havocsquad

My favorite two modern naval strategic warfare sims is Harpoon Classic 2002 Edition and Janes Fleet Command with NWP realism mod version 19.01 The DOS version of Harpoon Classic was done well also. Never was a fan of Harpoon 2 or 3, these might have been adquate in the early to mid 1990's to play. Unfortunately, I hated the unit/tactic/strategic interface of these two versions. If you've only played plain vanilla Janes Fleet Command without NWP and wished for more, get the current NWP mod. This brings more realism, massive more units and weapons, and also does an "adaquate" job of simulating steath (RCS) for a commerical sim.

Is there any chance of the VLS version of the Tico CG being released? Being as it only requires removal of the Twin Standard Missile launchers and modelling a MK 41 VLS system on top.

Well, I think if handled modestly, having civilian "hookers" in the cityscape of this ex-Soviet state makes sense. Keep in mind having reminders that all is not well here and an atmosphere of corruption and a general mood of "life sucks" here would be great. Put in some small scale gambling buildings, lots of slums, and other bleak environment items to complete it. Basically, my view Chernarus should feel like Moscow in the early 1990's, only more modern but slummy and Vegas like in the vices available (gambling, sex, drugs, booze, weapons smuggling). Desperate people do desperate things, living in this environment might motivate someone to take up arms against the government or another faction just as much as a threatened invasion would. With a practically non-existant middle class, you're choices would be military, government, starve, armed resistance (treason), or crime.

One important question I forgot to ask is if the CWC mod will release a different config or standalone addons of this so it will be compatible with other addons. My main concern is that some BIS addons and many other community addons won't work unless they are configed for CWC. For instance, I want to be able to use the CWC material but also be able to utilize the Harrier and the USMC Cobra as well for something near late 1980's along with modern material for later missions that occur after 2000. I tried to find a lot of my community based addons to test along with CWC, but most didn't show up.

I believe the most effective means for handling the HUD distance from the flight path marker is... Â Take the horizontal bomb flight distance from "pickle" time to boom. Â Now compute the horizontal distance from "pickle" point to the flight path marker point in which your plane will become a "lawn dart." into the ground Then subtract the bomb horizontal distance from the "lawn dart" distance and then determine the angle from impact point to flight path marker point. The angle number is a decent "absolute value" to use to control in HUD. I believe good ole SIN, COS, TAN, COSIN, SEC, COT will handle how you plot the CCIP line and death dot on the screen.

I vote for EF body skin #4, the low visibility gray used by most current U.S. & E.U. colition air forces for most air superiority/multi-role fighter/strike aircraft. It is one of the most effective paint schemes for reducing its visual presence in most weather conditions. The other similiar paint is the gray/blue blend used by the F-15E strike eagle. The only use for a black painted aircraft is for media coverage and air shows.

Actually, using the BISkeleton with O2PE actually was helpful and sufficient enough to work. It was just the hard part of figuring out the animation tools and functions, not to mention figuring out which LOD of the BISkeleton to use for the animations. Â It was the 1.0 LOD, not the "Edit 0.000" LOD for using with animations on the BISkeleton. Already in process of working on some animations I'll be needing for a few of my top secret ArmA projects. Â Using BIS core animations works well as a base. Â Takes a long time to get each time segment right, but got the process down to feeling like a comfortable glove that I like to use. Â Â The next and more annoying part will be properly configurating them, yay yay... Â

Russian Ballistic Nuclear submarines carry enough torpedoes to adaquately defend themselves, but far fewer than their fast attack counterparts. To treat or assume an SSBN as defenseless is to invite disaster. Â Take it from a very experienced person in modern naval strategic warfare who's pulled quite a few "rabbit out of the hat" tricks against my opponents.

I'm just curious, was it decided that the General Guba unit would not be made for CWR and the same for secretary Angelina due to project issues? That CWC office scene after the primary nuke scud sabotage with her execution for failure reminded me of this. I looked for its mentioning in this topic, but couldn't find it. Â Easy to miss something like that for dozens of pages of replies to read through.

if you say so... Oh please great sage, we beg of you, enlighten us mortals with your wisdom! Else STFuckU. As much as it might be tempting to enjoy a short duel of attitudes on a 3D modelling subject of interest. Â I don't believe having it turn into pettiness spat over clay wall designing would be constructive for anyone. Â Been there, done and regretted that more I'd like to think about. A small info update, I am currently working on and hopefully completing 2 other major US surface combatant warship 3D models for ArmA. First one will be Ticonderoga CG VLS, the second will be the Sprunance DD. Screenshots are not available of it due to the very early stage of the model. Â The Tico progress is currently at 5 to 8% completed, the coarse frame of the hull is mostly done and working on getting the look of the keel correct. Â After smoothing and adjusting the hull to look better, the belly of the main hull will be worked on and completed. Then the real work comes, the ship superstructure, sensors, and deck. Textures for it will be a real pain but far from impossible. Making them into addons by myself is a big if, mainly because it will depend on aid from others who have made them successfully (Gnat's frigates is the prime example). Its one thing to slap some guns on a ship in ArmA, its a whole other thing making a full combat capable warship in ArmA.

