P:UKF Weapons Pack.

[{G&L}ACF{SCOTDG} 10]

I don't like it either with experience of it , no point

[RabidStoat 39]

My god, I didn't realise it's so hated! You're right it looks even uglier than it used to.. don't think I'll even bother asking what you intended to do with it

[echo1 0]

Is the ACOG now standard issue for British forces? Last I heard, it was only being issued to 'selected units'.

[Pathy 0]

As far as I know, if you're in Afghanistan and your units a teeth arm, you get ACOG.

[Chrisgs 10]

I expecpt that mabye this has been mentioned but cant find it, why is the L85 so under powered, with us default weapons i can take an enemy down at 200m with one shot, whereas with the L85 your looking at 4-5 shots, seems strange. Guessing others must of noticed this too. Also ive fired many thousands of rounds with the L85 and recoil is minimal imo. Please sort the shot out and give this fine weapon the respect it deserves. Waitng for the BAF release to see how they have modeled things, but love this pack but dont use it too much now because of these faults. Thanks fellas.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

That isn't possible; the magazines used by the live-firing SA80s are the exact same ones used by the M4, and all damage dealt by weapons is dependant on the ammo they use (as defined by the magazine they have inserted) rather than the gun itself. Likewise recoil is the same as the M4 (or SCAR L SD if you're using OA)

Only the BFA weapons have a 'magazines[]=' entry in cfgweapons that allows them to use ammo that is any different to that of the M4 and other 5.56mm weapons in the game.

Nothing will be changed in this regard.

[Chrisgs 10]

That may be so, but regardless to what anyone says i have no doubt about this, still takes me 4-5 shots as compared to one shot one kill with the m4 or scar, or mabey im just a really bad shot. Anyways no biggy for me now as i use us default more often now, i really like this pack and appreciate all the hard work etc but the fact remains for me. Close range and not a problem at all, mabey i need to zero in a bit better i guess. Whatever the reason great pack and excellent work guys, thanks for reply. Only posted to see if anyone else had this problem, if not then the problem must lie with me.

[LordJarhead 1725]

These are some nice ones! Good job! I'll use them when i have some time. Great. Would be nice to making some sounds for these, lol^^

Greetings,

Jarhead

[Pathy 0]

Chrisgs, as Da12th says, this is not possible. The UKF weapons use the BIS 5.56 ammo. They thus deal the same damage as any other weapon that uses this ammo. My only suggestion is that you're recalling how effective the M16/M4 were on vanilla ArmA, and now you're using a mod such as ACE which changes these values whilst using the SA80s. Regardless, this is not something we can 'fix', as it's not a problem with our weapons. Not unless there is something hidden away that changes the damage values attached to ammo?

Edited August 8, 2010 by Pathy

[Chrisgs 10]

Ok no worries fellas, just curious if anyone else had this problem, thanks foe replys.

[SaBrE_UK 0]

Fantastic work P:UKF!

[galzohar 31]

Well you can always go and make it compatible with the ACE system which works around the magazine issue.

[GD Mast 0]

Browning looks great lads.

A shame us Brits are getting rid of it, otherwise I'd use it all the time.

Any chance you could include the Browning Hi-Power anyways in your next update, would be great for earlier time frame type of missions. I do like the Hi-Power.

[Protegimus 0]

We've been using your stuff quite a bit recently together with ACRE and it's made for some great missions, I appreciate the work you put into it.

I've made some CSM2 sounds (something I've been meaning to do for ages) for the L85A2 and derivates, LSW, L96A1 and LAW80 together with a couple of config fixes - would you mind if I make the sound pack available for public download?

Thanks,

Protegimus

[Pathy 0]

I'm Ok with the idea, sure, but how does the pack fit in? Is it a separate PBO or a rewrite? Not too keen on anything that requires replacing a UKF pbo with a modified version that's outside our control - for update/consistency/compatibility reasons.

Given this latest release was mostly Da12ths work, seek his imput also.

[Protegimus 0]

Morning Pathy,

It's nothing elaborate, two modular .pbo's (config, content) that update the sounds and config entries.

They depend on your mod, so complement it rather than replacing anything.

Protegimus

[da12thMonkey 1943]

As long as Chris is okay with it and it doesn't replace/overwrite the existing .pbos I don't mind.

Would the CSM plugin work for both the OA and ArmA 2 versions of the pack? The weapon classnames are the same.

What config 'fixes' did you have in mind though?

[das attorney 858]

Hi Da12th,

I had a question about the L85's in the excellent UKF weapons pack. When the ironsights/battle sights are bought up, the screen zooms out slightly. Is this to simulate a wider field of view and give the shooter more peripheral awareness?

I only noticed after trying the AAW pack, where their sights do not zoom at all. By all means, this isn't a moan, I'm just interested in the choice you made.

Thanks to UKF for all your work

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Yes, I wanted to give the player more peripheral vision in CQB where I figured irns/EBS would mostly be used (telescopic sights being the norm for British troops).

I find that I tend to zoom out with BIS' Aimpoints, EOTechs etc when in close quarters (to avoid tunnel vision) and that they're not much cop for shooting beyond 100-200m because the red dot covers a lot of the target when you zoom in to shoot that sort of distance.

