will BI add a functioning AN/PEQ-2

[zootia 0]

I've noticed a lot of the US weapons in ArmA have the AN/PEQ-2 box mounted on them. However, They have no functionality.

The AN/PEQ-2 beams an infrared light like a laser pointer to facilitate target acquisition. The beam can only be seen thru NVGs, so the enemy does not know that they are being targeted.

Heres a pic of it in action

Wouldn't it be cool if we got this too?

Night fights would be awesome

[frederf 0]

Basically it would be some kind of object that you could only see in certain vision modes, like a very simple polygon with a semi-transparent whitish texture in NVGs and invisible in normal vision.

If they could do this then BIS could definately do thermal!

[-Puma- 2]

I was asking the same thing the day Arma was out. It's a shame they modell it but don't make it work...

[smellyjelly 0]

I was thinking about this too, and infrared flares. Both would be awsome if programmed correctly.

[Fred DM 0]

i agree. i also think that you should only model thinks like that if you're gonna make it functional. if you can't, then don't model it in the first place.

unfortunately, too many games model stuff that turns out not to be working.

[shinRaiden 0]

If you are asking for accurate implementation you would need to be asking for technical data (ITAR 121.1.1.i >> 120.10) for an accessory (ITAR 121.1.h), information on signature control materials (ITAR 121.1.2.e)... and a whole heap of more nasty legal code.

That's why you model stuff that's not working, and then provide the infrastructure to those that are allowed to make it work. So you don't end up in Guantanamo Bay. Any further questions?

[-Puma- 2]

i agree. i also think that you should only model thinks like that if you're gonna make it functional. if you can't, then don't model it in the first place.

unfortunately, too many games model stuff that turns out not to be working.

maybe they ran out of time, and left the model there. to be finished in (next) patch maybe

[DaSquade 0]

Quote[/b] ]Any further questions?

Accurate implementation: Well getting it 100% accurate would indeed be a hard task, true. But we could live with a less accurate solution i suppose. I mean, (and i mean it in a friendly way ) "technical data (ITAR 121.1.1.i >> 120.10) for an accessory (ITAR 121.1.h)" my Xss . With a bit research you can get the fundamental technical details of it and imho this isn't the issue. In the end 'it' will need to be adopted to what the engine can supply and support, with or without modification. Imho it is just the fact it would need a lot of dev work to simply get it working with the basic principiles of the laser and knowning a lot of time is put in arma to get it bugfree doesn't gives them much time to 'play around' for other things atm (at least what i think).

What we do know from earliers community work is:

1. It can't really be done by 'geo'. Meaning, it has to be made out of an actual 'light source' witch interact with the envirement. Meaning, textured geo with some kind of shader (to let it work with NV) should work and atm could be done afaik. BUT it is the way the laser/light needs to interact with its envirement that is the braincracker. Meaning, in case of geo, there is no way (afaik) to recreated the fact the laser bundle gets stopped when blocked by other geo (trees, houses, units etc), as we all know the geo modeled and textured beam would simple continue once passed a blocking item. So it comes down to have it in form as it is, namely lightsource.

I'm noob and i don't know if lightsources can be manipulated that way so they have a light cone that narrow, bright and at the same time have the needed shader to simulate the NV only mode.

Beside that, maybe the other basic question is, are lightsources possible in arma on weapons? Again an other basic engine limitation witch was never possible in the previous enignes. Ok, it was possible to simulate it in the passed by integrating it in a unit, but lets faces it, why do that if it would be possible to integrate it in the weapon by default. I honestly think this wouldn't require hunderds of houres of work to implate it in the engine..proove me wrong.

I mean, if light sources would be possible on weapons, this would be a good start. Then at least we could have lighttortches on weapons witch would be a start and have imho a big impack on gameplay. And frankly, isn't that almost a standard feature in most first person shooters...makes you wonder why it wasn't implanted in the first place, unless the engine isn't that easy to modify in that area but again i dought to believe that...

Anyway, i understand it isn't laser or the IR light beam that will make ArmA the ultimate military (soldier ) simulation, but lets face it. In modern days warefare, the ANPEQ or any other laser/IR (and thermal, although last might be a good excuse not to included as it isn't used that often in the soldiers kit...ArmA isn't a flight/tank sim) is one of the technical items that are used and give benifit over those who doesn't...and afaik, this makes the difference in most case if you win or loose.

