British Troops DLC released & Official 1.01 Update

[mr_centipede 31]

How does that work?

Probably the same as how the BLUFOR CDF speaks Chernarussian and the BLUFOR USMC speaks ameringlish :D

[galzohar 31]

I see this pack has the same problem as the Tavor from RH weapon pack where the weapon is "pulled back" too much? :(

Edited August 21, 2010 by galzohar

[Stagler 39]

"sigh" looks like im gonner have to rename the campaign im working on. Any suggestions?.

[ams agent 000 10]

For queen and country?

[da12thMonkey 1943]

I see this pack has the same problem as the Tavor from RH weapon pack where the weapon is "pulled back" too much? :(

That's a consequence of bullpup weapons; they're much shorter than conventional rifles so don't stick out as far into your view. Without moving the eye point in the unit model or messing about with the FOV zoom levels (which creates a fish-eye effect if you do it too much) there's not much you can do about it.

"sigh" looks like im gonner have to rename the campaign im working on. Any suggestions?.

Plenty of similar names to 'Crimson Lance' in the link Dan posted when we discussed the BAF campaign name choice :D

18+ http://www.gregology.net/Reference/Dicktionary

On a serious note, that's a massive coincidence having 2 Brit campaigns with the same name being made simultaneously with different content.

Your promo pic is also quite similar to the one BIS are using for the ingame campaign selection menu.

[Stagler 39]

Royaltyinexile gave me a great name suggestion. Thanks be to him. Da12th I will be using the DLC content for the campaign mate, and for the record I got nothing to do with BIS or their campaign. As for the ingame campaign selection menu, coincidence it may be, but know full well all that I havent even touched the DLC yet. On the subject of the name I chose the name when I read it on the announcement for the DLC months ago and thought maybe they will name the campaign something different, probabaly a wild stab in the dark at the time like come to think of it.

Edited August 21, 2010 by colonel stagler

[metalcraze 290]

Haha so engineer will just run around, fixing tanks in seconds alone on the battlefield?

One thing is medic healing you from even most critical wounds in half of a minute (as moving wounded back to the field hospital can be tedious depending on the mission - although possible). But dumbing down like engineer? Geez BIS is really turning this into Battlefield ArmA

[Zipper5 74]

Talk about jumping to conclusions...

[l mandrake 9]

Haha so engineer will just run around, fixing tanks in seconds alone on the battlefield?

One thing is medic healing you from even most critical wounds in half of a minute (as moving wounded back to the field hospital can be tedious depending on the mission - although possible). But dumbing down like engineer? Geez BIS is really turning this into Battlefield ArmA

yeah it would be much more fun if it took 24 hours to fix a damaged vehicle, or maybe even a week waiting for the parts to be flown in. :j:

[metalcraze 290]

No how about you will move it back to the base and repair it at the repair station as it always was?

A single man repairing a nearly burning tank using what? Wrench in his pocket?

[galzohar 31]

That's a consequence of bullpup weapons; they're much shorter than conventional rifles so don't stick out as far into your view. Without moving the eye point in the unit model or messing about with the FOV zoom levels (which creates a fish-eye effect if you do it too much) there's not much you can do about it.

I know what a bullpup weapon is, but still, the sight position relative to the eye should be the same, so if I have, say, an ACOG, on the M16A4, I should be able to see the same portion of it as if I have it on a Tavor or any bullpup weapon. Right now it does not seem to be the case - It seems like it's more than just a "shorter weapon". Also, a full sized Tavor is about the same length as an M4A1 yet the 1st person view is quite different.

It is as if the hand is at the same place as for normal weapons while the trigger is more forward on the weapon (since the magazine is at the back) resulting in the weapon needing to be further back in order for the finger to actually be on the trigger... Or is it something else?

Edited August 21, 2010 by galzohar

[That guy 10]

i strongly suggest reading the armaholic forum section for the preview.

regarding the engineer repair ability:

I tried on helicopters, I think you can repair stuff like broken tail rotors and engines.. But you can't fully repair all the damage. With cars it's stuff like tyres. I might try get a vid on this.

its good to hear about the new IDF computer. sounds awesome. btw, does the stryker mortar carrier now work?

[Pathy 0]

Given the preview, I take it we're now free to talk about all the stuff I'd assumed was under NDA, as well as post images and videos?

[dale0404 5]

Given the preview, I take it we're now free to talk about all the stuff I'd assumed was under NDA, as well as post images and videos?

