Cold War Rearmed v0.36 released

[-duke- 0]

OFP is prolly what brought most of us here so I don't think there's such a thing as "too much OFP" personally.

I love the mod so far and can't wait to see how it turns out.

[Mr_Tea 0]

I really can`t wait for the final, so i begun to toy around with Evolution SP in CWR.

Mama i`m coming home, it`s so great.

Once all units and vehicles are out, Evolution SP and MP too of course, can make use of this great mod. A little editing is required, but not that much.

ArmA is getting more and more interesting.

I hope CWR can be "easily" ported to ArmA 2 when it`s out.

[vilas 477]

Quote[/b] ]EDIT: I do appreciate the info you and Vilas have given even if it doesn't seem so.

why doesn't seem so ?

my informations:

Quote[/b] ]

in real life - Carl Gustav is not guided launcher, it is strong, but not guided

in real life AT-4 Spigot is operated by team, not single man, single man cannot hold all this stuff, and it not fires from shoulder

in real life AK do not have "burst" mode , burst mode have Polish Tantal and Beryl AK variants on 5.45 and 5.56 ammo

in real life usual Soviet soldier had no chickom (chest pouches), he had webbing and pouch for AK mags on right and pouch for grenades on left side , also in real life most of Soviet troops were wearing khaki/beige uniforms

in real life PK and PKM are different in look, while in CWR there is class PK while model represents PKM (difference between PK and PKM is like between AK and AKM, very well seen on receiver, diferent end of barrel, top cover)

in real life AKS-74U because of it is destination is not weapon to be used at ranges 500m, but BIS made even in ARMA only difference in model only, not in range and seriously in dispersion

by the way - but this is off topic - BIS made AKS-74U with silencer and called it AKS-74UN while in REAL "N" means it has rail to mount optics ! sorry for offtopic about ARMA mistakes

p.s.

RPG-75 which in OFP was given to soviet troops is Czech launcher, Soviets use RPG-7, not 75NH which was Czechoslovak

those infomations are true, so why doesn't seems so ?

BIS in OFP made a lot of mistakes, so if people say about mistakes in CWR, they are caused by "orginality" of OFP

or maybe we misanderstood each other ?

i was talking about lacks and mistakes of OFP which you as CWR want/have to or AVOID when "remake" in new much better graphic engine and quality of ARMA 1

i must check if your AK use burst, if CWR CG 84 mm is guided and others, because i haven't tested it yet, but you gave Soviets RPG-7 instead of wrong RPG-75 , so probably if you "fix" one mistakes of OFP, you can also fix another ?

or we missanderstood words "seems so"?

i was only looking at your soldiers, BMP, and Malden

shame that you don't plane to release OFP islands as standalone, it would be SUPER because OFP islands had "atmoshpere" and I miss them very very very much

as standalone they would be usefull for many mods

by the way - soviet soldier gear:

may be helpfull in future

I really really dream to see OFP islands standalone addons

I spent there few years a big piece of lifetime

[Sergei_Q 0]

Quote[/b] ]EDIT: I do appreciate the info you and Vilas have given even if it doesn't seem so.

why doesn't seem so ?

I think you misunderstood him - he just meant that the information was appreciated even if he didn't express his appreciation.

[vilas 477]

in many languages convertion to english makes funny results, many "phraseology" forms can be found different

in my language "i doesn't seems so" is translated "it doesn't look like this"

[MEDICUS 0]

Very nice work, CWR-Team! Awesome island and units! Really lovely!

(Yes, i know ... bit too late, but i just came home from vacations )

Now i've just a few questions (sorry if some are doubleposts, didn't read through all 26 pages)

* Is it possible to "deactivate" the OFP theme in the editor? I know that the main goal is to bring OFP-feeling back, but well ... i actually like the ArmA-Editor.

* Are there any plans to add the "standart ArmA units" (like the Stryker, AH6, MH6, standart Inf. ect) to the editor? In my opinion it's a big limitation in editing without them (there aren't much vehicles/units in this game anyway).

* Are there any plans to make the units/island as a standalone (like FDF, BAS, etc in OFP)?

