quakergamer

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Oberon3d @ Dec. 17 2002,11:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I use MAX 4.2 and Photoshop. So I export it as 3Ds.... I think mapping in o2 is completely mad....I haven't even try it...it sounds crazy the way is done.. So I map it in MAX When I export it to O2 as 3Ds it asks me if I want to keep the mapping coordinates...I say yes....and when I import the model to o2..bulldozer shows the model already textured.... I'll post something tonight....I'm off on holidays for a while and I won't work on the ferret for 2 weeks. It's taking ages to do the textures....I can hardly expend 1 hour everyday...<span id='postcolor'> I see well it must be nothing so special. Just hte textures that make it haev a nice effect. But it looks quite dark compared to the soldier Anyway good job

Hey man, As ive told you on MSN i really like the model and I hope you will be able to do a nice cockpit for this awesome BOMBER B2 all the way

Very nice model and I like the textures even if they look a bit cartoony. I think the cockpit is great and I had great fun playing with your choppper. Nice to see that someone has finally made a Russian chopper. Also I've didn't find any real bug but you should: -Delete the "Enable Manual Fire" -Make it so that it can land when AI is pilot Great job!

The model looks awesome and the textures make it look shaded, it adds a nice look. And as Tanelorn asked, What program did you used to export it to .3ds or .obj before importing it into Oxygen ?

Awesome Leone cant wait to see the other things ChupChup is working on Anyway it looks awesome by what I Am seeing

Hello all. The OPGWC Team has finished the M109A6 version 2. It's not avaible for download For other pictures: http://www.iquebec.com/quakergamer/m109_2.jpg http://www.iquebec.com/quakergamer/m109_1.jpg For 1.75/1.85/1.90: http://www.roughnecks.org/opgwc/addons/m109v2_v190.zip For 1.46: http://www.roughnecks.org/opgwc/addons/m109v2_v146.zip And you can also get the Demo of our MOD at OPGWC Site: http://www.roughnecks.org/opgwc/default.asp

I still preffer my good ol' MLRS http://www.multimania.com/quakergamer4/mlrs.jpg

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (joltan @ Nov. 25 2002,14:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (quakergamer @ Nov. 25 2002,03:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">2nd) The sights are different becasue the 155mm shell is ARTILLERY Shell, indirect fire. The copperhead ammo is DIRECT Fire like a normal tank shell so thats why it has normal Sight. Hope you get what I mean<span id='postcolor'> But why make two different models just for different kinds of ammunition? Just because of the sights and to limit the ammunition users can load into the vehicle? Direct fire would work with the artillery sights, too. And wouldn't it be sensible for the user to be able to switch from one ammunition to the other (can't you limit the available amount for each ammunition seperately)? Im sure in reality there's not two different types of vehicles for these kinds of ammunition. Don't get me wrong, I really like the model - so please see the above and my questions as constructive criticism.<span id='postcolor'> I coudlf ix this but the 155mm sights look better with indirect fire but anyway. And also wardog, using the simulation="ShootMissile"; would not work cuz it would be like a missile (with smoke and all the stuff). And also yes it would be possible to make an M109 with al those ammo BUT it wouldnt bve that good with the misisons (AI would use the 155mm shell anyway). So thats why I've kept it like that.

Wardog you are right about it but OFP dosen't support shells being targeted by laser (and im pretty sure it dosent support laser guided shells) so I've amde it liek a regular shell. Anyway if you can givem e some suggestionms I will change it for the next version ...

M109A6 155mm Artillery http://www.roughnecks.org/opgwc....Team%29

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (joltan @ Nov. 25 2002,03:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Three questions: The two included versions: the heat version has less then 10 shots (ugh) and seems to fire in a very flat arc over far distances, while the other has around 40 shots of shells and seems to have much less range then the other one. Also sights are different... what's the idea behind that? Why has the the shortranged version the kind of sight I'd expect from an artillery piece, while the long ranged version has a standard tank sight (or was it shilka)? Is there a possibility to do a woodland cammo for use on the original islands? And finally: I liked the sight of the shell version - it would be nice if it would be able to cover furher distances, too (ie. continue the scale to the max. range of the weapon). That way it would be easier to adjust the firing arc to the calls from a spotter.<span id='postcolor'> 1st) It has 10 shots because CopperHead and Copperhead2 shells are VERY VERY expensive and werent used a lot in the Gulf War. We are trying to be as realistic as possible. Also the range is like that becasue this si how OFP calculates the range; The speed wit hte max range. And if i want to make indirect fire I need to set lower speed. Anyway its quite hard and it cant go beyond that., 2nd) The sights are different becasue the 155mm shell is ARTILLERY Shell, indirect fire. The copperhead ammo is DIRECT Fire like a normal tank shell so thats why it has normal Sight. Hope you get what I mean and yes we are working on a woodland camo, Cya

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Steam @ Nov. 24 2002,23:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The AI dont seem to engage from far away, eg i was on desert island and had some t-80s bout 2000 m away, i killed em, but the ai targeted but didnt engage.<span id='postcolor'> AI cant use artillery or any indirect fire. OFP needs engine improvements .

