E. Manning

Greetings. I've been wanting to create a modpack for my unit with custom gear, rifles, etc. but wanted a way to keep their functionality within the unit while still allowing the models, sounds, etc. to be seen for Joint Operations. For example, lets say we have a mod for a rifle. Would it be possible to have two mods, one mod with the rifle animations, sounds, model, etc... but have the bullet damage value set to almost nothing? Then have a second mod that overrides the original damage value to deal fully lethal damage? Or if that specific example is bad: Have one mod for a scope that lets players see it on the gun but when they use it, the scope has no reticle. But then a second mod adds in the reticle. Would this be possible?

Usually we like to travel to the action as fast as we can in ArmA, we take helicopters, planes, or the local HALO jump flag... But sometimes it is better to take the longer road, get a little lost on the way, and generally goof off.

So two things. One is that in all of the videos I see, everyone is going full on through the campaign by going loud which is alright I suppose, but not necessarily the way I feel it was originally intended. For reference, here is a video detailing a complete stealth walk through of Mission 03. Two, does anyone know how this is achieved? The AI detection in the campaign is not the same as it is in regular scenarios. Are the units you spawn into coded to have low camouflage and audible values? Is there some code in the AI Behavior? How does one replicate the campaign dumbing down of the AI for their own scenarios? Or am I just on crack and the AI are the same as they've always been? Also, what are your thoughts on this? Do you feel as a community that having a suspensop of disbelief is important to quality gameplay? Or would you rather that the AI's behavior be static as it has in the past?

Decided to start my own Gaming Channel, SPEC-4. Starting off with in-depth walk through's of the Apex Protocol Campaign, including some of the best ways to take on the objectives. As it is new, support would be wonderful and if anyone would like to get together with me on anything, let me know!

On the Apex Release, SPAR-16 and 17 recoil has been changed to a simple up/down. Much appreciated. Cheers!

Now you're just irritating me and arguing just to argue. I don't even know what you're arguing about or for anymore. I'm not even going to answer to your childish babbling to defend a failing argument. Anyone with half a brain can watch the videos and see that my feedback is valid.

I don't think we're reverting to ArmA 2. We have a full house of enterable buildings and a Eden/Zeus. If anything, this makes it easier on us with less windows, doors, etc. to worry about in CQB. Makes things more streamlined and straightforward for gameplay, and it can easily be stepped up by just placing a few extra buildings down.

Dude. I am saying that the SPAR-16's recoil is not consistent versus rifles which are consistent. Thus because it is inconsistent it is harder to CONTROL versus consistent rifles which despite having more rise are EASIER TO CONTROL. I already said that in terms of flat muzzle rise, other weapons are greater, but muzzle rise is not the sole factor in recoil. EDIT: Other individuals are more than capable and willing to attempt similar shot grouping tests. But it is easy to see compared to the MK 1 EMR and the Mk18, that my control of the weapon is consistent.

