APPEAL TO ADDONMAKERScan't we do some kind o

[colt 0]

Yeah, I's like to see a standardised weapon / vehicle / armour balance that modders can adhere to.

Maybe a locked and updated sticky thread in the mod disscussion where a table of agreed values can be put.

And with co-operation of fansites, they can also pin a copy of the table in their forums and websites. That way the info is spread around the ArmA community reaching many people.

[Wolfrug 0]

somebody told about replacements pack, but why i should use JAM if my M14 or SKS model is much better quality and more detailed ?

Not to butt in or anything, and I'm NOT an addon-maker at all, but as far as I know you can make any of your addon weapons compatible with JAM, since at least in OFP all the damage, accuracy, sound and other values were defined in the config of the magazine rather than the gun itself. If this has changed then I'm obviously talking out of my ass, but if not, you can just make your weapons compatible with both JAM and your own config (if that's your bag). JAM even had several soundpacks available depending on what kind of sound you wanted from them guns. And if you insist on your own custom sound and config, just make your own magazines, as well as making it JAM-compatible.

That way you can have a nice shiny custom-made weapon that ALSO has common ballistics with every other JAM-compatible weapon out there. Sure, people'd have to have JAM downloaded, but I doubt there many OFPers out there who don't have it in their Addons folder somewhere.

As to vehicles and their armor and damage values, I cannae much help you.

I'm no expert, but this is the way I've understood things work. I also read somewhere the G85 mod is planning something like JAM for ArmA, which, considering how large a part of the professional modding community they seem to represent, seems like a good thing to wait for.

/Wolfrug out

[funnyguy1 0]

1. It is a good idea, because default values aren't to good (weapons, the way AI use it, armor etc.)

2. A topic with discussion about the subject should be created

3.Moreover, we need 2 separate topics, lockable with the values, and the other one with the discussion

No, I'm not talking about Warcraft mod for ArmA, as it's armor values don't bother me at all. I'm talking about one decend config for the modern, ArmA-like conflict. Sooner or later we'll have XXX mods, modules, packs, conversions etc. with realistic configs, weapons, armor values etc. So, once again, I'm not talking about semi-realistic, almost realistic, arcade config or something else. The game ought to be "the most realistic combat simulator" after you installed it on your HD. It's not.

Just leave the discussion about the Sherman vs M1SEP stuff, as it'll encurage people who want a realistic sherman vs abrams battles to discuss such things anyway. I'm idealistic enough to believe that it's possible.

Why just sit in your own room and make configs. Isn't it better for the community and therefore for you to share your ideas, discuss it before you relase your work? Sure, there are mod teams, forums, sites, blogs and so on...but we can make 50% of work right here.

[vilas 477]

"aybe a locked and updated sticky thread in the mod disscussion where a table of agreed values can be put.

And with co-operation of fansites, they can also pin a copy of the table in their forums and websites. That way the info is spread around the ArmA community reaching many people. "

the best voice here

i wait for other addomakers for answer to this:

ironsights - optics zoom 0.42-0.3 not 0.22 like BIS gave

weapons range:

SMG short barrel like UZI 50 m, longer barrels like MP40 100 m (except PPS43, Sterling than 150 m)

assault rifles and rifles 400 m

mguns, sniper, scoped - 600 m

accuracy of rifle 0.001 in single, 0.003 in burst 0.005-0.007 in auto

4 types of grenades:

mortars (15 m, hit 30 ), defensive like F1, Mk2 (12 m, hit 20) , offensive like Mk 3 (7 m, hit 25 ) , underbarreled like M203 (6 m , hit 16 )

[johnwilso007 0]

how about creating some sort of addon maker alliance, where people who want to make their addons realistic and standardize values can join it. their addons can then be certified by the alliance?

this would prevent many different versions of jam, and ACES?

[andersson 285]

I believe that WGL had (have) the most realistic weaponvalues. They have put alot of effort into their work. Maybe talk to them?

[Dwarden 1125]

as always i nod on unified initiatives and if i understood it correct vilas got in mind unified accuracy & co.

yet someone said here that addon makers should release theirs "work" also as "little standalone packages"  

instead of monstrous ones like each vehicle , weapon, sound etc...

