jakerod 254 Posted June 25, 2010 http://afs.donaldson.com/blackHawk.html ;) Thank You. That's kind of what I figured it was but I couldn't find pictures of it and didn't know the proper name. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fred DM 0 Posted June 25, 2010 looks like BIS might have to include a set of desert camo M-4s in one of the next patches; USSOCOM abandons the Mk 16: http://kitup.military.com/2010/06/socom-cancels-mk-16-scar.html#ixzz0rtef9uMB :eek: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarlGustaffa 4 Posted June 25, 2010 Hehe, I always find warnings like these intensively funny (from the manual): Precautions During Use • Do not stand too close to the screen. Sit a good distance away from the screen, as far away as the length of the cable allows. • Preferably play the game on a small screen. • Avoid playing if you are tired or have not had much sleep. • Make sure that the room in which you are playing is well lit. • Rest for at least 10 to 15 minutes per hour while playing a video game. I find myself constantly, and even actively, breaking all of these, all the time :D Does anybody follow these advices? :p Good move though, making manual available legally. Even looking at the manual makes me want this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevedrumsdw 10 Posted June 25, 2010 Hehe, I always find warnings like these intensively funny (from the manual):I find myself constantly, and even actively, breaking all of these, all the time :D Does anybody follow these advices? :p Good move though, making manual available legally. Even looking at the manual makes me want this. I break these everyday practically lol:eek: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nodunit 397 Posted June 25, 2010 Nnnnope and that is probably why my eyes are in horrible shape. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Noraf 0 Posted June 25, 2010 ....snipp...... Which mentions that the helicopter can automatically hover... now making auto-hover a realistic feature. I bet they stole the idea from BIS. Granted I don't know, maybe it has always had it. .....snipp............ Well, if i'm not terribly mistaken, the sh-3 : seaking we're using here for sar duties, got an autohover function, and those choppers are 30+ years old ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted June 25, 2010 Well, if i'm not terribly mistaken, the sh-3 : seaking we're using here for sar duties, got an autohover function, and those choppers are 30+ years old ;) Okay. It was the first time I had actually read about it on a real helicopter before and they made it sound like it was some brand new thing in the article. I thought I remembered people complaining about autohover in OFP and ArmA because it was realistic. Maybe they were complaining about others using it to land because it is a crappy way to do it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AnimalMother92 10 Posted June 25, 2010 looks like BIS might have to include a set of desert camo M-4s in one of the next patches; USSOCOM abandons the Mk 16: http://kitup.military.com/2010/06/socom-cancels-mk-16-scar.html#ixzz0rtef9uMB :eek: Hahaha this is great. Silly, good thing we have plenty of M4s and HK416s already! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nodunit 397 Posted June 25, 2010 Okay. It was the first time I had actually read about it on a real helicopter before and they made it sound like it was some brand new thing in the article. I thought I remembered people complaining about autohover in OFP and ArmA because it was realistic. Maybe they were complaining about others using it to land because it is a crappy way to do it. It's been there but it's not something you can freely mash at high speeds and have everything go perfectly, auto hover in reality is far more sensitive and can lead to some problems if not performed properly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SEALVI 10 Posted June 25, 2010 looks like BIS might have to include a set of desert camo M-4s in one of the next patches; USSOCOM abandons the Mk 16: http://kitup.military.com/2010/06/socom-cancels-mk-16-scar.html#ixzz0rtef9uMB :eek: US Rangers will keep theirs because they've already been issued. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fox '09 14 Posted June 26, 2010 ....but there are no rangers in OA!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted June 26, 2010 (edited) ....but there are no rangers in OA!! There are Special-Forces though. I imagine they can still keep them. Keep in mind this game takes place in an alternate timeline than ours. For example, there was no Takistan or Chernarus in the 1980s or 1990s in our universe. So in the Armaversum, it is feasible that the Mk16 never got abandoned. Granted that opens up a very large door for alterations (Come on South African control of Australia!) but you get the point. Edited June 26, 2010 by Jakerod Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SEALVI 10 Posted June 26, 2010 ....but there are no rangers in OA!! I only wish. :( Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hamm 10 Posted June 26, 2010 ....but there are no rangers in OA!! I think the main US Army force is supposed to be airbore rangers, and the special forces team-leader is Delta Force. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kristian 47 Posted June 26, 2010 When going to future in games, we can really change stuff. :p 1985 - Cold war did not begin, but it did begin in OFP OFP is a fine example of alternate history. Now we can go bit of fictional with future aswell. MTVRs for Army? Yeah sure, maybe in future. SCAR Weapon family for Army basic infantry, sure, in future. I like how BIS went bit of their own way here, and not just represent war on scale never before seen ;) (I know above makes no sense, ok? I can't control my mind properly 3:36 AM) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AnimalMother92 10 Posted June 26, 2010 I think the main US Army force is supposed to be airbore rangers, and the special forces team-leader is Delta Force. Nope. Main force = Airborne troops (82nd or 101st I guess) SF = SFOD-D I pray for Rangers as DLC :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Laqueesha 474 Posted June 26, 2010 I pray for Rangers It's easily moddable. In the end, it's just different SSI on the ACUs. ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smurf 12 Posted June 26, 2010 From AO Manual: Hand Grenades and Smoke ShellsThe degree of power with which a hand held projectile is thrown can be controlled. Press and hold LMB to prepare the weapon, pause, and release to throw. Holding LMB for longer time increases the distance. Is that new? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted June 26, 2010 From AO Manual:Is that new? Awesome! Good find. I guess I should've read a bit harder. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarlGustaffa 4 Posted June 26, 2010 Well, I hope it is new. Grenades have always been completely uncontrollable for me; full power and they'll bounce around like crazy never doing their intended job, but always being hazardous to our own forces... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SEALVI 10 Posted June 26, 2010 Well, I hope it is new. Grenades have always been completely uncontrollable for me; full power and they'll bounce around like crazy never doing their intended job, but always being hazardous to our own forces... Are you sure you are arching them correctly? Standard frag grenades I don't have a problem with. Smoke grenades never follow their intended destination though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakerod 254 Posted June 26, 2010 Are you sure you are arching them correctly? Standard frag grenades I don't have a problem with. Smoke grenades never follow their intended destination though. I can normally get both to land in the intended area that I meant to throw it to. The bounce is what makes it so hard though. They changed something at some point. I can't remember if it was in a patch for ArmA or ArmA II but they used to be very controllable but then they made them bounce like flubber. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Laqueesha 474 Posted June 26, 2010 (edited) I can normally get both to land in the intended area that I meant to throw it to. The bounce is what makes it so hard though. They changed something at some point. I can't remember if it was in a patch for ArmA or ArmA II but they used to be very controllable but then they made them bounce like flubber. The aiming system is fine, with crosshairs enabled. Turn them off and you're Helen Keller in a marksmanship contest. The bouncing is the real problem. God damn, are you throwing a Super Ball or what? Shit, even budget value titles have better grenade physics than ArmA II. Not that ArmA II has even a rudimentary physics system to begin with, but yeah. Edited June 26, 2010 by Laqueesha Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarlGustaffa 4 Posted June 26, 2010 I don't use crosshairs. And no, turning them on is not an option. If only assault rifles, machineguns, and sniper rifles didn't have crosshairs <sigh>... And, well, yeah I guess, smoke is harder than frags. But the problem is CQB usage, you just can't toss/roll a grenade to go 5 meters into a room while you hurry back into cover. That sort of control has not existed. ACE helped though. But hopefully now that is a thing of the past. At least looking how far he tossed the IR Target Marker (in some video) seems to indicate that. Hopefully it's not bound to what you throw. Turn them off and you're Helen Keller in a marksmanship contest. LOL! :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Laqueesha 474 Posted June 26, 2010 But the problem is CQB usage, you just can't toss/roll a grenade to go 5 meters into a room while you hurry back into cover. Not that there's any CQB to begin with in ArmA II. ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites