British Troops DLC released & Official 1.01 Update

[m1n1d0u 29]

somebody have some information of the engeiner udapte ?

[Schancky 10]

Looks good, a bit disapointed about the number of vehicals, but hopefully there will be more in future updates/patches for the BAF DLC :)

Edited July 29, 2010 by Schancky

[STALKERGB 6]

Actually it looks most like the L115A2: picatinny sight rail (A1 had a dovetail) and the Mk.2 .338 muzzle brake (A1 had cylindrical one with a single baffle, A3 has a threaded lug on the front for fitting a suppressor - AI 'tactical' muzzle brake). IIRC the chassis is coloured green in one of the DPM pics too which was the case on the A1 and A2 (A3 is tan)

ah cheers for the info da12th, wasn't really aware of what the A2 had/didnt have on it so assumed it was the A3 :)

[DRoberts69 10]

Just wondering, how do Operation arrowhead US army units compare in accuracy to how the new BAF units are?

[n00b1 10]

There will be Temperate and Desert as well as the new MTP camo, like I said, the L115A1 BIS have looks similar to the L115A3 anyway, with the folding stock

That's good. It was more the optics and suppressor I would have liked to see from the A3.

[Steakslim 1]

I know this is probably arguing semantics, but shouldn't the AH-64 Apache be titled the AH-1 Apache for the BAF vehicles?

[Prydain 1]

That L85 looks god awful. The infantry look nice when they aren't in 'shopped pictures, even if they are inaccurate.

[Dwarden 1125]

I know this is probably arguing semantics, but shouldn't the AH-64 Apache be titled the AH-1 Apache for the BAF vehicles?

thanks, one of many leftovers from old web design splitup

[STALKERGB 6]

Does anyone know what the L85A2 AWS is? I guess the AWS refers to a sighting system but for the life of me dont know which one?

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Does anyone know what the L85A2 AWS is? I guess the AWS refers to a sighting system but for the life of me dont know which one?

I think they mean CWS as in 'Common Weapon Sight' (a version of the Pilkington/Qioptiq KITE). It's in one or two of their screenshots.

[Jack 0]

It seems that most of the arguments for gear that isn't currently used by the BAF return to "it will totally be used in the future, bro!" (2 years from now). Which is fine, even if current service members speak of contracts with rival manufacturers that preclude the possibility of certain items being used for 4+ years.

More importantly though, I am completely for developers creating their own unique games and fully utilizing their creative license to make a fun and interesting game environment. It's very important for developers to not be bogged down with concerns about 100% authenticity in everything they do - even in a game thats essentially an infantry/combined arms simulation.

Which is why I was surprised when this irked me so much...

M1911A1

The 1911 (or M1911A1) is a single-action self-loading pistol. It was the standard side arm weapon used by the US army from 1911 to 1985; and it was widely used by US troops in WW I' date=' WW II and both Korean and Vietnam wars. The 1911 is designed to use .45 ACP rounds. Even today many SWAT teams - as well as many other armies - favour this weapon thanks to the great stopping power of .45 rounds.[/quote']

It seems highly unlikely that in the future an entire army will switch to a 100 year old pistol design, especially when NATO forces use the 9x19mm cartridge as their primary pistol round. What happened to the L9A1 or better yet, the SIG P226!? At least the P226 is currently being fielded with UK Units in Afghanistan.

[Wallz 0]

This is sweet!! ( if only it was Canadian units though -.- )

I'm just thinking now though, how will the community separate all the different British units o.O ?

I know there are quite a few mods at that British units already,

plus all the units that will come with the future ones, ( I.E Project Reality.. )

SO will there be a split in the community ?

People using free mods for the units VS paid DLC units... :S

[Pathy 0]

My prediction is that most public MP games will use this pack, whilst private co-op squads et al will either use this pack, supplemented with community addons, or use soley community addons (as not to force members & potential members to buy it).

It serves a pretty good purpose, really - alot of people will probably get it, and it'd be feasable to run a BAF public server in a way that it wouldn't be feasable to run a public server requiring P:UKF or RKSL addons.

[das attorney 858]

I'm not too versed in the details of British kit but this sort of thing would be good for the more casual gamer I think. As Pathy mentioned, with online play its standardisation, standardisation, standardisation all the way.

[Zipper5 74]

That has the potential to make a previously varied and interesting experience very monotonous and boring...

[Defunkt 431]

Well you of course can reserve the option not to standardise.

[Zipper5 74]

But then what use is that if everyone does it? Because, let's face it, standardization makes it take a lot less effort on the player's/server admin's behalf.

[Defunkt 431]

Well yeah, but then what are you complaining about? Standardisation makes online play feasible so it's standardised or nothing-at-all and if there's some other option beyond those two then that's still available to those who can access that now.

[kylania 568]

Well yeah, but then what are you complaining about? Standardisation makes online play feasible so it's standardised or nothing-at-all and if there's some other option beyond those two then that's still available to those who can access that now.

Online play is entirely feasible as it is. The only people who have trouble with multiplayer as the people who blunder blindly and ignorantly into the game expecting it to be a spoon fed console experience. Anyone with the ability to read can figure out MP without major problems.

[Defunkt 431]

Well the subject (standardisation) was initially raised in respect to the "more casual gamer".

[Zipper5 74]

Well yeah, but then what are you complaining about?

Well, what kept me coming back to OFP MP all the time was the variation. I loved playing with the FDF mod, running out of missions to play, starting up ECP, playing small coops with some friends, running into a server using CSLA 2, switching to that, then playing some crCTI on vanilla OFP. Good times... :D

Standardisation makes online play feasible so it's standardised or nothing-at-all and if there's some other option beyond those two then that's still available to those who can access that now.

It was feasable in OFP to lack standardization, and has remained feasable up to now with OA. In fact I found it more unpredictable and fun to lack standardization. There's simply been a recent rise of it in the form of ACE 2 or no addons at all.

[das attorney 858]

That has the potential to make a previously varied and interesting experience very monotonous and boring...

Hmm. Maybe you misinturpret. I meant that if people want to play British Forces, it's a lot easier to join a public server that requires one addon rather than using the various UKF and RKSL mods. More mods = more things that can go wrong (like people joining with old versions etc).

Don't get me wrong. I'm not putting down the UKF and RKSL stuff. I use it all the time. The BIS pack looks easier for the pubbers who want to play as Brits.

As for being boring, I don't know. It hasn't been released yet so I wouldn't know. Maybe you should give it a miss.

[Zipper5 74]

As for being boring, I don't know. It hasn't been released yet so I wouldn't know. Maybe you should give it a miss.

You too seem to have misinterpreted my point. I'm definitely buying the DLC and greatly anticipate it's arrival. My point was that using only one or two addons/mods, or none at all, and locking out every other one, makes the experience become stale quite quickly in MP.

[das attorney 858]

Fair enough mate. I got ya now!

Edited July 29, 2010 by Das Attorney

[SEALVI 10]

Noob question. Probably asked over one hundred times in this thread. Will this add-on come on disk form?