Cold War Rearmed Discussion

[Mr_Tea 0]

Those rifle fired grenades where used, but i don`t remember where it was.

Edit: Look what i found on Wikipedia.

[SEAL84 0]

I realize you folks aren't recruiting anymore but I figured it couldn't hurt to say that if you need any voice acting done at some point I'd be happy to help. Just throwing that out there.

[canukausiuka 1]

I thought the intention was to use the voices from OFP:E. But if more voices are needed, I'll go ahead and volunteer too.

That leads me to one other question: are the sounds going to be the OFP sounds, OFP:E sounds, ArmA sounds, a mixture, or are you going to be using new ones? (Lord knows there will be sound mods after release, because this is one of those things where everybody seems to have their own preferences, I was just wondering what the official source will be).

[chipper 0]

If CWR uses OFP:E voices I'll mod it to use original CWC sounds, but thats just me.

[Jahve 0]

The reason we cannot use CWC voices is because they are the property of Codemasters, and such they probably wouldnt like us putting their property into another game than what it was made for.

[mattxr 9]

But OFP:E is also codemasters.. and the voices are crap.  

Anyways if this is being made by the community when have they stuck to any rules outside the community taking songs from bands and music websites to put in there missions/movies when did that stop them?

BIS isnt actually ripping the sounds your are, and you dont work for BIS lol.

[raedor 8]

OFPE sounds are property of BI. For now we will be using OFPE sounds -- but thanks for volunteering, it is possible that we add better sounds later on.

@Matt Rochelle:

Quote[/b] ]The Cold War Rearmed (CWR) modification is a collaborative project with BI and community fans [...]

So yes, we are not working _for_ them.

[Commando84 0]

cant we have anthony hopkins do some voice overs?! ok but seriously what about finding some good sounding people and then give 'em some of the ofp and ofp R lines and then they record them in and then you got the next best thing maybe?

[gazmen 0]

Nice idea :

Still I was not happy that ARMA don't support OFP Addons, due to the fact that the texture & OFP P3D were missing...

Also in CPP, bis replaced the OFP side by ARMA side using same values, what could cause conflict...

What would be great is that BIS change the value of CPP adding the new side of ARMA with those of OFP, when update for ARMA woulbe be available

They could keep the ancient from O.F.P & add new camp...

Example

    - BluEfor - Euro (G36 & FAMAS, Marder, Leopard, Leclerc, Tiger serie, Eurofighter) {Catholique} [Armed Assault]

    - R.A.S : Royal Army Corps of Sahrani - U.K or C.W - INDEPENDANT (L85A2 & SA80, Stryker, Chalenger) {Protestant} [Armed Assault]

    - L.A.S : Libération Army of Sahrani - OPFOR - MIDDLE-EAST or Asia (AK74, BMP2, T72, MI24, SU25, MIG29) {Islam} [Armed Assault]

    - WEST - U.S.A/N.A.T.O (M4, M2A2, M1A2, AH64, F22, F117, B2) {Unknow} [Operation Flashpoint]

    - EAST - Soviet (AK74M, BMP3, T80, MI28, MIG31, SU34) {Orthodoxe} [Operation Flashpoint]

    - RESISTANCE - Africa (AK47, BMP, T55, Serie, MIG25) {Unknown} [Operation Flashpoint]

    - CIVIL

    - ASIA {Buddhist}

    - HINDU-PAERTHIAN {Hindousim, Zoroastrism}

Please, could you add those new side in C.P.P sous forme de :

//Group Types //

      #define TEast 0

      #define TWest 1

      #define TGuerrila 2

      #define TCivilian 3

      #define TEuro 8

      #define TIndia 9

      #define TSla 10 (Indepedant)

      #define TRAC 11 (UK & CW)

      #define TAsia 12 (Indepedant)

      #define TSideUnknown 4

      #define TEnemy 5

      #define TFriendly 6

      #define TLogic 7

C.E.I : EAST in OFP

      Weapons : AK74M or AK100 serie, PKM, KSVK, Dragunov SVD-M

      Tank : BMP3, T80...

      Plane : MI-28, SU-30, MIG-29

U.S.A : WEST in OFP

      Weapons : M4, M24, M240, M256

      Tank : M2A2, M1A1...

      Plane : AH-64, AV-8, F-22

AFRIKA : RESISTANCE in OFP [b.A.S]

      Weapons : AK47 serie, PK

      Tank : BMP1, T55

      Plane : MI-17

C.E.EYRO : BLUFOR in ARMA

      Weapons : G36, G3, FAMAS, STEYR, BERRETA, H&K MSG, HECATE...

      Tank : Leclerc, Leopard, Stryker...

      Plane : Eurofighter, Tiger...

U.K & C.W : OFPOR Royal Army Corps of Sahrani in ARMA (C.W : U.K + Canada + Australia & Others [monarchic Protestant State])

      Weapons : L85A1 and L85A2 , L86A1 - SA-80, AWP

      Tank : Challenger, Landrover 88, FV-432

      Plane :

MIDDLE-EAST INDEPENDANT Liberation Army of Sahrani in ARMA

      Weapons : AK74, Dragunov

      Tank : BMP2, T72

      Plane : MI-24, SU-25

ASIA CHINA+JAPAN+KOREA+SIAM+Indonesie, Malisie, Philippines, Singapour

Hindu-Paerthia India, Iran, Nepal, Afghanistan Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka...

CIVILIAN

[Jahve 0]

No we will not. This is not a request thread, its a discussion thread for discussing ofp vs arma addons.

[dm 9]

This is not a request thread, its a discussion thread for discussing ofp vs arma addons.

I thought it was a discussion thread for CWR, as opposed to general "OFP Vs. ArmA Addons".

Anyho, enough hair splitting. Real questions time:

I know these have been asked before (I know because I asked them ) but I don't recall ever getting a straight answer:

1. Are you going to be updating the content to match the ArmA "standards" (graphically speaking) or is it going to be a straight port from OFP:E with the relevant modifications made in order to be functional?

2. If so, are you going to be updating the "functionality" of the content to match real-world specs, or are you going to keep it in line with OFP? I.e. are you going to put either 2x M240's or 2x M134's on the UH60, or are you going to stay with the rarely used M2?

3. If so, I assume that you'll be tweaking the missions accordingly in order to not break the playability. Correct?

[gazmen 0]

No we will not. This is not a request thread, its a discussion thread for discussing ofp vs arma addons.

Are you speaking for yourself or even for B.I.S...

[fasad 1]

Cheeky question - How many satellite/layer map segments are you using to cover the OFP islands?

I'm hoping you have some more "insight" than the current hex & guess editing craze

[Jahve 0]

No we will not. This is not a request thread, its a discussion thread for discussing ofp vs arma addons.

Are you speaking for yourself or even for B.I.S...

I am not a BIS employee, so I cannot speak on their behalf. I speak on the behalf of the project.

Remember: Even though we are backed by BIS, we are not paid or employed by them, or anyone, for doing this project.

The point is, you asked us to make a whole bunch of sides as a part of CWR, wich we wont do because its not a part of the project, as it was not a part of OFP.

[1436 1]

Right now the t-72 Has almost the same damage and Armor as the m1.. when cold war rearmed comes out are the devs going to ajust all the armor values to the old ofp way. otherwise you would probly have a new .ofpRearmed.exe file i think it would be best to go old armor standers to avoid this conflict and overpower.. from east/west

old ofp example but without res addons example of armor vs armor

bmp1 & t55 vs stryker??

t-72 vs M60

t-80 vs m1

note m2a2 was added in resistance..

if you dont change the armor values it would be something like this

t-72&T-80 vs m-60 & m1 that does not make sence to me

but on the other hand if you have two configs one for ARMA others for Arma:ofpR it would work out aswell say you just have a mission that is ARMA addons then if no OFPR addons are used then dont use the ofpr addons/arma config...

sorey i am tyred jsut trying to help.. but i hope i am makeing my point clear

but then again its a free expation pack so it shood be Unified all together Somehow...

[berghoff 11]

Cheeky question - How many satellite/layer map segments are you using to cover the OFP islands?

I'm hoping you have some more "insight" than the current hex & guess editing craze

For the Islands we are using 2048 segments (satellite map + mask) of 512x512 and a whole bunch of rvmats files .

In Photoshop it is 12800x12800 px.

[fasad 1]

Thanks BergHoff

[Jahve 0]

No strykers in 85

[gazmen 0]

No we will not. This is not a request thread, its a discussion thread for discussing ofp vs arma addons.

Are you speaking for yourself or even for B.I.S...

I am not a BIS employee, so I cannot speak on their behalf. I speak on the behalf of the project.

Remember: Even though we are backed by BIS, we are not paid or employed by them, or anyone, for doing this project.

The point is, you asked us to make a whole bunch of sides as a part of CWR, wich we wont do because its not a part of the project, as it was not a part of OFP.  

If I'm asking this is to add better compatibility, between ancient addons  & ARMA (BIS said that the OFP addons should normaly be compatible with ARMA, but problem of SIDE, modele [P3D] & texture [PAA] caused bug & incompatibility)...

Also by adding OFP (C.R.E.W) side to ARMA (C.L.E.R), the addons would be better manage...

By adding those OFP camp in editor :

It would be able to experiment new battle :

- C.E.I (Est) & EURO (Blufor)

- ROYAL [uK, CW] (opfor) vs USA (West)

- EURO vs Afrika (RESISTANCE)

- LAS (Far & Middle-East) vs C.E.I (Est)...

So it would add a lot of fun...

[dm 9]

Gazmen - I dont see how:

a. this contributes to CWR, which focuses PURELY on the content created by BI for the CWC and RES campaigns.

b. this makes any ounce of sense. Sure it would be great to have extra sides so that more "what ifs" could be experimented with. But since ALL addons had to adhere to the same Side structure as OFP, which is continued in ArmA, I don't see how adding all these extra sides could possibly "help" the situation....

[granQ 293]

Cheeky question - How many satellite/layer map segments are you using to cover the OFP islands?

I'm hoping you have some more "insight" than the current hex & guess editing craze

For the Islands we are using 2048 segments (satellite map + mask) of 512x512 and a whole bunch of rvmats files .

In Photoshop it is 12800x12800 px.

thanks, really nice to hear what we can expect (From a addon maker perspective) however I would like to point out the rules of this thread I posted.

No discussion of the tools are allowed.. and this very close to it, remember its the official policy of CWR that you guys don't have the tools.

[Planck 1]

Quote[/b] ]

remember its the official policy of CWR that you guys don't have the tools.

I have never seen the CWR official policy, would you care to point out where it is written down so I might know what the official CWR policy is.

Planck

[xav 0]

Guys... let's try not to get this thread closed again please

[granQ 293]

Quote[/b] ]

remember its the official policy of CWR that you guys don't have the tools.

I have never seen the CWR official policy, would you care to point out where it is written down so I might know what the official CWR policy is.

Planck

i would like to give that one to radeor to reply to.

Seeming i already have one warning level, after being a part of the ofp/arma community since half year before the demo was released.. and this year, for the first time, i been threaten, got a warning level and so on just because of the CWR. So i rather pass now..

[gazmen 0]

I wan't to know if they plan to release the whole pack or addons by addons ?

Also a long shall we wait for this ?