IMHO in that case let's look on it like lego

modmaker can release complex item based on thousands pieces (full mod, like FDF, CSLA & many others great i forgot to mention > sorry )

then there will be for sure packages like multiple modifications of same vehicle or weapon, sound packages or texture packages, config packages etc ...

but would be great to get single pieces of lego too

example1)

let say You need use 500MB addon full of desert stuff just to get single apc and jeep from it on server ...

sure you can rip it out, rewrote config and fix and redo stuff just to get these 2, then fight with addon maker claiming you messed with his package w/e ...

yet think what happens when You also offer these "pieces" standalone

+ less time needed to collect items You need for mission

+ such step allows way better flow on "lego" pieces on servers

example2)

starts from distribution to clients

You need download only 999MB of addons to play this great battle yet utilizing only 1/100 of that

now imagine if You can simply setup only 99MB addons combination (some vehicle types, some weapons and bonus stuff) ...

+ lego system prevents also spiral increase of duplicated items

example3)

some take huge addon A, B, C ... rips some needed stuff, packs in one his single item addon D to suits his need

and voila u got another pack to download / use (not to mention 'wasted' space) ...

+ lego system could also lead to easier collaboration similar to  open source projects

where multiple people can cooperate and improve each building piece together (coordinated e.g. via BIKE) to maintain major MP compatibility ...

think of it as unified models approach ...

sure this can't prevent duplicates to appear or people "fight" who made better looking/working vehicle (e.g. jeep)

but even if just some mod makers start cooperate beyond usual unified con figs/sounds/texture packs it will be great step forward ...

it may be done also by community voting

like nominations on "standard" package in certain 'class'

sure harder say who can nominate, could be e.g. committee from mod makers, editors, server admins

then it will need well done website system, with each basic lego addon, it's variants, detailed info, files, structure for url forwarding (server/client download), tons of bandwidth ...

I hope and I believe it can be done and will be done (either for this game or some game in future)

i'm aware that "fragments" of these ideas already exist in various forms for OFP & will reappear for ArmA yet it's way away from such scale

what i wrote above were just my opinions and You may disagree

so put Your imagination to use and think out and reveal something better

p.s. i know i suck on writing under fever  

[pathetic_berserker 4]

people will make what they want to, however the idea of having someplace for addon makers to see and compare values in order to avoid conflicts would be good.

As for wich values may be good to change in Arma. I'd wait for the 505 release.

[funnyguy1 0]

how about creating some sort of addon maker alliance, where people who want to make their addons realistic and standardize values can join it. their addons can then be certified by the alliance?

this would prevent many different versions of jam, and ACES?

Well, that's the idea, however I wouldn't use lofty names and stuff

@Dwarden:

Addons will be relased as a standalone packages anyway! You can not stop that, and for some reasons it's just more comfortable, just like you wrote. There's no point in creating *another* one big mod that changes the stuff mentioned here. It's about creating a standart for those who want to make any mod that messes with the values and claim to be the only one who created the realistic thing.

If you're keen on Star Wars, that's good, make a SW mod, I'll play it too. If you want to have a realistic config, well that's the place you should visit first. If you have a better solutions, post them here and discuss with others, than update common work.

Imho It's like creating a wiki.

[Dwarden 1125]

funnyguy1 i fear you missed what i tried explain ...

it wasn't related to realistic or sci-fi configs at all ...

[funnyguy1 0]

I did Sorry Dwarden. I didn't understand correctly what you had written and just posted a replay, which was lame and impolite. It was 6:30 a.m. though

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

I tell you what would be better thant creating various versions of JAM, CAVS, ACES etc.  A few pages on the BIKI that show the BIS armour & hit values of all the units in the standard version of ArmA.  Then all addon makers have a reference to start from...

THEN...  we take the likes of JAM, CAVS ACES etc (why waste the great work) and  build up a "community approved" (That will be fun wont it)  "class" list with an upper and lower limit for the dammage etc.  This could then be used by people not wanting to use addons like JAM, ACES etc to provide reasonable and fairly balanced values.

Just an idea.