Well if you are going to go all out on this, adding a sizable military or government HQ building that is enterable wouldn't hurt. Â All the HQ and admin buildings I ever see in OFP and ArmA are eye candy boxed buildings with no interiors. Â Shame, such buildings present project power and and a sense of a functioning organization. You might want to also make some airbase/airport bunkers for personnel or airbase munition bunkers. The bunkers shown in those screenshots look like World War 2 style bunkers using mainly stone. When I think about a modern airport bunker, I see concrete and camo or it being recessed into the ground or hill.

I've tried using OFPAnim with a couple of ArmA pbos converted to allow OFPAnim to work for ArmA. Â However, none of the body parts are linked or chained. Â Thus, each time I try to do an animation, it looks like complete crap AND it takes forever to ensure you've selected all the needed sections. I have completed a few decently made custom unit animations for OFP, but using it for ArmA is a nightmare... So is it better to agonize through OFPAnim or use the functions available in Oxygen 2 PE? If I choose to animate with O2, here are my main questions.... What LOD mode is animation changes supposed to be done, 1.0, Edit 0.00, or Memory LOD? What is the most effective means to animate each limb and part of the body? Â Is it just trial and error of the 3D rotate method or is there a better way in O2?

Well, the straight flush isn't too hard of something to model really, its getting someone to do it. I think SAM efforts should be focused with the ArmA RKSL project for their stuff. They seem to be tackling this with the most interest and effort to back it up. However, my two requests are most likely never to be completed, even though they would add much to the ArmA experience. #1. Field Duty and Dress Uniform (male/female, enlisted/officer) for all major branches of the US and Russian/Soviet military. This is not referring to BDU's or battle fatigues. Nothing would make Cold War Rearmed project feel more better and nostalgic than to have a great Soviet Army female officer unit being Angelina and good ole Guba decked out in a high quality model& textures sporting that General's field uniform. #2. A well made "enterable" Headquarters. Militaries don't run on only dirt hugging grunts or aircraft pilots all day, they need a enterable headquarters(Generic/US and/or Russia/USSR) that looks like one. Gotta have pencil pushers and others running the army too.

Hmm, these screenshots remind me of a question that keeps bugging me. Has anyone tried to mobilize or drum up support for any duty uniform or dress uniform units for the various Russian/Soviet armed forces branches? Â No, I am not referring to BDUs or battle fatigues. I know Armed Assault comes with a few that look somewhat Russian/Soviet officer-like, however that is strictly for SLA. My view is Armed Assault needs this to provide more seperatist Russian officers with overinflated egos (General Guba), more desk jockeys, and more logistics or intellegence officers. I'd like to go on about the need for HQ enterable buildings to give an "administration" feeling to a mission, but that's a whole different topic.

My main focus on ships for ArmA and ArmA regarding interests in using only involves three main areas that hopefully the community and addonmakers won't stray from this... #1 Â Showing a real and credible naval presence in a mission or missions. Â There's nothing that can replace seeing an enemy blockade consisting of several ships offshore spitting fire, or the sight of a naval amphibious operation with large warship escort. #2. Â Acting as a credable threat to enemy forces and being able to adaquately protect itself in ArmA combat. Â Most capable warships are no pushovers, in ArmA they should be able to crush reckless and uncoordinated attempts to sink the ship. #3. Â Allow units to be placable on the bridge of ships when stationary ("not" driver, gunner,commander, or cargo) via scripting. Â If not possible, some simple object made to provide a stable floor that could be moved wherever the cutscene on the ship was needed. Why #3, the bridge is where most of any significant dialogue would occur regarding naval matters in a cutscene offshore. No one as of yet to my knowledge has made any LST,LSD,LHD,or LPD for ArmA yet. Â You'd think with Saharni being an island, more talent would have worked on this matter. Its unfortunate that the Arliegh Burke DDG, Tico VLS CG, Sovernmeny DDG, and Sprunace DD have not been made into successful naval addons yet. Â Slava and the Kirov are by far much more work intensive and poly intense warships, both probably are not feasible to make into ArmA Â models or addons.

