cole 0 Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) M1151 in Woodland Camo.[i.MG]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g73/NZXSHADOWS/M1151WX1.jpg[/img] Generic Suspension [i.MG]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g73/NZXSHADOWS/M1151WX2.jpg[/img] Do want! these have GOT to be released soon :inlove: also, the wheels on them look completely like the vanilla ones, how the hell did you manage that without MLODs? :plain: I'm not complaining or anything, just curious about it :) Edited November 12, 2009 by Cole Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
suhsjake 1 Posted November 12, 2009 Because it is a texture. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
max power 21 Posted November 12, 2009 a) Because, as i said they were flawed. But not anywhere near as badly as sensationalist internet stories makes out. To be honest, having read some of them myself i seriously doubt half the authors actually used one in the field. I read a review some time ago in a magazine about the L85. They slated it then right at the end they said "the information in this review is gathered from informed sources". They hadn't even touched one. Its all hearsay and rumour. Unless you've used one yourself how do you know if its any good? Because a mate down the pub who has a friend who read about a guy how was once a cadet who had a mate who was in the TA told him it was crap? Using one yourself and either have a good or a bad experience with it does not make for very good evidence either way. b) it was far cheaper to refurbish them than to replace them with either the G-36 or M4. And the initial cost of designing them and then procuring them and then the 80 million pound refurbishment probably is more expensive than a weapon that was already developed. WTF has this got to do with nationalism? Personally I preferred the G36. It fits my hands nicely and when at my shoulder felt far more natural than the L85 ever did. But having said that I found the L85 ridiculously easy to shoot with. Hell they even had to change the marksmanship standards because so many people were passing in the high 90s. Well, developing the weapon in-house no doubt had something to do with nationalism. I thought perhaps that ardently defending something like this might have something to do with nationalism but of course you are above such indulgences. It is renowned for being accurate. I always like to shine the light of truth on the uninformed. You it was deficient and that it has some ongoing problems yet it certainly was not and never was shite? Perhaps it was the word 'shite' you're at odds with? Oh yes. 9 years, on and off. Nearly all with the A1. I've had several duff magazines drop out while marching. Numerous stoppages, a broken cocking lever. I even once bent one attempting to go over a wall on exercise. So yeah I know quite a lot about the A1. Sounds like the kind of thing I would want to stay away from if I was British special forces- and this isn't even the version that's supposedly crappy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
STALKERGB 6 Posted November 12, 2009 Sounds like the kind of thing I would want to stay away from if I was British special forces- and this isn't even the version that's supposedly crappy. The L85A1 was the original version of the rifle (that all the poor reviews refer to) although a couple issues such as the mag drop problem were sorted (before the HK refit) but the designation was still left as A1. As far as I'm aware, the HK refit cost £400 per rifle (or was that cost of a new rifle, i cant remember). Either way that sounds cheaper than buying in the G36, may be wrong though... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
max power 21 Posted November 12, 2009 The L85A1 was the original version of the rifle (that all the poor reviews refer to) although a couple issues such as the mag drop problem were sorted (before the HK refit) but the designation was still left as A1. As far as I'm aware, the HK refit cost £400 per rifle (or was that cost of a new rifle, i cant remember). Either way that sounds cheaper than buying in the G36, may be wrong though... My mistake! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Aeneas2020 10 Posted November 12, 2009 The L85A1 was the original version of the rifle (that all the poor reviews refer to) although a couple issues such as the mag drop problem were sorted (before the HK refit) but the designation was still left as A1. As far as I'm aware, the HK refit cost £400 per rifle (or was that cost of a new rifle, i cant remember). Either way that sounds cheaper than buying in the G36, may be wrong though... The £400 was for the retrofit of the old rifles you are spot on sir! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pvt.Kiwi 10 Posted November 12, 2009 Im workin on the Tango 51 with a 10 round mag and muzzle break, the point of this thread is to ask for help when it come to the UV mapping and tincturing, if anyone is willing to help me send me a PM or post. Also anyone who has use a Tango 51 can you post in this thread because i would like some feedback on the recoil of the weapon as i have only shot similar rifle Thanks in advance. :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pathy 0 Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) Before the SA80 was refurbished by H&K, it used to be total, unadulterated shite. That may have played into it. .... Have you ever even touched one? .... Nope, but I read some complaints from soldiers who had. Fair enough. You don't have first hand evidence but you're willing to take the testimony of people who've used them as evidence of your argument.... ....except, apparently, when that evidence disagrees with you... Using one yourself and either have a good or a bad experience with it does not make for very good evidence either way. Is the word of people having used them good evidence or not? If its not, then by your own admission your initial statement is based on 'not very good evidence' to begin with! Kinda undermines your basis for argument right off the bat.... Edited November 13, 2009 by Pathy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thebarricade 7 Posted November 13, 2009 I'm trying to tone down the colors of the interface (concentrating on the commandbar for the moment). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cole 0 Posted November 13, 2009 [i.MG]http://i34.tinypic.com/fcl7pt.png[/img]I'm trying to tone down the colors of the interface (concentrating on the commandbar for the moment). That looks sweet, would nicely fit with Operation Arrowhead imo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
floosy 0 Posted November 13, 2009 I'm working on a desert island for the ADO french Team. All the informations and pics here Coming soon: oq1NsMpcSIM vidéo from ADOCorsair83 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
due-_- 10 Posted November 13, 2009 looks good ;) reminds me of some Bf2 maps Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr Sarkey 0 Posted November 13, 2009 looks good ;) reminds me of some Bf2 maps Yea, BF2, it does thinking about it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
max power 21 Posted November 13, 2009 ........ Fair enough. You don't have first hand evidence but you're willing to take the testimony of people who've used them as evidence of your argument.... ....except, apparently, when that evidence disagrees with you... I'm referring to a number of testimonies rather than one personal account. Is the word of people having used them good evidence or not? If its not, then by your own admission your initial statement is based on 'not very good evidence' to begin with! Kinda undermines your basis for argument right off the bat.... What we are looking for here is testimony or other evidence that suggests these things are worse than average, or may be some kind of liability. I've read minutes from parliament meetings, personal accounts, and technical discussions. Rock was insinuating that because I have never held one, I am not informed. When I asked Rock if he had used one before, I was not calling his bluff. I assumed that he had. I was actually expecting that his experience with it was better than he later described. What I was saying was that one person's personal experience with anything is not a valuable source of information in itself other than serving as a starting point for further inquiry. For instance, someone says the rifle is shit. If this is interesting, then one would see in what ways it is shit, and then start a more in-depth look along those lines to test those claims. The more points of data you have, the better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
orson 0 Posted November 14, 2009 Some would claim this to be a work in progress thread about models made for armed assault 2 My guess would be that some gun forum would be the place to discuss the real world weapons Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
max power 21 Posted November 14, 2009 Some would claim this to be a work in progress thread about models made for armed assault 2My guess would be that some gun forum would be the place to discuss the real world weapons It is whatever the moderators choose to enforce. This has been made clear. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Binkowski 25 Posted November 14, 2009 The last few weeks of boredom & busy-ness and these screens are ready... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ebanks129 10 Posted November 14, 2009 @binkowski - man good stuff! so will your next release be filled with all these units + the multicam ones you had posted awhile back?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
b00ce 160 Posted November 15, 2009 I really like these. More than the "Old" ACU pack. :p And hows the multicam coming? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swtx 42 Posted November 15, 2009 (edited) :D:cool: It's a fourwheeler or Quad Imported from OFP. I still have a ways to go before finishing this one... Edited November 15, 2009 by swtx Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
viibez 10 Posted November 15, 2009 (edited) :D:cool: It's a fourwheeler or Quad Imported from OFP. I still have a ways to go before finishing this one... Sorry for the small image, not sure how to enlarge it... Love the Quad, but am extremely confused that you say you can port 3D models from one game to another yet you have no idea how to RESIZE AN IMAGE :butbut: (omfg) Edited November 15, 2009 by viibez remove image Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swtx 42 Posted November 15, 2009 (edited) Love the Quad, but am extremely confused that you say you can port 3D models from one game to another yet you have no idea how to RESIZE AN IMAGE :butbut: (omfg) I switched to ImageShack...:) Edited November 15, 2009 by swtx Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kristian 47 Posted November 15, 2009 Yup, I'm still trying to figure that one out :confused:Photbucket will not let me resize the image !?!? I dont know why ?? So I switched to ImageShack... Just use paint or Photoshop or whatever you prefer :P Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
