Cold War Rearmed² Discussion

[vilas 477]

And what this has to do with CWR²?

that some people should visit eye-doctor before posting about this or other mod and spread bullshit

[max power 21]

There is certainly something to be said about effective polygon use and effective texture vs. geo representation.

[W0lle 1052]

That poor bugger with the Steyr must have hands of asbestos... either fold the grip upwards or change his hand position.

Otherwise, fantabulous!

Although, if that's a custom animation, I understand.

The Steyr has a custom animation, I just checked and it's working correctly here so this time it was not me screwing up the config as I thought first. Guess the screen was made with an older version.

I think Vilas P'85 soviet models are more realistic, why you can't use them?

http://s009.radikal.ru/i308/1011/0a/4eb0e45b1dce.jpg

http://s011.radikal.ru/i315/1011/d8/c0ba04a49267.jpg

http://s19.radikal.ru/i192/1011/14/88e5cd45beca.jpg

http://i021.radikal.ru/1011/5b/9b1caa7e0820.jpg

Because vilas never offered the models and we never asked him to do so. ;)

Though I must say with all the problems we have with our units now I wish we could use the models now.

And stop fighting in our thread. Go and find some other place for that, mkay?

[enad 11]

gawd, those units looks awesome. Please tell me this is coming out before ArmA 3! :)

Anways...I was a bit confused when I saw the US Army soldier holding a Steyr....Is that accurate?

[Heatseeker 0]

Anways...I was a bit confused when I saw the US Army soldier holding a Steyr....Is that accurate?

In the flashpointversum.. yes, although it was more common to come across US soldiers carrying M21's and G36's instead.

Edit:

The units look professional to me, perfect actually, except for the russian officer....

Edited November 16, 2010 by Heatseeker

[CameronMcDonald 146]

In the flashpointversum.. yes, although it was more common to come across US soldiers carrying M21's and G36's instead.

Edit:

The units look professional to me, perfect actually, except for the russian officer....

Eye c wut u dyd their.

[vilas 477]

Because vilas never offered the models and we never asked him to do so. ;)

Though I must say with all the problems we have with our units now I wish we could use the models now.

cause i repected other man effort, man who did those units spent time and let his time will be respected

of course you can use P85 units, but textures and materials are RHS

i simply not offered cause i had in mind hours that were spent by creator of those units

and that is my public statement - "due to respect of other man work" not due to other reasons , if CWR wants other units models - no problem

[Altimeter 10]

cause i repected other man effort, man who did those units spent time and let his time will be respected

of course you can use P85 units, but textures and materials are RHS

i simply not offered cause i had in mind hours that were spent by creator of those units

and that is my public statement - "due to respect of other man work" not due to other reasons , if CWR wants other units models - no problem

Sorry but are you using google translate or something :D Having a hard time understanding what youre saying (And Im a non-native english speaker too)

[vilas 477]

no, i write in English as i know it and it's grammar (sometimes by mistake using Polish grammar)

but:

i meant - other man made CWR Arma1 units, he spent his time, he made big effort, and that is why i not offered replacing his work,

also CWR has other goal - bring back OFP

while in P85 every soldier is almost other way equipped (other pouches , depending of specialization, RPK gunner has other pouch than AK rifleman, Spetznatz with APS has other pouch than guy without APS etc. )

CWR uses OFP classes - SoldierEB, SoldierEMG etc. and doesn't need "soldier with AK + something" like P85 need

CWR aims in "OFP-realia", while P85 is "real realia" , otherway OFP units would have to look like this one:

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/6648/sa883allnz8.gif

and than players would say they look odd and WW2 style compared to US (USSR army used those uniforms till the mid/late 80s )

people make artificial competition between CWR and P85

while CWR is beloved-OFP-back :)

CWR is real OFP1 again (which we love and will be loving , cause OFP "is it" )

P85 is Warsaw Pact + some NATO , not OFP :)

in fact not we - moders, but community members - tried to divide us since Arma1 pushing use "competee"

still some people should understand basic difference between those mods , we had other goals

CWR units try to present OFP - which is best game ever (RTCW, Max Payne1 ... too )

Edited November 16, 2010 by vilas

[Shadow NX 1]

If CWR decides to use Vilas soviet P85 units i give my ok on the usage of my textures and normals.