Well I can certainly say for now the soundtrack will definitely need to be a high priority. Â That doesn't mean leave a ton of bugs unresolved or rush development that leaves holes the size of a Freight truck to drive through. It's just a shame that most of the strategy games developed have to be historical, significantly absurd, or sci-fi now. Â I deeply wish the sim market would demand a successor to the Harpoon series and Fleet Command. Â Realism, powerful mission editing options for single missions and dynamic campaigns, real resource management, and strategic land warfare simulation by using battalion sized land combat groups or larger. Â Sonalysts would probably develop it if they felt it was profitable, but it seems the commerical modern naval warfare market is too volitile and small to risk developing a sequel now. Only two sci-fi games I've played ever measured up to the standard of "good" for me. Â They were Homeworld 1, and Star Wars KOTOR 1. I wonder if there will be a strong mission editing/building system with powerful options like for OFP/ArmA I/II? Â Maybe not to that extent, but maybe some of the powerful logic operations for objectives and events would be nice for mission editing.

Strange, I never have those problems when I fly with the (KB) version. Â For me it does quite well anytime I needed to pull out of a bad situation. Â Maybe 5 to 10% more elevator coefficient needed, but its reasonably close. Â Then again though, not very many people have over 1,100 flight hours in modern combat sims.

The version with the "keyboard" handling, that was a much better representation than the standard AWS version. Â I Â could pull expected high G manuvers with good turning rate and get the expected amount of resistance. Â It seems those who want to turn on a dime using the standard "loose" version are going to pay a steep penalty in airspeed.

Won't the Super Hornet be a USN only aircraft since from that last time I heard the USMC was going to an all F/A-35 force. Most of which would be the F/A-35B for Amphibious Operations off of LHD's. However, a few USMC F/A-35 squadrons might be based on Carriers as a B or maybe C variant. The USN would have a mix of the Super Hornet and F/A-35C's.

I'm just wanting the pitch to be fixed where when I command the stick to full pitch, it feels closely like an agile turning aircraft and not a latch flipping instantly up at 90 degrees. I used to do this feedback work for some of Footmunch's planes by modifying the configs to find a good result, but this ArmA config.cpp error is bugging me.

My educated assessment is the current version 0.15 is way to squirrely in manuvering to be effective. My specifics: Roll is okay, elevation is extremely sensitive and wrong. The aircraft needs to accelerate slower on the ground (increase weight or friction?) (if possible). Afterburner acceleration needs to be reduced by 10 to 20% Regarding the manuverability arguement, for my own personal only testing I tried to edit the elevatorcoefficient line for the F/A-18E base model in the config. Â This was to possibly give some helpful feedback on good values that work for most in simulating the F/A-18E/F. However, it seemed any time I made a very minor change in the number (elevator coefficient from 1.7 down to 0.7), ArmA revolted against me giving me a landing gear config error when I packed it and tested it. Any clue on why?

I think you've listened too much to unrealiable public opinions and hearsay from those that like to make other people's minds up for others. No he's not an addon maker that's manfactured a ton of addons, but he has produced results for the OFP community. OFP Frigates, B-52, and a couple more small projects addons. It will be nice to have some ships that do more than just sit as background eye candy. Hopefully after this release, it will motivate scripters/coders to develop anti-ship missile system and hopefully a TLAM launching system for the subs and ships like CoC TLAM's. I plan on testing and if needed tweaking the weapon settings so that its firepower capability is on par with its real life capability (within ArmA limits and reason of course).

Yeah, those look like the Russian R-27 (Alamo) series of air-to-air missiles. It's no big deal that they stay to hold the positions of key hardpoint areas on the Tornado model, but as soon this addon starts to materialize far enough, then the R-27's probably need to be replaced with Skyflashes or Sparrows. The Skyflash is basically an improved version of the AIM-7 Sparrow design by the British. So except for a few texture changes, it should be almost identical. I'm sure you can find many reference web pages and info on loadout abilities for each variant of the Tornado.

My hope is that the ArmA community can hammer out a scripting engine that would bring realistic anti-ship missile abilities. That being for ship, land (land based missile launchers), or air units like this F/A-18E/F Superhornet. That would encompass an active seeking sensor and guidance script system, and that the fired anti-ship missile would take on the side of the firing unit (West, East, Res) and would be treated as an aircraft unit which could be shot down. Mando missile system might be a decent idea, but I think the best course of action would be a scripting engine made from scratch for this.

Do remember we are thinking about the community as a whole and for additional situations that might not happen on the BIS island. MiG-29's are definitely needed for ArmA because it is one of the key air superiority aircraft used by OPFOR forces. Â That and of course the Su-27/33. I'm not trying to dictate what should be done, but I believe this following list shows what would probably be best done in priority order: 1st priority: F/A-18, F-16, MiG-29, Su-27/33, Su-24 2nd priority: Â Tornado, Mirage III/5, Mirage 2000 C/D, F-15C 3rd priority: Â F-15E, F-14, E-2, E-3, MiG-31, MiG-23/27 4th priority: Â E-2, E-3, IL-76 AEW Mainstay, Bombers, etc.