[vilas 477]

the only thing that I concerning

none of addonmakers here :/

I posted suggested values of accuracy, range but there are only players

so rest f*** this issue ?

so there will be mess in configs :/

I thought this idea will work

but probably someone will made super acurate and super power rifle saying "look my rifle kills by one shot from 500 meters" just to prove himself "how super i am" :/

[Sled88 0]

I like your idea vilas... but before the tools are released the addonmakers should use the standard bis values... My opinion... so the addons which would be released NOW don't have any conflict between the addons released LATER... I would support your idea!!! You should now...

[sickboy 13]

I like your idea vilas... but before the tools are released the addonmakers should use the standard bis values... My opinion... so the addons which would be released NOW don't have any conflict between the addons released LATER... I would support your idea!!! You should now...

Im not entirely sure why if the new values would be implemented, published etc in the next weeks etc, why this would be a problem for addons later? (They can also use these values right?)

[Sled88 0]

Yes but these values have to be released first before we can use them... and before making some own values, let's wait till one military expert show us the right ones... or we have the next unreleastic values isn't it?

[sickboy 13]

Yes but these values have to be released first before we can use them... and before making some own values, let's wait till one military expert show us the right ones... or we have the next unreleastic values isn't it?

Sure, but the basic idea behind all this is exactly that what you describe... Define, Review, Tweak and finalize the results.

It has nothing to do with the release date of the mod tools imho, but simply with the time it takes for such list to be into a publishing state (which indeed could take longer but also shorter than the modtool releases)... The idea is/was to first establish such list before using it, at least that was my conclussion

[Sled88 0]

Yea what i said... With tools I mean we can create models... but we can make them better with the tools... so it would be a unless thing to use them in addons which are released NOW. I hope you understand now! ,)

[crashdome 3]

While noble, I think addon makers getting together and trying to create realistic values would be more of a mess than the OFP addons as is. People fighting about which is better, etc.. etc..

Name ONE game that has mods in which units from different mod teams work without being unbalanced!

The only solution is to find others that think alike and want the same values and for them to form together and make their own mod. In this respect, I think independant modellers should focus less on config and more on distributing their models to various 'teams' for them to create a larger group of balanced and accurate representations of their work. The modellers already in teams of course already have config writers for them.

[Edit] We seem to have a lack of organization in OFP simply because the motivations between mod teams and individuals with talent to make the addons were scattered over the course of time. Now that we are starting over, perhaps mod teams should be more receptive to including other models from others and modellers should happily give their work out to teams.

A well done model and a good team to represent that model benefits everyone.

[fasad 1]

I definately agree with crashdome. An individual unit addon is almost useless unless it's config fits in exactly with a common standard (ideally something more realistic than BI values). Models should be released as models, allowing variations of the config to be created. It will require addon makers to be a bit more flexible in how their model is used. To help this, addons should be kept as modular as possible. A model and textures go into one pbo, the config and any support scripts in another.

As for the original proposal, I think the best thing to do would be to post a set of values to get the ball rolling. Base them on JAM/cavs values. They don't have to be universally accepted, but at least it would give addon makers an strong alternative to BI values before the chaos starts.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

the only thing that I concerning

none of addonmakers here :/

I posted suggested values of accuracy, range but there are only players

so rest f*** this issue ?

so there will be mess in configs :/

I thought this idea will work

but probably someone will made super acurate and super power rifle saying "look my rifle kills by one shot from 500 meters" just to prove himself "how super i am" :/

Villas am I correct in seeing that you are asking not only for people to make addons with more consistant values but also for someone to support your own personal idea on how the values should be changed?

I think you should try and tackle the problem a bit more before saying you may have an answer.

(now suggested multiple times)

The idea of a 'values repository' containing values from BIS, JAM, CAV, WGL etc, and future well researched/debated then accepted MODS/systems will go a very very long way to solving half your problem. If addon makers can see how some values already work they will better judge when deciding thier own. Meaning less disparity between addons.

And it may also help your second wish.

Looking for feedback for your personal ideas you could try the Configs and Scripting section of the forum or maybe try www.ofpec.com.Some variables only reqire vey small changes while others may work in combination

I don't how much you know about OFP but the drop In values you noted for Arma may be because many people were annoyed by the AI's ability to consistantly get head shots, snap firing, at range. Personaly I think they have it right for Arma. Its balanced. Which is the most important thing. Its one thing to understand the statistical possiblities of a weapon another to understand the experience of the person holding it.Then balancing that between the fact that the AI doesn't aquire its targets (via values) in the same way that players do (via screen and key board). The wide range of possibilities is kind of why systems like JAM have HD ammo. (its a pity that accuracy wasn't tied to a units skill in OFP).

personaly I think a 30% increase in overall accuracy for a weapon and an AI's engangement range is too much. I think you will be stuck playing against super troopers, when reality tells some very different stories. On the gap between the US and the russian weapons, I dont know.

By the way "super rifles".If they exist its because makers have been unaware of the conflict (that could be avoided with a 'values repository') some are by design to reflect very highly skilled specialist personel (DMA? Super Sniper) because a realistic encounter couldn't be accomplished using skill level alone.

[vilas 477]

super rilfe is when someone will give values from M16 to submachinegun, and it is WW2 mod- than MP40 is best than few men with 98k

in real life at range 50 meters, SMG is better

but at range 200 m MP40 is useless

or AKS-74U is differ from AK-74 only by model - not by config

or when HK G36C differs from G36A only by model - not by config - subcarabine is used at 200 m

short barrel subcarabines are used by special forces, police on short ranges, as stronger to penetrate vests than SMGs

but AKSU is not used at 500 m as in OFP, when Specnaz kills you by one shot from 400 m !

and underbarrel grenades for grenade launcher are in ARMA, OFP so strong like frag handgrenade

for M203: M381, M406, M386, M441 grenades hurt at range 5-6 meters (in ARMA , OFP 7 meters) but handgrenade at 15-25 meters !!! so let's stay with BIS values for underbarreled but increase hand grenade hit range up to 10-11 meters ?

except offensive grenades - used when capture buldings

i know that for historic reasons some people in eastern europe don't like russians (BIS is from Czech republic) i am from Poland

but this is no reason to give US weapons better config than to Soviet stuff,

M4 is good smaller version of M16, but it's efective range of use is about 350 m, while M16 500 meters like AK74

BIS gave bigger AI probability of fire at 400 m to M4 than AK74

AK74 have 2 times worse accuracy than M16 and AK74 kicks like hell

PKM has worse accuracy than M240 (0.005 against 0.0038)

i suggest - lets give to weapons with long barrel BIS 400 meters max range

but weapon like M4 lets give 350

weapon like XM177, AKSU 200-250 meters

SMG - from short barrel 50-75 m, Sterling, PPS even 150-200 meters

and all will be well

accuracy of MP5 is not good (0.006), why it is used by all special units in the world ? because in real it is good

BIS gave :

maxRange = 150;

maxRangeProbab = 0.05;

in real aim of MP5 is 25/50/100 meters (my friend is in Police)

of course Parabellum bullet can kill at 200 meters, but probably it is used at 100 meters max

WW2 weapons had worse powder than now, effective range of Para bullet during WW2 was lower than from Sterling SMG only cardridges

[funnyguy1 0]

updatnij pierwszy post vilas! jest straszny balagan i sie goscie nie moga pozbierac z tym wszystkim...zrob tak zeby bylo wiadomo o co chodzi i podaj te wartosci w configach o ktore ci chodzi zaraz na poczatku...potem updatuj pierwszy post i bedzie git. powodzenia;)

[vilas 477]

dobra - do pierwszego dodam tabele, mam kumpla w BOR, GROM, to sie nasłuchałem ostatnio

okay - i 'll update first post, i will give a table - one friend s Goverment Security Service, other in GROM so i know something more now about weapons - we 've been discussing

[Rhodite 3]

funnyguy1 & Vilas

English please..

Quote[/b] ]§7)Write in English

In the English part of the board please write in English and in the Czech write in Czech. Try avoiding writing in any other language since the majority of the members most likely won't understand.

Please avoid using short forms of words e.g. "m8" instead of mate, "u r" instead of you are or your, it may seem attractive to type in such a "shorthand" manner but remember that there are many people on the forums who do not have English as a first language, so it is disrespectful to use bad English simply for the sake of laziness. (Obviously there are common shortenings of words that have been used for many years on the internet that continue to be acceptable, e.g. LMAO, LOL, FYI etc.)