Jump to content

hcpookie

Member
  • Content count

    2503
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

2437 Excellent

About hcpookie

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  1. Pook ARTY Pack

    New desert tan and showing off the hinged fenders on a slope... Well of course they have unique values as the default BIS values won't accommodate the distances... not sure exactly what you're asking
  2. Just to be clear I tested a SITE as that's really the only way to get AI to behave as intended. If you randomly place an SA3 launcher it will still appear on your radar because they all require an active radar sensor to shoot, but the launcher sensors are severely truncated to around 1-3km to avoid SAM SPAM. Sites are the only way to go.
  3. The missile launch warning is part of the plane's config. I don't know what the USAF F22 mod uses. I have not seen launch warning failures on the SA3 radar but I'll double-check it this morning. Just confirmed SA3 launch alerts are working fine F22 has an internal jamming system. That sounds as if the jamming functions are working. Which should be initialized by the incomingMissile EH.
  4. Pook ARTY Pack

    Like a "reload ammo crate"? I imagine I could do that... good idea! I'm going to look at the gunner memory points on some of the vehicles and try to fix some broken animations - barrel recoil animation going the wrong way, things like that. I have a few vehicles that does damage to itself when you shoot the weapon. I think the weapon mem points are too close to the 3D model but I can't be certain on that yet.
  5. Pook ARTY Pack

    Progress! All conventional and rocket artillery is calibrated to their published distances. I can't confirm the 9K72 (SCUD-300km) or 9K720 (Iskander-500km) max ranges because there is no map big enough to make the test - not even PMC's maps on which I've been testing! Doubt anyone will complain about that :) No idea how AI will work with the "artilleryFire" command at 100km ranges however the config should allow them to function regardless. We'll see I guess. I haven't explored dispersion although I wish to provide the SCUD with a wider CEP since it should have around 3,000m CEP (!!!) vs. the 9K720 Iskander which is in the double-digits. Might be nice to have a "realistic" SCUD for those long range barrages which would mean you could never be sure it will really hit the target. I need to look into that some. As for the rest of the arty, they are considerably more accurate so they can probably remain as-is or perhaps altered only slightly. 3D models are mostly done and need very little except for some turret memory point config changes for the gunner views. Texture sets are about halfway done and progressing nicely. I've replaced the older texture sets that weren't really working that well with some better configured and color-matched textures. Overall things are looking better. Vanilla and CUP configs are planned. I am thinking about adding a reload truck so the ammo is available for reloads. Otherwise it will be tricky trying to rearm in the middle of a mission! Test results for different artilleryCharge values for posterity...
  6. Nope, you're following the directions correctly. However, the directions are wrong... Mea Culpa! Try this instead: _scr = [this] execVM "\pook_P12\scripts\raise_radar.sqf"; I should update that to use "animationsource" since that supposedly works better in MP.
  7. That script is the script that the MP/JIP script the M113 ambulance uses to configure a random texture but none of the other external clutter features. That _camo variable should be a random selection from the textures array. It has all worked in the past and I haven't seen what changes if any were made to the scripts in some time.
  8. POOK CAMONETS

    Thanks for the mirror Foxhound! Apologies to those who tried to download from my onedrive last night... my upload to onedrive was interrupted last night when my computer went to sleep. I re-uploaded the ZIP and the version onedrive is now the correct v6.
  9. POOK CAMONETS

    v6.0: 1/12/2018 - FIX: West Spotter net errors - FIX: Zeus compatibility was missing from certain objects - IMPROVED: All nets now have semi-transparent shadows - IMPROVED: Camo net crates now use the drop cargo model - NEW: Roadblocks and checkpoint signs - NEW: Editor preview pics for most items
  10. That would be my fault there. That would not cause crashes, however, only spam the RPT file. Which is why you are better off running the -nologs switch to avoid all that spammy spam. I will need to update that script and recompile that mod for that script to be fixed. Again, not a game crasher, just a log spammer...
  11. POOK CAMONETS

    Identified the problem with the spotter nets. All things considered I should have a fix by this weekend. Also adding some new signs to the pack :) Thanks for your feedback and patience!
  12. I've observed on Tanoa that the Jets DLC planes taxi differently than other planes. Placing a "GETOUT" waypoint on the tarmac near the ILS landing coordinates, the Jets DLC planes will correctly taxi along the tarmac and always stay "in the lanes" until they reach the waypoint. With custom planes (my planes, as well as the F/A-18 and Su-35) they land, and almost immediately head directly for the GETOUT waypoint, with regard for taxi ways, etc. My question is whether the "precision" taxi process can be added to any other plane or is this a hard-coded feature? The config viewer doesn't reveal anything obvious.
  13. United States Air Force( 2015)

    You must not have been on the Interweb that often :) Its quite simple. The annoying portion goes both ways. As a mod maker, I spend literally hundreds of man-hours a year making a mod. For free. For my buds in the community to play and enjoy. Release time... inevitably within 4 posts of the release, someone with 12 posts asks "will you ever be adding XYZ" to you mod? Which is very deflating for a mod maker. I'm not joking about the hundreds of man-hours a year. I personally don't make mods for praise, however when all you see in feedback is "your mod sucks why don't you make it like XYZ did with their mod" or "your mod sucks how come it doesn't work with XYZ's mod you must fix it now" you tend to get a bit defensive about your "baby". I have a mod that is now officially over 1GB in size (!!!) and yep I can't tell you how many people have asked via IM or otherwise "your mod sucks because it is too big why don't you cut it into little pieces". The nature of their posts clearly indicates they are zit-faced 19 year olds that have little to no regard for quality content... they just want to put your FREE on their monetization server they host at their dorms so they can make money from your hard work. Did I mention how many hours a year I spend making mods? Let's not start on these asshats that repackage your mods and redistribute without your permission. So if the BIS forums seem a bit PASSIONATE about their mods, I would submit that most mod makers these days are proud of what they have created and they go to great lengths to protect that IP rather than have it passed around without regard or respect for the authors. It ain't the authors' fault! Can we agree to quit this line of discussion and keep focus on the USAF mod?
  14. Research for Ground Control Intercept is progressing. Those radome spawners I made may become more valuable after all...
×