MfG Medicus

[W0lle 1050]

Very nice work, CWR-Team! Awesome island and units! Really lovely!

(Yes, i know ... bit too late, but i just came home from vacations )

Now i've just a few questions (sorry if some are doubleposts, didn't read through all 26 pages)

* Is it possible to "deactivate" the OFP theme in the editor? I know that the main goal is to bring OFP-feeling back, but well ... i actually like the ArmA-Editor.

Yes by removing/renaming the cwr_ui.pbo from your ..\CWR\Addons\ folder.

Quote[/b] ]* Are there any plans to add the "standart ArmA units" (like the Stryker, AH6, MH6, standart Inf. ect) to the editor? In my opinion it's a big limitation in editing without them (there aren't much vehicles/units in this game anyway).

No, our goal is to bring the original OFP content back into ArmA. Plus CWR replaces the original game classnames with it's own objects, SoldierWB and SoldierEB for example.

It's a full scale modification like others too which are replacing stuff.

Quote[/b] ]* Are there any plans to make the units/island as a standalone (like FDF, BAS, etc in OFP)?

The problem is that you don't need just the islands but also a lot of other pbo files (roads, vegetation, buildings etc.). The situation is the same as with the FDF Islands for example. They also needed some external pbos too.

Don't quote me on that but I doubt it will happen anytime soon.

[spooky lynx 73]

I'm not sure what you mean by old jacket. It might be wrong, but something like this was done for OFP and VBS so that is why I went that route.

I mean that it looks like officer recieved just new trousers from army stocks but at the same time he wears very old jacket which was used for several years Well, don't matter!

[tophe 69]

Great job! I almost had goosebumps when taking a spin on the island.

Is there any plans on bringing back the old nice OFP-forrests? Or at least adding as much trees as OFP had. It really doesn't feel OFP without the big forrests. I know some other modder made the forrests for another ArmA Malden port. It looked great!

In my opinion that is the only great setback in ArmA compared to OFP. The lack of dense forests. ArmA is great for urban fighting but the woods are just not much fun.

Malden looks great otherwise. Add the woods and it will be the greatest add ever to ArmA!

[Planck 1]

Ummm, I don't understand, Malden has the exact same number of forests or woods as it did in OFP.

These forests are in the exact same positions and are as dense if not slightly denser than the originals.

Which forests are you finding missing?

Planck

[tophe 69]

Well.. the forests are there. But now it feels more like wandering around in meadows with apple trees than big dense pine tree forests. There are alot of trees but almost only small leaved trees.

I miss the way you could kind of disappear in the OFP forests. The woods were tall and the sky was almost blocked. There was alot of room for lower vegetation and the fight in those forests were just great.

I'm guessing this is something that won't happen, maybe someone will make a OFP-forests addon, maybe I will

I like the work so far, just miss the forests. Always have, since ArmA was released.

But I ust say... Riding a UAZ around Malden is just great! I love the colors you managed to get into it!

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Aren't you thinking about the forests on Kolgujev and Everon? O.o

[Planck 1]

Aye, well, as Ti0n3r has hinted, Malden never did have pine forests, only, mostly, broadleaf trees and bushes.

Try Everon or Kolgujev as he suggested.

Planck

[raedor 8]

I hope you all saw the easter egg'ed Christmas Trees!

[RN Malboeuf 12]

I want to ask some more questions (without any offence on quality of the mod)

I agree that it's critical to leave all the class names the same, but you could change some stringtable names to fix errors, couldn't you ?

You said you're going to bring back all the stuff from old ofp no matter how foolish or wrong it was )), but...

You're kinda supported by BIS (i really wonder if you were given proper tools ) and you are worried about author rules. You said you can't even use ofp sounds cause it's protected by codemasters. Thus i wonder what else is protected by Codemaster's copyright ? I can't imagine that story line, main characters, some art work are not protected by publisher. am i right ? So how can you use it ?

[raedor 8]

If BI is correct -- and I think they thought about that -- CM only owns the voice files, complete Red Hammer and the OFP and OFPR logos. All other stuff, including the whole CWC and OFPR campaing is free to use for CWR.