Anyway, like some others, lasers and IR is still one of the number one item/features on my list. Somehow i can understand BIS can't do it (perfectly). But maybe it is a mather of the community to search and investigate if ArmA allows more then what was possible.

Just my 5 €cent.

[karl76 0]

We already have something like laser beams inside the game.... the tracers. Make the current tracer effect constant and only visible through NV and semi-transparent and since that effect is actually a 3D object it should behave like a laser/light source and be stopped by other 3D objects. Anyway, that was just a noobish idea of mine, it probably wouldn´t work anyway.

[-Puma- 2]

and vehicle lights are allso stopped by enviroment, and they move around too...

(i'm not even saying that, make the sight, from vehicle lights, thnx to all the "do it yourself" replys.)

[shinRaiden 0]

Erm, my point was that IF BIS adds feature xyz to their product, to what level do they implement it? Regardless of how 'accurate' they make it, there will always be someone who wants to do it different.

Let's suppose that BIS only adds the necessary changes for the community to implement them, but doesn't make some samples themselves. There's factions here that would starve cursing BIS rather than lift a finger to do it themselves. BIS can't satisfy everyone, and it will always be one more thing, and one more thing, and one more thing, and I'm all outraged it wasn't the way I wanted it and when I wanted it.

Ok, let's take a different approach. Suppose BIS, being in the Czech Republic, made content that inside the US market would be considered a controlled item. No publisher would dare touch it, and how would you guarantee that all copies are controlled? What about network play? Would sufficient information be transmitted in a network session to require an export license to play multiplayer from the US to the UK?

And that last item, dealing with visual and near-visual wavelength optical manipulations, that could possibly be covered by the materials signature control clause.

[Sgt_Eversmann 1]

Weapons just should be able to use hiddenselections.

With hiddenselections on Weapons we could have Flashlights and Lasers, and then there would be a way for a IR Laser I think.

[BOROVIK 0]

Hmmm it will be great to see the AN/PEQ-2 in Arma because this can be used to be as a pointer in NVG missions, It think that this is a easy feature to add. The AN/PEQ-2 has also the NVG illumination great stuff for some CQB NVG missions.

[PilusPrimus_aka_jONATHAN 0]

Quote[/b] ]Ok, let's take a different approach. Suppose BIS, being in the Czech Republic, made content that inside the US market would be considered a controlled item. No publisher would dare touch it, and how would you guarantee that all copies are controlled? What about network play? Would sufficient information be transmitted in a network session to require an export license to play multiplayer from the US to the UK?

Although I totally respect the thinking behind your argument, and your obvious experience with the subject matter....Umm...It's a game kids.

If we were talking about accurate mathematical modelling simulations of real-world classified US equipment, then perhaps there might be some classified white paper or IP out there that would be in conflict...but that's what VBS is for, right?

I don't see that a generic emulation in a video game of an infra-red target designator is going to cause the US Department of Defense (or whoever) to bomb the Czech Republic, or dismantle the internet, or worse...take away our ability to play this game. :-)

On a side note - if someone were to recreate this technology using DoD specs in real life for, say, a paintball gun, then I'd love to be around to see the p00p hit the fan in that case.

Where technical considerations are considered to make it happen in game, an old school method for consideration would be to fire an invisible "bullet" with no ballistic properties and with highest velocity possible from the targeting device once per screen refresh ... when it hits an object or reaches it's maximum range, either event would create a trail of self propagating "laser" objects back along the trajectory to the source.

Caveat - this would be laggy unless it's explicitly generated locally.

Probably not hte best solution, but there's a concept there which may bear fruit.

This input is worth exactly 2 cents.;)

See y'all in the field - J.

[Mr.Whitlow 0]

lol. When I first looked at your topic I was like "What the f£%^ is an AN/PEQ-2", thinking it was some obscure multi-purpose weapon used by the Zambians in the second Zargonian war.

Then I realised it's that thing on the right of the barrels of some guns, and I've got to say: thank you, now I know what they are. I always wondered what they are for except for making the gun look more futuristic.

So yeah, the functionality should definitely be added. Will it? Probably, at some time. I doubt they'd model it at some time but just leave it out, never to look upon it again. Who knows.

[BOROVIK 0]

How it works:

Will be great to have it in ARMA

[DaSquade 0]

Don't get me wrong ShinR, although i try me best to understand you and your posts , aren't you lokking to much outside the box. You make a point they maybe aren't allowed to much it 100% accurate (if that can be assumed out of the third part of your post), in the end it is a game. Although i'm not 100% sure if any other game dev. tried and managed to integrate laser, witch i surely think...i haven't heard of any game dev. getting sued or whatever to implant this (almost sound like super doober high top secret technoligy) .