But if you use the units maybe edit the helmets and fieldcap a little, only thing that always bugged me a bit apart from the units not looking baggy enough.

Other than that they would fit CWR very well i think.

[Altimeter 10]

no, i write in English as i know it and it's grammar (sometimes by mistake using Polish grammar)

but:

i meant - other man made CWR Arma1 units, he spent his time, he made big effort, and that is why i not offered replacing his work,

also CWR has other goal - bring back OFP

while in P85 every soldier is almost other way equipped (other pouches , depending of specialization, RPK gunner has other pouch than AK rifleman, Spetznatz with APS has other pouch than guy without APS etc. )

CWR uses OFP classes - SoldierEB, SoldierEMG etc. and doesn't need "soldier with AK + something" like P85 need

CWR aims in "OFP-realia", while P85 is "real realia" , otherway OFP units would have to look like this one:

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/6648/sa883allnz8.gif

and than players would say they look odd and WW2 style compared to US (USSR army used those uniforms till the mid/late 80s )

people make artificial competition between CWR and P85

while CWR is beloved-OFP-back :)

CWR is real OFP1 again (which we love and will be loving , cause OFP "is it" )

P85 is Warsaw Pact + some NATO , not OFP :)

in fact not we - moders, but community members - tried to divide us since Arma1 pushing use "competee"

still some people should understand basic difference between those mods , we had other goals

CWR units try to present OFP - which is best game ever (RTCW, Max Payne1 ... too )

Yeah, now I get it

You did some excellent russian units from the 1985 period.

But the CWR mod doesnt want the recreate that period, it wants to recreate "Operation Flashpoint". And while theoretically "Operation Flashpoint" did took place during ~1985, there are some differences, and the CWR mod prefers to

recreate the slightly different units from the original game instead of accurate ones from the timeperiod.

[topas 1]

the CWR mod prefers to

recreate the slightly different units from the original game instead of accurate ones from the timeperiod.

\

In this case I withdraw my question about the strange fieldcap.

Although the RF Uaz one still stands :P

[W0lle 1052]

Sorry but are you using google translate or something Having a hard time understanding what youre saying (And Im a non-native english speaker too)

Then be happy your English skillz are better. In any way it has no relevance to this thread at all.

If CWR decides to use Vilas soviet P85 units i give my ok on the usage of my textures and normals.

But if you use the units maybe edit the helmets and fieldcap a little, only thing that always bugged me a bit apart from the units not looking baggy enough.

Other than that they would fit CWR very well i think.

Thanks. :)

We may have another option to get fresh unit models, but should that fail it's good to know to have a backup.

\

In this case I withdraw my question about the strange fieldcap.

Although the RF Uaz one still stands :P

The RF UAZ is just a placeholder until ours have the same decent textures as the Urals. It's just a lot of work for just one man.

So no, the RF UAZ will not be included. :p

gawd, those units looks awesome. Please tell me this is coming out before ArmA 3!

Anways...I was a bit confused when I saw the US Army soldier holding a Steyr....Is that accurate?

No it's not accurate but these weapons were included in OFP and so they are in CWR².

[max power 21]

Don't forget that this mod isn't going for period accuracy. It means to recreate the OFP gameplay experience and also aims to be as compatible as possible with legacy community made content. For these reasons, the OFP world's little quirks (like m16a2s in 1985 and the presence Augs and Uzis in a US vs. USSR clash) must shine through.

[Laqueesha 474]

Don't forget that this mod isn't going for period accuracy. It means to recreate the OFP gameplay experience and also aims to be as compatible as possible with legacy community made content. For these reasons, the OFP world's little quirks (like m16a2s in 1985 and the presence Augs and Uzis in a US vs. USSR clash) must shine through.