[MehMan 0]

One question, you can't change the class names, but you can change the values a bit to fix the BI errors that were done. I know you're going to say: it'll break the campaign. Well, you can make it so it won't. You'll be editing the missions anyway, so why not do this extra bit to satisfy us all.

Or you can just ignory the whiny bitchy me.

[raedor 8]

One question, you can't change the class names, but you can change the values a bit to fix the BI errors that were done. I know you're going to say: it'll break the campaign. Well, you can make it so it won't. You'll be editing the missions anyway, so why not do this extra bit to satisfy us all.

Or you can just ignory the whiny bitchy me.

Yep, we can change some values. I did a start with making "real" representations of HEAT and SABOT rounds... now I hear that the AI is not possible to change mags of a weapon. So we have to make it that way that a SABOT can also be used against people and vice versa... so I'm switching back to OFP values now.

The other problem is not the campaign but user made missions. If the campaign was our only job, we could change the class names and everything without many problems as well. But we want CWR to make it easy to convert any mission...

[MehMan 0]

Oh, ah, that is a pickle. Oh well, I am happy enough to have CWR, so cheers!

[andersson 285]

Wouldnt it be possible to have a replacement-addon that makes the CWR units replace the arma classnames. Then you only have to disable the replacementaddon to have the units next to standard arma units?

[tophe 69]

Aye, well, as Ti0n3r has hinted, Malden never did have pine forests, only, mostly, broadleaf trees and bushes.

Try Everon or Kolgujev as he suggested.

Planck

Ah,of course you're right.

Well, can't wait to try out Kolgujev and Everon!

[[asa]oden 0]

... I did a start with making "real" representations of HEAT and SABOT rounds... now I hear that the AI is not possible to change mags of a weapon. ..

For OFP one have to rearrange it so the ammo type runs with the mode - downside is a total of 38 rounds in a T-62 ends up to be a BM or BK by needs so one cannot sim. actual loadout but I see this as a far minor problem than having ai shooting sabots all the time.

in ArmA one have to use muzzles - this time one have to add a player muzzle so ppl dont shoot faster than the 8rpm average tankgun rate.

Exempel:

ai weapon/muzzle (carries magazine)

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

class Oden_125_BK21M : Oden_125_BK12

{

// 125mm HEAT 19kg 750mm RHA 905mps 1985, DU

displayName="125mm HEAT BK21M";

magazines[] = {Oden_125_BK21M};

};

player weapon (carries all types of mags.)

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

class Oden_125_2A26 : CannonCore

{

// Basic 125mm 2A26 for T-64

scope = public;

displayName = "125mm 2A26";

sound[] = {"\ca\Weapons\Data\Sound\gun120", db50, 1};

reloadSound[] = {"\ca\Weapons\Data\Sound\gun120reload", 1.0, 1};

magazines[] = {"Oden_125_BM9","Oden_125_BM12","Oden_125_BM17","Oden_125_BM22","Oden_125_BM29","Oden_125_BM32","Oden_125_BM42"

,"Oden_125_BK12","Oden_125_BK14","Oden_125_BK18","Oden_125_BK21","Oden_125_BK21M","Oden_125_BK29","Oden_125_BK29M"

,"Oden_125_OF19","Oden_125_OF26","Oden_9M112","Oden_9M119","Oden_9M119M"};

minRange = 1; minRangeProbab = 0.1;

midRange = 2500; midRangeProbab = 0.7;

maxRange = 5000; maxRangeProbab = 0.1;

dispersion = 0.002;

reloadTime = 7.5; // est. 8rpm

magazineReloadTime = 0; // keep, splitting loadouts in 6 round blocks

maxLeadSpeed = 100; // max estimated speed km/h

autoReload = true;

};

player muzzle evolved from above, no real use.

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

class Oden_125_2A46M_1 : Oden_125_2A26

{

displayName = "125mm 2A46M-1"; // T-64BV, T-72B, T-80BV and T-80U

};

Main battle tank weapon, with ai and player muzzles. ai muzzles are single mags ones and player muzzle have the lot as per above to access, depends on what mags one add to the tank later on.

