL has made this amazing game so much more dynamic for both cooperative and adversarial modes it has totally transformed the way people play Flashpoint online at ShackTac The response has been resoundingly positive. Old and new players alike have embraced it. On the surface its just simple, balanced gameplay but underneath lies the tremendous effort your team has made and it shows. Count me as one of the many people who appreciate all the work. I consider it the "missing link" between the potential of the original game and whatever lies ahead. It simply must be played to appreciate. Thanks again guys, you rock. -L*Z

[Ukraineboy 0]

I want to echo what so many others have already said here before. WGL has made this amazing game so much more dynamic for both cooperative and adversarial modes it has totally transformed the way people play Flashpoint online at ShackTac The response has been resoundingly positive. Old and new players alike have embraced it. On the surface its just simple, balanced gameplay but underneath lies the tremendous effort your team has made and it shows. Count me as one of the many people who appreciate all the work. I consider it the "missing link" between the potential of the original game and whatever lies ahead. It simply must be played to appreciate. Thanks again guys, you rock. -L*Z

Agreed whole heartidly. One funny thing is even though I cannot wait for Armed Assault, it will also be a sad day since when I play Armed Assault I won't have all the amazing features of WGL until a few months later.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Heck, WGL in AA will far outstrip the OFP version, hopefully. Since the BIS models are already fairly high-spec in AA, it's WGL will look (and run) a ton better, with the WGL team being able to concentrate solely upon scripting and tweaking, rather than (it's limited, I know) unit replacements.