Sure, if BIS would have the time and find it important enough to add it, there will be some trolls that don't like it and would have wanted it differently. But hey, even tracers are apperently worth 50 topics . Just my point is, BIS always said they wanted to make their games (and engines) to be part of the closest as realisme can provide. Maybe we simply ask to much and it simply isn't possible, but somehow i dought as other engine have made it possible and atm i don't really see what would be that hard...meaning if the lasers can be implanted they way i think, over lightsource with some kind of shader that is compatible with the NV.

I don't think the fact you won't be able to make it 100% (and then i think of the multiple modes of the laser and IR on the AN/PEQ2a etc), can be the overall excuses not to 'try' it. Ok, we the community don't know if they have tried or the fellas in Australia. But like i said, even the simple integration of lightsource as we know (lights on planes, cars, streetlights etc) would be a start if you understand my going...Let the community figuer out the rest maybe, as this was something that stopped most in the past as recreating the feature meant big, unaccurate and laggy alternatives. Anyway, no trolling here and if BIS decide not to take a look at it, fine by me. I and other simply trying to create and help ArmA to an other level...

@Sgt_Eversmann: Don't see what hiddenselection could help in the term of lasers and lights imho. In the end, you need to have some form of interacting base (lightsource) that by default interacts with the envirement. Meaning, lightsource afaik should be ale to provide most things you need, like interact with envirement (blocking lightsource) and a cfg'able cone + colour values in combination with the new types of textures/shaders you could simulate the laser beam behaviors...

Anyway, just trying to give a civil input .

[granQ 293]

don't forget this is a computer game.. maybe they shouldn't make nukes in Red Alert games, nukes arent allowed for civillians blabla.

also, what is asked for is a damn "flashlight" to only be visible thru nvg, thats it. Call it "swedish monkey light" if that makes you happy.

[ArMoGaDoN 0]

lol I thought it was just a small MagLite on the side of the barrel. It'd be great if they could just make it work like a torch IMO.

[frederf 0]

Well if you didn't have to see the beam from the side then this feature is already in the game sort of except for "visible only in NVG".

You'd just have to figure out how to make a weapon fire 2 muzzles at once the bullets and the light. Hehe, would be funny to run out of batteries too.

Check out the Laserdesignator (SOFLAM), it makes a white splotch at a distance, gets blocked by stuff in between. I'm not sure how "bright" it is (texture or an actual light source). I think the SOFLAM in game creates a lightsource object at the end of the path from the barrel.

[weegee_101 0]

I don't see that a generic emulation in a video game of an infra-red target designator is going to cause the US Department of Defense (or whoever) to bomb the Czech Republic, or dismantle the internet, or worse...take away our ability to play this game. :-)

The US DoD wouldn't care. If they did then we still wouldn't have this game. Lets see, M16A4, M4, associated aimpoints, AT-4, Javelin, Strykers, etc. I can go on all day. If that little piece of unclassified hardware would stop this game from being published, then the rest would have as well.

The technical details for doing this would be difficult. It'd have to be built into the engine, which at this point may be the last thing in BIS' eyes. Maybe they'll stick it into game 2?

[-Puma- 2]

lol. When I first looked at your topic I was like "What the f£%^ is an AN/PEQ-2", thinking it was some obscure multi-purpose weapon used by the Zambians in the second Zargonian war.

Then I realised it's that thing on the right of the barrels of some guns, and I've got to say: thank you, now I know what they are. I always wondered what they are for except for making the gun look more futuristic.

So yeah, the functionality should definitely be added. Will it? Probably, at some time. I doubt they'd model it at some time but just leave it out, never to look upon it again. Who knows.

I agree, and yes I tought the thing was flashlight....(searched the wiki like hell at first to find a proper button to make it work )

[Beagle 684]

My thoughts: It's allready in the game... it is called crosshair and can be turned on and off in the option menue.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

All you really need is a "range" animation controller, like a laser rangefinder, only the animation would be the length of the beam (with a maximum value of course, and that can be done), which you could model on to the weapon and give it a texture that you can only see with NVGs.

[-Puma- 2]

My thoughts: It's allready in the game... it is called crosshair and can be turned on and off in the option menue.

and u call crosshair a laser sight??