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

class Oden_125_T80BV : CannonCore

{

scope = public;

displayName = "125mm 2A46M-1";

muzzles[] = {ATGW,SABOT,HEAT,HE,PLAYER};

class HE : Oden_125_OF26 { ShowToPlayer=false; aiRateOfFire = 7.51; };

class HEAT : Oden_125_BK21M { ShowToPlayer=false; aiRateOfFire = 7.51; };

class SABOT : Oden_125_BM32 { ShowToPlayer=false; aiRateOfFire = 7.51; };

class ATGW : Oden_9K112 { ShowToPlayer=false; aiRateOfFire = 7.51; };

class PLAYER : Oden_125_2A46M_1 {};

};

Example of T72B config

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

class Oden_bis_T72B : Oden_bis_T72A

{

vehicleClass=OdenBISVehicle;

displayName = "T-72B"; //T72B, Turret540/850, glacis485/910 (armor=520; classes 1.6 and 1.9) (T-72BV actually)

//armor = 750;

armor=540.8; // 520^2 /500, hitHull and hitTurret inherited from T-72A, this is not T-72BV

class Turrets : Turrets

{

class MainTurret : MainTurret

{

class HitTurret : HitTurret {armor=1.1;};

weapons[] = {"Oden_125_T72B","Oden_PKT"};

magazines[] = {"Oden_9M119", "Oden_125_BK21", "Oden_125_BM32"

, "Oden_125_OF26", "Oden_125_OF26", "Oden_125_OF26", "Oden_PKT", "Oden_PKT"};

class Turrets : Turrets {

class CommanderOptics : CommanderOptics

{

weapons[] = {"Oden_DShKM"};

magazines[] = {"Oden_DShKM"};

};

};

};

};

class UserActions : OdenUserActionsVehicle {};

class Library { libTextDesc = "T-72B from 1985 (rated 520mm RHA it gets Oden Armor=540 and cheramic armor on hitHull=1.1), Improved T-72 series with BDD armor, better FCS, lead-target and AT-11 'Svir' ATGM. 2A46M Main Gun/Launcher firing 125mm BK21 rated at 550mm RHA (hit=605;indirectHit=605;indirectHitRange=1.230;), BM32 rated at 460mm RHA (hit=327.4;indirectHit=0;indirectHitRange=0.9047;) and its primary ammo OF26 HE"; };

};

all in all this runs better in ofp using modes but i find it fairly good in ArmA though the muzzle solutions needs a ded. player muzzle.

Haven't done extensive tests in ArmA (since ArmA failed me so many times it grew old on me) but in ofp it sure runs ok with ai shooting HE on infantry and HEAT on armored targets, even missiles from T-80B simulated tanks. This ai behavior is basically managed from cost and hit values for the ammo.

[RN Malboeuf 12]

Quote[/b] ]s. I did a start with making "real" representations of HEAT and SABOT rounds... now I hear that the AI is not possible to change mags of a weapon. So we have to make it that way that a SABOT can also be used against people and vice versa... so I'm switching back to OFP values now.

AI was never able to switch to correct magazine nor in OPF nor in Arma Some tricks with muzzles can work but that will chnage standart weapon classes

[Wanderfalke 0]

Quote[/b] ]But we want CWR to make it easy to convert any mission...

I make some OFP-MP-Missions.

Shit. With standallone CWR-MOD is this not easy.

You kill all MP Servers.  

Standallone Addons + ArmA Addons for more free editing Missions and a Big CWR-MOD 

Time to say goodby OFP  

[baddo 0]

I go as far as saying that the CWR team should ignore for now what people wish to be 'fixed'.

I mean how are they going to get the thing done if they listen to your suggestions?

To me it has been clear that the goal of the CWR project is to bring OFP CWC into ArmA. I think that changing the goal of the project from bringing OFP content into ArmA into fixing what are errors in OFP in your opinion at this stage could be a costly mistake regarding project schedule.