This. ^ A similar point was brought up with CWR for ArmA 1 regarding the Bizon.

[andersson 285]

Will you make 1985 campaign MP compatible? I know it wasnt that way in OFP but as its possible in Arma2 it would be fun to be able to. I have always made 1985 missions into MP coop and its good fun to play them that way.

[max power 21]

I'm no mission making expert, but it seems to be that it would not be possible to do. There are a few missions where the player is the only friendly unit. It certainly would be possible (in the strictest sense of the word) to recreate your favourite campaign missions as multiplayer missions.

[abs 2]

I'm no mission making expert, but it seems to be that it would not be possible to do. There are a few missions where the player is the only friendly unit. It certainly would be possible (in the strictest sense of the word) to recreate your favourite campaign missions as multiplayer missions.

Meh...don't see why you couldn't have most of it as co-op, and the solo missions as PvP.

It would be cool to play the evacuation mission that way.

Abs

[Devil Dogs SF 13]

(like m16a2s in 1985 and the presence Augs and Uzis in a US vs. USSR clash)

A little off topic, but M16A2's were not used by US forces in 1985? I thought that rifle was used since 1980-Early OIF.

[max power 21]

IIRC the M16a2 was adopted in 1982, but there was a few conversations I think I recall on Skype that indicated the m16a1 would be a better choice. The reasons for this are beyond my understanding of the situation and recollection.

edit:

Wikipedia claims:

Marines were the first branch of the U.S. Armed Forces to adopt the M16A2 in the early/mid 1980s with the United States Army following suit in the late 1980s.

@Abs

Your suggestion seems reasonable but, in my estimation, the purpose of playing the coop campaign would to pass it rather than further confound the progress of the player with a meta-gaming, human controlled foil. The OPFOR player(s) would have to lose eventually for the story to progress (voluntarily or not). It seems like there might be a lot of problems there. You're sticking a player in a situation where his gaming objects are contrary to the goal of the gaming group, himself included.

Edited November 20, 2010 by Max Power

[abs 2]

@Abs

...the purpose of playing the coop campaign would to pass it rather than further confound the progress of the player with a meta-gaming, human controlled foil. The OPFOR player(s) would have to lose eventually for the story to progress (voluntarily or not).

If the purpose is to win, then the AI should be useless to make it easier for the player.

In my estimation, the purpose of co-op multiplayer is to have fun. In the missions that are more than solo-player, people can work together. In the missions that are solo play, then they can be on opposing sides.

Granted being opfor goes against the definition of 'co-op', but this seems like it would be a rare occurence, and in my opinion would be fun.

Abs

[max power 21]

If the purpose is to win, then the AI should be useless to make it easier for the player.

Ridiculous. Prevailing in the face of a challenge is fun.

In my estimation, the purpose of co-op multiplayer is to have fun. In the missions that are more than solo-player, people can work together. In the missions that are solo play, then they can be on opposing sides.

Granted being opfor goes against the definition of 'co-op', but this seems like it would be a rare occurence, and in my opinion would be fun.

Abs

I don't know what the plan is exactly for the final release. I think it's not really much beyond the scope of the originals. You suggestion, I'm sure, has been or will be read by those involved in making those decisions, though.

[stgn 39]

A little off topic, but M16A2's were not used by US forces in 1985? I thought that rifle was used since 1980-Early OIF.

Marines started getting them in 1984, the Army first in 1986. It did officially replace the M16A1 as the standard weapon in 1983.

STGN

[abs 2]

Ridiculous. Prevailing in the face of a challenge is fun.

Thanks for using such dismissive language with regards to other people's ideas. You're a good guy.

Despite your demeanour, at least you've agreed with me that the purpose is fun. As you equate a challange as being fun, then I'm sure you can't deny that facing against another human is also challanging.

Abs

[andersson 285]

Well, when I think of it I dont think its a good idea anymore to have campaign coop. Then teamswitch will be enabled and thats not the 1985 way to go.

I can make the campaign to coop myself when its released :)