Vix Stryker

[Ase290406 0]

Thx for the explanations Macser. That second pic can almost pass for a real one. Looking forward for it's release.

[leondus 0]

Wow, Macser!

Great pics

If you need any help testing it, give me a yell.

[Wilco 944]

Man, that looks a hell of a lot better from when I first had it.

[Macser_old 0]

@R0adKi11,Ase290406 and Leondus,

Thank you for the kind words guys.Much appreciated.

@Wilco,

Yeah,it's gone through some changes.As it happens I'm

almost done at my end.So it won't be too long before

it's put back out there.

There's still one or two minor things to be sorted.

[Jeff2121 0]

Macser...you...are...awesome!

[spooky lynx 73]

So what about release?

[Macser_old 0]

Hello,

We decided to put this out there.This is the last

build I did of the Stryker.

Although feedback is welcome,I don't know how

much time I personally would have,to address any issues.

But I'll do what I can.

For anyone who's used the FFur version.This is very different.

For a start the one in the FFur/SLX mod is a much

earlier build.And it inherits from the tank class.

Whereas this one inherits from the car class.

Both have their advantages.Handling wise,I prefer

the car class.It's a much more realistic feel overall.

But the downside is the lack of a gunnerview.

Which means handing weapon control to the AI.

The tank class clears that up,but you pay for it

in visual and handling terms.It essentially looks

and feels like driving a tank.If there was enough

interest though I could put one together.

Anyway,take a look and tell us what you think.

Hope you like it.

Macser.

VIX_STRYKER(Updated) Via RapidShare.

VIX_STRYKER(Updated) Via Filefront.

[DiFool 0]

Great!

Downloading now.

Thank you very much. We apreciate your work!

[DiFool 0]

Oops!

Link not quite working!

[Macser_old 0]

Yeah,sorry,

Looks like it's at full capacity at their end.

Links in previous post updated.Needed to

re-do it anyway,as I forgot to put the

readme in the archive,as well as the PBO.

Hopefully everything should be ok.

[Bobcatt666 0]

There isa system implemented called Mcar for adding missil systems to wheeled vehicles, now works perfect in MP and SP and the AI can use it with rather good ability. Its installed on most of hte high end addons like Combats HUMVE pack.

[Macser_old 0]

Hey Bobcat,

I've heard of Mcar,just never actually tried to use it on anything.

I know some editing of the model would have to be done,that's

not much of a problem.It's the application of the scripts that

would get me.I'm not too good with 'em.

It would make an ATGM version possible I suppose.

I don't know,maybe Lamentin might be up for an

attempt,but I'm not goin to volunteer him for it.

[Bobcatt666 0]

Well you guys did a lot of work to make this addon operational, sadly most people are not going to appricate it, but having made a number of units in OFP even after all this time it still a pain..

[Macser_old 0]

Well,

on the upside,I enjoyed workin on it.If only

a couple of people get some use out of it,I'll be

happy with that.

Thanks for lookin in Bobcatt.

Macser.

[Bobcatt666 0]

yeah beating the crap out of it shortly, and will implimentit into a CTI setup I suppose. Kinda finishing off USMC vs PLA at the moment.

[Ase290406 0]

Hey checked the Stryker and it's great. Drives well, shoots well.

3 things I didn't like though:

1)The Radio chatter effect (I didn't use ECP) is heard outside the Stryker pointing to it's location.

2)On a runway the bottom of the wheels was inside the ground. Maybe it's an Island problem I don't know.

3)On the back of the interior - It's just white making it hard to distinguish the floor and the back of the vehicle.

[Macser_old 0]

Hello,

1.The radio chatter.

I had a feeling that might come up.The

engine deals with sounds in an unusual way.It's

somethin I find hard to combat.The best I can do

is lower the overall volume or ditch it altogether.

I'll tweak it down as low as I can get it,before

doin away with it though.

2.Wheels slightly embedded.

That's a side effect of the suspension being

"spongy".I was trying to get the wheels to

track the terrain a little better.So the land contact

points were moved to accomodate it.I'll tell

ye what,if there's enough complaints regarding this,

I'll just pull it back a little.But I do actually like the

feel of the vehicle on the move.So I'd rather not

make the suspension too "hard".

3.The Back of the interior.

Eh,I assume you mean the area around the door?

I'll get right on it,and have a look.Although it's

hard to get good pics of the interior from that angle.

So I may have to make somethin up.

While I'm here,does the lack of a gunner view bother

anyone to the extent that it spoils the addon?

Anyway,thank you very much for the feedback.

One other thing,I don't know if it's worth pursuing,

and I'm not sure if I'd have the time to sort it out.

But I had been experimenting with a rear hatch

gunner.It would probably need the attention of a good

scripter,to make it a bit more solid.Atm it's somewhat

unstable.

Well,have a look anyway.It's similar in effect to GNAT's

"Active cargo" scripts for Arma.