There's also the fact that the 'eye' memory point is quite far back relative to the normal view position in game so it looks even more pulled back - the ArmA rifle raised stance doesn't exactly lend itself very well to the position of the sight rail on the SA80 (if you've ever free-looked to you're right when using the SA80 in first person you'll see what I mean).

I'll see about pulling the view in a bit in future if it bothers a lot of people. Iron-sights at least, since they are used at intermediate ranges.

[ck-claw 1]

I'll see about pulling the view in a bit in future if it bothers a lot of people.

Nah don't do it!

The one thing i noticed with your weapons packs is how much better those back-up sights seem to work! :)

[iasmeymour 10]

Morning Pathy,

It's nothing elaborate, two modular .pbo's (config, content) that update the sounds and config entries.

They depend on your mod, so complement it rather than replacing anything.

Protegimus

I registered purely so I could voice my support for this!

I love these weapons and always use them, however the sounds are not quite to my taste, so a sound replacement to make them sound more like the other 5.56 weapons already in the game would basically make my world!

[Protegimus 0]

Cool, so I have the CO/OA only weapon parameter config separated into its own .pbo allowing the sounds to be used with UKF weapons in the spirit of the original release.

[Amended following review of ArmA 2 UKF Weapons version]

Support will initially be for CO/OA users only, as although the ArmA 2 UKF classname are the same, the inheritance is different requiring a separate build.

For fixes, this is what I had in mind:

Zero is adjustable for the SUSAT from: 100, 200, 300, 400, 600m.

Emergency battle sight zero is reduced to 100m from 300m (I seem to remember the zero is actually 25m, but it's pretty hazy...also, if anyone can confirm the range drum settings for the optic, that would be great).

Zero is also adjustable for the L96A1 from: 100,200,300,400,500,600,700,800, 900 & 1000m and the camera point is corrected so that your head isn't in front of the chamber which produced wierd effects (sonic cracks were audible when firing).

Finally, weapon dispersion is configured and explicitly set for L85A2 and L86A2 fire modes to avoid inheriting wrong values when other mod's are used.

The dispersion is slightly reduced (closer to published information) as you're inheriting from the shorter barrelled M4A1 class and also to take into consideration the greater accuracy of the L86A2 LSW.

Test version is available from the Zeus TS server if you'd like to check it out.

If that's ok, I'll go ahead and ask for it to be uploaded for public web download.

Protegimus

Edited August 21, 2010 by Protegimus
formatting

[da12thMonkey 1943]

For fixes, this is what I had in mind:

Zero is adjustable for the SUSAT from: 100, 200, 300, 400, 600m.

Emergency battle sight zero is reduced to 100m from 300m (I seem to remember the zero is actually 25m, but it's pretty hazy...also, if anyone can confirm the range drum settings for the optic, that would be great).

I'll leave it to Jonny to give feedback on that.

I seem to remember reading that the standard battle zero for EBS and the optical sight was 300m but I've not got much info on the drills regarding adjusting the range drum or elevation or how often it's done in combat. I thought it best to leave out the ranging control for IWs as BIS have done, until I got some good gen on it.

Zero is also adjustable for the L96A1 from: 100,200,300,400,500,600,700,800, 900 & 1000m and the camera point is corrected so that your head isn't in front of the chamber which produced wierd effects (sonic cracks were audible when firing).

L96 or the L115A3? I've experienced the sonic cracking problem with the L115A3 and it's already been fixed in prep for a proper OA version along with some other problems with running it in OA (buggered up the range tables etc because distancezoom has migrated from cfgweapons to the opticsmodes subclass). Though I really don't bother with the L96s (for obvious reasons) so it might affect it to.

If it's the L115 - leave it for the time being it'll be sorted when there's a proper OA version. If it's the old shitty L96, crack on and send me the appropriate info on how to fix it so I can drop it into the next version's config at my end.

Finally, weapon dispersion is configured and explicitly set for L85A2 and L86A2 fire modes to avoid inheriting wrong values when other mod's are used.

The dispersion is slightly reduced (closer to published information) as you're inheriting from the shorter barrelled M4A1 class and also to take into consideration the greater accuracy of the L86A2 LSW.

Already looking at this for the next version - it's just not something I had time to test extensively for the LSW. Dispersion for the L22 is already much greater than the L85 in semi-auto, though the value used currently is quite arbitrary.

I'd leave it be for the time being until we establish how we'd like it. Though I'd be interested to hear your input on what values you think are appropriate.

[galzohar 31]

25m zero probably also means 300m (or so) zero. At leat iirc with M16A4 zeroing for 25m will also get you zeroed for 300m (since when you hit spot on at 25m the bullet is still going up).

[akd42 10]

25m zero probably also means 300m (or so) zero. At leat iirc with M16A4 zeroing for 25m will also get you zeroed for 300m (since when you hit spot on at 25m the bullet is still going up).

While true, this depends a great deal on the height of the sight over the barrel. SUSAT iron sights seem pretty high up, so not sure if it would work out the same.

Also curious: is giving shorter-barreled weapons higher dispersion an ArmA convention due to lack of wind drift?