da12thMonkey

Sort of. Mk1 was skid-steer only, so you were just pulling the brakes on one side, like how you steered old tanks. The later versions used by the UK could do skid steering for fast, small radius turns and more conventional Ackerman steering for wider turns, using the front two axles. But the middle axles only turns a little bit, whereas the front axle has a greater range of motion.

To me that looks like it's fording more than floating in that moment, but before when I said they float in ~1m of water unladen, I did indeed mean without preparation (i.e the case where you're not fitting them with an outboard motor and extra stuff for true amphibious use). Though IIRC fitting bilge pumps is always necessary for operating the ATMP in water whether it is floating or fording. The pontoons are for the sake of stability and enough extra buoyancy to carry a more useful load. Without the pontoons it can only float with the driver and 300kg of kit, compared to the 1600kg it can carry on land. And the more load you add, the depth of water it can float in reduces from 1m, up to that 300kg mark where it wont float at all. Oh, and all six tyres also need to be fully inflated.

ATMPs aren't really amphibious unless you put an outboard motor on them. They float (but only when unladen and in water from ~70cm deep), but you may as well get out and swim because the wheels paddling in the water alone provide very little forward thrust.

Are you using this method? Sounds like it when you describe the reticle is floating out in front of the weapon https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Weapon_Collimator_Sights That method is mostly outdated now (though still has its uses for some things). BI added a new shader that allows you to do collimator sights on a simple 2D plane https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Scope_3D

@bludski's WIP terrain, Katya

OFP Island classnames were Old Testament biblical names too: Eden (Everon), Cain (Kolgujev) , Abel (Malden), Noe/Noah (Nogova). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enoch_(son_of_Cain) You can see two different Enochs listed as relatives of both Cain and Noe respectively

Then you are in luck because it's the alien assets and campaign are the optionally-loaded parts. The terrain, structures, CBRN objects, Russian and Livonian factions and all other content that fits the previously established Arma 3 environment are set to be part of the base game install

^^ I assume this enquiry is aimed towards RHS players preference and maybe server admins, rather than us mod devs. Because it's not something RHS has any means to gather telemetry/data on.

All the Patreon proceeds are managed by a single member of RHS for the sake of covering expenses incurred by our own development. It is not distributed among our large-ish team of past and present members. There is no financial gain to be made for our content creators (in fact a bunch of the patrons currently subscribed are members of RHS paying towards our hosting since we didn't have a formal way to do this within the team before). As such, there is no incentive for our content creators to provide additional information on what they are working on, or change the way they work either. Donations are 100% voluntary and nobody working on the mod or donating to the mod receives any special treatment as a result of it. If the terms are not satisfactory, then we don't encourage you to donate. But people in the past have asked to donate money, so we are providing them a single place to do that. We're not looking to draw in large sums of money to subsidise anybody's lifestyle, so tips on making the mod marketable and draw in more money really don't concern us.

That's an Arma limitation. Not really anything that can be done about it directly. The grips use a duplicate of the bipod/underbarrel slot (grip attachments are in effect bipods in terms of function, they just attach to a different proxy position). The game overrides the integrated bipod function when any attachment is in an underbarrel slot. Presumably because it would cause some kind of conflict if you did actually produce a weapon with an integrated bipod plus a conventional underbarrel slot for the BI bipod attachments. In order to get around this on toadie's lurvely M249 models in RHS itself (dev version), we've decided to exchange the integrated bipod for an attachment-based version. In most instances once you attach a grip now, you have no inventory slot for a bipod; so there is no longer an "integral" bipod to be disabled by the grip. Then we produced two special M249 grip+bipod attachments that have both meshes combined in one model to retain both functions. But as I said, there are only two of these, rather than combinations of every available grip with the two different styles of M249 bipod. So you don't get quite as much visual variety.

It's not clean cut like we have a metric fal and an imperial FAL and intention to make specific FAL variants yet. We have the rifle that is built around an L1A1 so has the L1's front and rear sights and gas system and bolt with lightening cuts, selector switch, etc. etc. etc. and optics: SUIT, and a PVS-2 (original PVS-2, not the equivalent L1 IWS). Then we have some additional parts of furniture to configure the rifle in different ways, should we choose, but not all the parts for every FAL out there. Graham may decide to make specific SLR parts to bring it closer to the original UK-spec rifle, or make more FN-style parts that could lead to some variants that look more like metric FALs.

Probably not, no. Graham made the receiver based on the L1A1 and a variety of other parts that we can configure to suit GREF. It's not so much meant to be an exact replica since we also have parts that weren't on the real SLR like a folding stock (that accommodates the ramp sight rather than the typical aperture para sights) and picatinny dust-cover, that we will probably add in some form down the line once we decide how we want to use them to make different configurations. We have a wooden Inch pattern pistol grip that will likely be used at some point with the wooden furniture, but the polymer one is based on an R1(metric) for now. I don't think there is a folding cocking handle in the parts set.

Other mags in the current stable version probably don't have hiddenSelections[] = {"camo"}; array the config (because we didn't have alternate textures for them). However, the camo selections have always been there in the models and model.cfg regardless. So it should work if you add the parameter to your own classes yourself in addition to the hiddenSelectionsTextures[] array. In Dev version of the mod though, we have an all new STANAG mag model with a couple of texture versions to represent EPM mags and SCAR mags (so if you're making textures for the current/old STANAG model... RIP!), and Sabre did some real nice UCP, Woodland and Coyote Brown textures for the 100 and 200rnd M249 nutsacks. So these now have a defined hiddenSelections[] array.