Alright. The videos are uploaded. I would first like to say, piss off with the personal attacks. If you're going to crap on me about config values, why don't you go pull some up yourself and take a look and post them for all to see? You're pissing on me about this but you're not even mentioning what the programmed statistics actually are. You're going off on a hunch just to attack me. I said the AK12-AKM ironsights had more field of view and that people complain about the obstruction of the SPARs. This is overall more useful. The AK-12 currently in game is more controllable than the SPAR-16. Let me clarify some things regarding the SPAR-16: I am not advocating that it have less recoil, but I am comparing its performance to that of the AK-12/AKM series. If you mag-dump and fire straight up, the AK-12/AKM are only higher than the SPAR-16 by 3-5 rounds using Dyslexci's script. However compared to the SPAR-16's lines, the AKM grouping follows a coherent axis while the SPAR-16 is much more dispersed. The SPAR-16's recoil is light, yes, but it is also inconsistent. Thus when you are firing, you are able to achieve better accuracy as in a TIGHTER SHOT GROUPING with the AKM/AK-12 along with instinctively resetting your point of aim after a shot, than you would with the SPAR-16 as its inconsistency, despite its light recoil, prevents you from instinctively making adjustments, but you have to constantly track the offset and then correct for it every shot. That being said, it is still possible to maintain a good shot grouping with the SPAR-16, but it is sad that even tighter groupings can be achieved by other firearms of the same or larger caliber. You're even going to piss on me about gun flexing? Yeah, all guns have tolerances, but older AKs turn into fricken rubber when fired as compared with AR-15 style rifles. You're ignorant. Shot at the same FPS, standard AR vs AK. You can see just how much the AK flexes and bends as compared with the AR. Older variant AK's with a single layered barrel experience this rubber effect, while newer variants with the double layer mitigate it. The only reason I brought it up, is because when that level of flexing and bending happens, your shots go every which way which is exactly how the SPAR is performing right now. There is no coherency, it is like it turns into rubber.http://www.akfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67669 The SPAR-16/17 was introduced as a specialist rifle for CTRG, a NATO Tier 1 SOF group. Delta/DEVGRU use the HK416, and the kit they have on them is not factory standard. Geissele triggers, match-grade barrels most likely mellonite coated, after-market stocks... Thus it would follow that a fictional Tier 1 group (CTRG) using specialist rifles (SPAR) derived from an earlier specialist rifle (The HK416/17) would have high quality rifles built for their specific needs and not cheaper mass-produced stuff that the general infantry get. Also, by your own account, it is front heavy, and last I checked, that extra weight reduces muzzle rise. Regardless, the HK416 is not just an above average firearm that is slightly better than your run of the mill stuff. The Hk416 was at one point considered and still is in some circles, the best AR-variant out there. So piss off. The rifle is extremely high quality. Also, don't equivocate. I said the MXM was more controllable than the SPAR, not "Wah wah, the 6.5 is better than 5.56!" - The heavier round 6.5 can produce a tighter shot grouping than the SPAR-16 can. And the reference to the CMR-76 was that it is EXTREMELY controllable on fully-automatic in retort to "THE 17 IS A DMR." - Other DMRs perform and behave differently. Now, here are the videos, including a demonstration of the recoil pattern which I am telling you about. So piss off once more because I have to throw it in your face to get it into your thick skull. SPAR-17 on semi. Notice that on some shots, it goes halfway up the tower, on others it travels all the way up, and on others it goes right. SPAR-17 shot grouping. Notice that it overshoots the tower by a large margin and is very dispersed. 9.3 Navid, no overshoots. MK-1 EMR, no overshoots. MK 18 ABR, no overshoots. AK-12, shot grouping is extremely tight. Almost all landed on the small vent.

I will upload to Youtube when I get home from work and show you actual shot groupings of other 7.62 DMRs and some LMGs as compared with the SPAR-17. Also, for the record, the video of the Mk-1 EMR on auto shoots better than the SPAR-17, so I don't know about your earlier comments about the 17 being better.

Can you guys stop misdirecting things with useless information? So what if it is meant to be a DMR rifle only used in semi-auto. If a .22LR DMR had more recoil than a 9.3 LMG, would that extreme be more clear to you? Even on Semi the SPAR-17 behaves in the same way with a wave like recoil pattern rather than something more smooth and consistent. This should not be the case given the intended quality of the rifle and the size of the cartridge. Weapons with more upward momentum are more controllable than the SPAR-17 simply because the "SPAZ-17" spazzes out all over your screen while you frantically move your mouse left right up down trying to keep it even on target. The CMR-76 doesn't even have this problem and it is a DMR-type rifle. Also, it is a completely different animal when bipoded? What gun isn't? A bipod offers complete and total support, you can fire a 20mm cannon with a bi/tripod, what difference does it make? Supported firing positions are designed to nearly completely mitigate recoil regardless. Crouched or standing, there is an issue. I build AR-10/15's, they do not behave this way and few guns do. This problem exists even on SEMI. Get that into your heads, I am tired of having to repeat myself. EDIT: I am not complaining that a DMR is bad at being a LMG. What I am complaining about is the fact that a LMG specifically designed to be fired from a supported position, with a larger round nearly double the energy, can be fired standing and perform better than it. The SPAR-17 only has a 20rnd mag, goodluck being a LMG with that. But 20 rounds out of a LMG perform better. With your reasoning, why don't we invent a 6.5" barrel carbine that fires 20mm rounds? It is okay that it has no recoil because it is a carbine. EDIT 2: Also, stop attacking my character and accusing me of trying to be Rambo. I take this game seriously and methodically, and my methods of evaluation have only been pointing out discrepancies between the performance of cartridges/firearms and not complaining that shooting the SPAR-17 gave me a minor case of PTSD and butthurt. I would just like the SPAR-17's recoil to be more consistent so that is more controllable given the performance of other weapons.