Yes, talk away!:p

[Zipper5 74]

Given the preview, I take it we're now free to talk about all the stuff I'd assumed was under NDA, as well as post images and videos?

When has it ever been allowed to break a NDA? :confused:

[royaltyinexile 175]

Given the preview, I take it we're now free to talk about all the stuff I'd assumed was under NDA, as well as post images and videos?

Preview is still bound by the NDA.

Edit - Doesn't say as much in it - I misread a sentence. I'd guess it still applies untill 26.08

Edited August 21, 2010 by RoyaltyinExile

[b101_uk 10]

Given the preview, I take it we're now free to talk about all the stuff I'd assumed was under NDA, as well as post images and videos?

One would assume that if you are held under a NDA that you are bound by it until the agreed expiree point contained within the NDA is reached ;)

[Pathy 0]

Zipper, don't be a fuckwit, nobody is talking about breaking an NDA.

What it is, is the NDA covers 'confidential information' (A pretty vague term). Before the info given in the preview was public, i'd assumed it was confidential. Now theres been a preview complete with videos, i'd assume alot of stuff can no longer be reasonably considered 'confidential', as it's in the public domain. I'm just wondering if I can stage some screenshots and videos, is all.

Make sense?

Edited August 21, 2010 by Pathy

[b101_uk 10]

Well, NDA covers 'confidential information' (A pretty vague term). When the info given in the preview was not in anyway public, i'd assumed it was confidential. Now theres been a preview complete with videos, i'd assume alot of stuff can no longer be reasonably considered 'confidential'. I'm just wondering if I can stage some screenshots and videos, is all.

Make sense?

If BI or people who have permission from BI to post images, video or information it still doesn’t affect NDA’s that other are held to or lessen/void them in any way!

In this case only BI can tell any person if and how much of the NDA still applies to that person,

So if in doubt say/do nothing!

[Zipper5 74]

Zipper, don't be a fuckwit, nobody is talking about breaking an NDA.

Yeesh, thanks for the civilized response. To me, you were discretely making the reference that the preview was in some way breaking the NDA.

Make sense?

No, not really. I have a hunch that Dead3yez asked IDEA or BIS before releasing the preview if it's okay for him to do so, and they would have had to say yes before he could. If you want to release something and you're also confined to the NDA, I'd imagine you'd have to do the same. I don't think that, just because one person (with unknown circumstances) has been allowed to post stuff that would otherwise void the NDA he has, anyone else under the NDA is allowed to do the same.

But feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, don't like to seem a "fuckwit".

[Pathy 0]

Better stop posting then, Zipper. :)

Seriously, if you don't understand whats being asked...

I'm very sure Dead3yez has been allowed to release his preview. Forget it anyway, I could no longer be bothered even if I were allowed.

Edited August 21, 2010 by Pathy

[flufball 10]

I'm still not sure what to make of this expansion. Some of it looks good, some of it, I'm not so sure about. Still, it's on preorder so I'm content to wait till it comes out before forming an opinion.

Regarding NDA's - I have in front of me a copy of one I signed a few years back. Part of the agreement has as follows:

Recipient shall have no obligation under this Agreement with respect to Confidential Information which is or becomes publicly available without breach of this Agreement by Recipient; is rightfully received by Recipient without obligations of confidentiality;

It goes on to cover content developed by the Recipient (i.e. Me) and such like. I must stress that I have no legal qualifications, nor do I know the specifics of any NDA or Confidentiality Agreements signed regarding the BAF expansion, but I thought it might help explain what Pathy is asking and why it is a fair and reasonable question.

[Zipper5 74]

Better stop posting then, Zipper. :)

Seriously, if you don't understand whats being asked...

It just seemed like you were making some sort of point by posting something, that I surely would have though would be done in private via PMs or emails, publicly on an open forum, which I don't think is very professional if I'm right in my assumption.

Forget it anyway, I could no longer be bothered even if I were allowed.

Yeesh, wake up on the wrong side of the bed today? Tried to make a point, got angry at me and then called it all off because you're not bothered anymore? :confused:

[mattxr 9]

Why dont just not post anything at all! keep to the agreements and let the people who are ment to be.. give out the information.. its not hard people - maybe those previews were of course giving permission

Anyways got me PC back to normal, checking out armaholic etc ill definitly be buying british units.. sounds like a uber cool pack!

Edited August 21, 2010 by MattXR

[Postal0311 10]

Is the campaign coop?