The system we had in place to generate all the class data automatically from configs with our builds was unexpectedly a resource hog, and driving up hosting costs by quite a lot. So it has been taken offline indefinitely. The boss has more important things to do than come up with a new API for it.

That's because Steve who makes SPS, chose to scale his sights relative to the WFOV instead of the NFOV BI use as the baseline for 1x on all the scopes and vehicle sights. At 8x his short dot is equivalent to around 5.4x magnification at the BI standard for Arma 3 optics. My point was, Toadie's not wrong for the FOV values used on the ATACR's 1x setting. It conforms to BI's values for 1x optics. Steve isn't really wrong either - he's just not a conformist 😄 E.g. using values direct from the config viewer: BI's DMS sight is nominally a 2-4x optic (according to the inventory description). It has discretefov[] = {0.125,0.0625}; This is calculated 0.25/2 = 0.125 and 0.25/4 = 0.0625 respectively 0.25 is also the opticsZoomMin = 0.25; value for all 1x collimated sights in the game. Default FOV with collimated sights is opticsZoomInit = 0.75; (note that it's called opticsZoomMin for the NFOV "zoomed in" view, and opticsZoomMax for the UWFOV view that is "zoomed out" - because Arma is strictly speaking, dealing with FOV, not magnification and FOV decreases to increase "magnification") Steve's Short dot is using discretefov[] = {0.6818,...,0.04665}; for nominally 1.1-8x, so 0.25/0.6818 = 0.3666x and 0.25/0.04665 = 5.359x. We can determine that Steve used 0.6818*1.1 = 0.749 as his baseline 1x magnification value (and strangely another value 0.04665*8 = 0.37 for the 8x magnification). So you can see it's based around opticsZoomInit, rather than the way BI handle magnification on their powered optics. Toadie's ATACR is using discretefov[] = {"0.249/1",..."0.249/8"}; for nominally 1-8x and you can see already that it's using the same 0.25 FOV baseline as BI (give or take a fraction of a radian to account for the memory point offset) It's pretty near impossible to simultaneously achieve properly scaled magnification (in terms of visual acuity and reticle scale against the background) and FOV (in terms of the viewable angle through the optic and scale of the reticle relative to the aperture)in Arma, because the monitor frame puts a big physical limitation on how much space is available. So as addon makers you have to fudge one way or another. As for the initial part in my post about it not looking fine if it was like Iansky and RHS Elcan Specters with a 3D 1x mode. It's not the same issue I was talking about in the rest of my post regarding the zoom/FOV values thing. The Short dot in SPS isn't using 3D scope view for 1.1x either - it's a 2D one like Toadie's ATACR, but with a nicely made custom 2D optic instead of the BI one most of us addon makers usually use. So the 3D scope issues don't apply

I doubt that will work well on a scope the shape of an ATACR. It's too long and narrow to work well with the way that Arma does 3D scopes. Looking through the eyepiece you would most likely just see a big black ring behind the lens and a small aperture of what is on the other side of the objective lens, similar to how scopes look IRL if you're not using the correct eye relief You can see with the AUG A1s roughly how long, narrow, low-magnification optics look when you try to do them in 3D As for the ATACR being magnified at the lowest setting: It isn't really. In general, all Arma scopes magnification settings are scaled such that the narrow FOV view you have when not looking down the sights but using Num+ key to "zoom" is the standard 1x magnification and the ATACR's lowest setting matches that. The default wide-FOV view is <1x, and there to give you a more realistic field of vision within the confines of a computer monitor.

That's maybe partially our (RHS) fault. We made a typo with the magazineWell name when defining it on the M249 for testing (before BI added wells for their own mags and CBA made an effort to produce standard classes).

It's largely the same model. reyhard made new textures and material (as Disgusting_Man inquired about), and improved some geometry for the ironsights etc.

Save fuel and reduce IR signature when static. The Arma AI behaviour is probably inspired by the same reason tanks IRL run their systems on an APU when they are not expecting to be moving for a long time.

Yeah, it's not a config-only thing. Custom penetration .rvmats are baked in to the fire geometry LOD of the models

Well, the GM lads already announced it'll be possible in a way where .ebo isn't a factor So I think it's fair to make plans

Not replacing anything. The Gorka-1's (including the original "Afghanka" type texture and an additional Flecktarn one that comes with GREF) are in the Arsenal alongside the existing Gorka-R.

There's no immediate workaround for that. Weapon animation sources cannot be conditional of other sources. If we added an animation to unfold the sight again when the GL muzzle is selected so that it was up when optics are attached, it would then be folded forward when there is no optic attached. Unless we model a quadrant sight for the side rail some day, you'll just have to put up with it

I have in my notes somewhere from converting Toadie's original box/pouches that were aligned with the weapon model: M249 Mags RotX = -69.0667 Then translate X = 0.0284 Y = 0.04472 Z = 0.049878 But I suppose it's kind of dependant on the origin of these translations, and I can't remember what the origin coordinate was

No, you would have to cut a hole in the turret wall behind the periscope in order to look right through. Unless you use render-to-texture/picture-in-picture like is used with mirrors. But R2T/PiP has various limitations like low image resolution, and doesn't render shadows. So it would not look as clear an image, and multiple PiP displays can have a big impact on performance.