All I am running is MCC/CBA3 for testing purposes. I am not saying that the SPAR-16's recoil is "Zomgwtfuncontrollable" but relatively speaking it is outclassed by almost any other firearm, even the 6.5 MX series performs better/just as well. The SPAR-17 is just insane though. It is lack of consistency and uncontrollable recoil make it worse in fully automatic standing than a 9.3 Machine Gun designed to be fired from a supported position. I can mod the GM6 Lynx to accept 30 round mags, fire at 700 rpm, and still have more control than this thing.

No. Just no. A 7.62x39mm rifle should not have significantly less recoil than a 5.56x45mm NATO rifle, especially when the SPAR-16 is supposed to be a high quality rifle built for Tier-1 operators. Both the AKM and the AK-12 have less recoil than it and we're talking a difference of about 600 rpm vs 700rpm. Even fast-tapping the AK-12 on burst at 900-1000 RPM is more controllable. Have you ever shot a decent AR and compared it to an AK in real life? Right now the AKs outperform the SPAR in every aspect besides stealth, which is not only unrealistic, but I feel imbalanced. It is not worth it using the SPAR-16/17 for general purpose use when an AKM/AK-12 will give you a one shot kill, ammo is everywhere, and it has more accuracy and less recoil. Especially given the fact that both the AKM/AK-12 have open iron sights which improves field of view and people have already complained about the SPAR's ironsights. Even compared to the 6.5 MX, the MX for the first 15-20 rounds actually has less recoil though it becomes gradually harder to control. Unless you're mag dumping, the MX actually beats the SPAR-16. Even the AAF Mk 20 which is a 5.56 bullpup is more controllable than the SPAR-16. Even plinking around with the ASP KIR produces a better shot grouping than plinking with the SPAR-17. The SPMG 338 has more recoil than the SPAR-17. I can get a tigher shot grouping with the 9.3 Navid than I can with the SPAR-17. It is broken/inconsistent. EDIT: Upon further review in slow-motion, it is clear to me that the SPAR-17's recoil value changes. On some shots it is low and then suddenly WHAMO it hits you big. This inconsistency is a nuisance as it makes it impossible to adjust for recoil. The only real life weapon which behaves in such a way is the AKM and only because three parts of the gun actually misalign and bend during fully automatic fire. The SPAR-17 should just be a simple up/down like the rest of the weapons and have consistent recoil rather than this "Light, medium, light, OH MY GOSH 50 CAL RECOIL, medium, light, 50 CAL RECOIL" pattern

After using the SPAR-16 in combat, I am very impressed by the level of stealth that it offers. I am not sure if this is very scientific, but using the Type 115 Silenced after taking several shots at close range (under 50m) led to me being spotted within 5-10 seconds. Using the SPAR-16 the AI are aware they are being attacked, but are very oblivious as to where the fire is coming from and only spot me by direct line of sight. The Type 115 attracts everyone to my location due to as I believe, the visible and audible fire values in the config. Though I really lack the understanding to check for this. Given it being CTRG's to-go weapon, I really like this and I think it is great. The only complaint I have is that all the 5.56x45mm NATO rounds are tracers which I believe have a larger visible fire value. If regular ball 5.56 non-tracer rounds could be made with a lower visible fire rate, I think this would be superb for stealth. EDIT: All shots were suppressed.

Would it be possible to make certain types of bushes found throughout the under canopy give you full camouflage? For reference, the Tigeria map from ArmA 2 had a large black bush that you could hide in and provided you did not shoot, make large movements, or make noise, the AI would walk right by you as the bush was scripted to block sight. Playing the Tigeria map in ArmA 3 preserves this functionality and gives an added measure of stealth and strategy in addition to making things much more intense as sometimes you end up walking right on the enemy and have point blank engagements. I realize that the current ArmA system tries to incorporate this, but due to natural holes in the foliage, even if an inch of you is exposed, the AI will spot you. By designing a bush which incorporates full sight blockage, this will allow the AI to keep their current spotting techniques, but allow us some leeway in concealment.