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Eviscerator @ Nov. 23 2002,10:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i havent tried this out yet (as its gonna take a while on my 56k), but will it work for multiplayer? if not can you consider making a multiplayer compatible version with just a sound.pbo replacement?<span id='postcolor'> well this would be pretty difficult cuz Satchel Sound pack has .ogg sounds and they ARENT named like normal OFP Sounds (as example explosion1.wss is atexplosion.ogg in satchel soundpack) and also they need to be converted to .wss to work correctly :/

Nice but why did uve posted 4 replies for just 4 pics. Just putth e 4 links in one reply ...

Hey guyz, I've just finished importing my new CH46. Here is a picture and compare it with Indepedance Lost CH46.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Soul_Assassin @ Nov. 11 2002,19:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">YAY...three exactly identical models/textures how fun <span id='postcolor'> Not models ...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (USMC Sniper @ Nov. 11 2002,04:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It looks a bit streched, and the textures are a bit warped, but I really liek the idea of you making it look nearly the same as in IL, great work! Â <span id='postcolor'> Yea textures are stretvcched but its not final, not even beta. But look on IL ch46 the back of the CH46 is also stretched :/

I want Mi28 and thats one of the things that East needs the most. Maybe ill make one who knows

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Eviscerator @ Nov. 09 2002,15:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">why is a challenger 2 in a desert storm mod demo? it only came into service in 1998....<span id='postcolor'> Because thats the model ive did. But becausew e are redoignm the chal 2 model and m109 one we will include Challenger 1 soon.

For those who use HWTL and have texture bugs (Like FOrest camo BMP or T72 ,etc, etc) Go here: http://www.roughnecks.org/opgwc....ures%29

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mellis @ Nov. 07 2002,17:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've seen and heard that it's possible to change the "Design" of the menu in the game for example a new mod. Do I do that in the resources.bin file?? I am a bit confuesed about that.. Â Â If there is any good tuturial for how to make mod, more like a mod in the menu's and things, I would be happy to use it.. So is there anybody? Â <span id='postcolor'> Yes there is but I dont think tehre is a good 100% owrking 1.85 ressource.cpp file that you can edit. Most of the mhave problems

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (nierop @ Nov. 07 2002,14:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hi I just tried some units in the mission editor. What I find a bit ... whats the word... irritating (but thats too strong) is that the units that you made yourself (paladin,challenger, etc) really look "synthetic" in comparison with the reskinned ones. My knowledge of making is not such that i can tell you what is the problem, but it might be a lack of detail in both model and textures. To my opinion this should be corrected. I plan further comments after playing missions. Bye and keep up the good work, Pimmelorus [sHoP]<span id='postcolor'> We will redo the challenger 2 and M109. I think that F15 and huey looks fine but u are right M109 and challenger 2 looks very basic. The new model will be good I can tell it to you ] And btw thanks Skaven for your comments

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RAF_Maverick @ Nov. 07 2002,19:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Any idea of when the split up (or whatever you call it) version is out because 200 meg is a wee bit too much too take at one time on a 56K modem, and I wanna try this demo out<span id='postcolor'> We will release the units (created ones) so you guyz wuth 56k can njoy them. Check them out next week I want to play some games and go snowboarding this weekend no working

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (SantaMania @ Nov. 07 2002,13:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yea i noticed... Just weird that I hadnt noticed it earlier at all, then when I try it first time after installing the mod, it happends on me...<span id='postcolor'> Probably because uve tried the F15 of ourm od for more than 1 minute

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (whisperFFW06 @ Nov. 07 2002,13:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (SantaMania @ Nov. 06 2002,21:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My ofp:res is now fucked. Open ofp:res in normal mode (no mods) Try fly a plane in the editor on desert island... just fly the a-10 (BIS standard), then after a minute or two... the model suddenly becomes invisible???!!!!<span id='postcolor'> Before accusing any 3rd party add-on & mod, just check facts. This happens to me too when I get out of map in an air vehicle. This is NOT a mod problem. Incredible respect in these boards!<span id='postcolor'> Looks more liek 1.85 problem. Ive reinstalled ofp on MY OTHER HD and the planes become invisible too