Short clip (REAR HATCH GUNNER)

[Lamentin 0]

I am not much of a modeller, but I can figure out scripts and the like. If anyone wants to make a ATGM or MGS version of the model, I'll make it work. Regarding your rear gunner, a script could made to automatically move a soldier with the Stryker, so that it only appears they are in the apc, because of their position, but from the game's perspective, they are actually out of the vehicle. Thereby allowing the turret to function normally. Or you could make a turretless version, and have the hatch gunner be the turret.

[Kirby 2]

But if he makes the turret seperate and the stryker rolls over the gun will stay upright... It'll look damn odd.

[Macser_old 0]

Hello,

The script I'm using is basically the one Wadi released

called "MGCarry".As you can see from the video clip,it works

to an extent.But I had to make some adjustments to the

model in order to keep the soldier in place.It seems pretty

effective rather than just looking good.The gunner will

even toss out grenades when in range.He won't last

long under fire though.

There's 3 drawbacks that need to be lessened or

dealt with,for it to be viable.

1.Turning to engage a target is extremely limited,

So something like a "keycapture" script would be

needed to overcome that.I think there may be one

out there somewhere.

2.Getting hit,or being subjected to violent jumps

can "dislodge" the gunner.Making them vulnerable

to being smacked by the vehicle.

3.The addition of a roadway lod has a tendency

to make the carrier vehicle slighty "bouncy".But I

found it necessary to give the gunner a solid base.

But even with those problems,it still has potential.

And I haven't tested it that extensively.

If the Stryker does roll over,the gunner will most

likely die,unlike a turret.Bearing in mind it's actually

quite hard to flip.I know,because i've tried to do it

many a time.

Anyway,it was only an idea.But if Mcar were applied

you could have yourself an Atgm.And derive the MGS

from the Tank class.It'd mostly be a question of

modelling them.

[Macser_old 0]

Hello,

The script I'm using is basically the one Wadi released

called "MGCarry".As you can see from the video clip,it works

to an extent.But I had to make some adjustments to the

model in order to keep the soldier in place.It seems pretty

effective rather than just looking good.The gunner will

even toss out grenades when in range.He won't last

long under fire though.

There's 3 drawbacks that need to be lessened or

dealt with,for it to be viable.

1.Turning to engage a target is extremely limited,

So something like a "keycapture" script would be

needed to overcome that.I think there may be one

out there somewhere.

2.Getting hit,or being subjected to violent jumps

can "dislodge" the gunner.Making them vulnerable

to being smacked by the vehicle.

3.The addition of a roadway lod has a tendency

to make the carrier vehicle slighty "bouncy".But I

found it necessary to give the gunner a solid base.

[Correction]

(After removing the roadway,it seems it was the

altering of the model centre which caused this.

That's the model's geometric centre,not centre of

mass.)

But even with those problems,it still has potential.

And I haven't tested it that extensively.

If the Stryker does roll over,the gunner will most

likely die,unlike a turret.Bearing in mind it's actually

quite hard to flip.I know,because i've tried to do it

many a time.

Anyway,it was only an idea.But if Mcar were applied

you could have yourself an Atgm.And derive the MGS

from the Tank class.It'd mostly be a question of

modelling them.

[Ase290406 0]

Hey Macser. What I meant is that I sit down in the cargo and point "my" head away from the gunners/drivers positions. There in the back of the vehicle it's kind of hard to tell where the floor begins and the "wall" ends. It's nothing serious on gameplay but ruins the immersion a bit.

[dkell3 0]

I love this version much more than the FFUR build. The modeling is tops. Also,I like the hit system implemented with the slat armour.

[Kirby 2]

@Macser:

I was refering to someones idea of attaching the turret by script, so that you can use the sights on it, even with the Styker defined as car.

OFP cant tell if the vehical is tilted (rolled over or on a hill) so the turret would look odd.

But the sodier thing is fine... How exactly is he "in" the vehical? script or just the model holding him in there?

[Macser_old 0]

Hello guys,

@Blazin

Atm the moment the unit is held in place by a single

script,and a roadway lod to stop him from sinking

through the hull.As you say,it's the pitch and bank

that tends to spoil it.It wouldn't be as steady as

[APS]Gnat's Arma version looks.

It's quite flawed,but maybe a good scripter could

come up with somethin to "lock it down" a bit.

@Dkell3

Glad you like it.The FFur version was just an earlier

build.Thunderbird liked the look of the model,but

had a deadline to meet.Which is understandable.

@Ase290406

Now,I'm not trying to be a smart ass.

But I'm still not too sure what you mean.

Are you referring to the texture quality,the

mapping or the colour in general.

Is it where the edges meet,that you're

not happy with?Or something else entirely?

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

With regard to the "radio chatter".I've discovered

a bit more about the way the engine deals with

sound.Maybe it's already common knowledge,but

it was news to me.

The entry which most people think is decibel level,

is as much to do with distance as volume.Outside

of a certain range,it seems there's no real change

in volume.So at say 70 meters,it could sound almost

the same as at 5 meters.Which would explain people

saying they can hear a low volume sample tens of

meters away.

Anyway,the new setting should be more subtle.

You have to be right on top of the vehicle to

hear it.But inside the sample plays at base level.