Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

-Snafu-

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1739

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by -Snafu-

  1. Posted

    WGL have enough iron sight "zoom"... It have the same ammount of zoom than the original game If I remember well.

    You are asking for the zoom without iron-sight right?

    Then you need to go to Man: Land, and change this:

    fov=0.9;

    minFov=0.9;

    maxFov=0.9;

    // fov=0.85;

    // minFov=0.42;

    // maxFov=0.85;

    To the vals with "//" to have the original game zoom.

    PD: I think totally the contrary, I took out even the zoom of the iron sights, and surprising, you have the same problems that the AI have firing at you, like not-perfect accuracy, more bullet wasted, etc... In MP it works really good (A custom made modification of WGL), you use a lot of munition and the backpacks of WGL are really useful now, the firefights last longer and are more exciting =P

    You can get a similar effect by editing the aimPrecision value of the different animation stances. No more perfectly still sights and it affects the AI too. :)

  3. Posted

    Congratulations on the release.

    I do what I always do when I download a new mod. I play the Battlefields mission. The infantry is nicely spread out and the DSAI and new sounds are working. My squad soon spots an enemy BMP so the AT guy opens fire but misses! He dies from enemy fire and I see a squad member grab his launcher, move and fire at the BMP! Meanwhile I am putting rounds down range. As I am moving I press R to reload expecting stop and do so but my guy reloads on the move. That was a nice surprise.

    I only got to play for about 10 mins but it looks really good so far. Keep up the great work.

  6. Posted · Edited by Snafu

    There is a laser designator in vanilla because you use it in the 1st mission in the campaign. Force Recon should have it and you can also use the class name for the weapon and it batteries to add it to any other soldier. Click here and scroll down to equipment.

    You should give the scripts a try, tough. Easy as pie to use.

  7. Posted

    I've read that in order to get more realistic firefights by increasing AI engagement ranges you need to modify cfgAmmo in the config.cpp.

    cfgAmmo

    class CfgAmmo

    {

    access=1;

    class Default

    {

    access=3;

    hit=0;

    indirectHit=0;

    indirectHitRange=1;

    minRange=0.5;

    minRangeProbab=0.5;

    midRange=100;

    midRangeProbab=0.8;

    maxRange=450;

    maxRangeProbab=0.05;

    model="";

    proxyShape="";

    simulation="";

    cost=0;

    maxSpeed=0;

    cartridge="";

    simulationStep=0.05;

    tracerColor[]={0.7,0.7,0.5,0.04};

    tracerColorR[]={0.7,0.7,0.5,0.04};

    soundFly[]={"",1,1};

    soundEngine[]={"",1,1};

    soundHit[]={"",1,1};

    hitGround[]={"soundHit",1};

    hitMan[]={"soundHit",1};

    hitArmor[]={"soundHit",1};

    hitBuilding[]={"soundHit",1};

    explosive=1;

    irLock=0;

    airLock=0;

    laserLock=0;

    manualControl=0;

    maxControlRange=350;

    maneuvrability=1.0;

    sideAirFriction=1;

    visibleFire=0;

    audibleFire=0;

    visibleFireTime=0;

    initTime=0;

    thrustTime=1.5;

    thrust=210;

    };

    class BulletSingle:Default

    {

    hit=9;

    indirectHit=2;

    indirectHitRange=0.1;

    model="shell";

    simulation="shotBullet";

    simulationStep=0.05;

    soundFly[]={"objects\bulletnoise",0.2511886,0.7};

    explosive=0;

    visibleFire=16;

    audibleFire=16;

    visibleFireTime=3;

    minRange=10;

    minRangeProbab=0.1;

    midRange=50;

    midRangeProbab=0.38;

    maxRange=200;

    maxRangeProbab=0.04;

    soundHit1[]={"weapons\bulletricochet1",0.0316228,1};

    soundHit2[]={"weapons\bulletricochet2",0.0316228,1};

    soundHit3[]={"weapons\bulletricochet3",0.0316228,1};

    soundHitMan1[]={"weapons\bullethitman1",0.0125893,1};

    soundHitMan2[]={"weapons\bullethitman2",0.0125893,1};

    soundHitArmor1[]={"weapons\small_impact1",0.0316228,1};

    soundHitArmor2[]={"weapons\Big_Impact2",0.0316228,1};

    soundHitBuilding1[]={"weapons\bulletricochet4",0.0316228,1};

    soundHitBuilding2[]={"weapons\bulletricochet5",0.0316228,1};

    hitGround[]={"soundHit1",0.33,"soundHit2",0.33,"soundHit3",0.33};

    hitMan[]={"soundHitMan1",0.5,"soundHitMan2",0.5};

    hitArmor[]={"soundHitArmor1",0.7,"soundHitArmor2",0.3};

    hitBuilding[]={"soundHitBuilding1",0.5,"soundHitBuilding2",0.5};

    cartridge="FxCartridge";

    cost=0.7;

    };

    class BulletBurst:BulletSingle

    {

    minRange=0.5;

    minRangeProbab=0.25;

    midRange=70;

    midRangeProbab=0.5;

    maxRange=250;

    maxRangeProbab=0.08;

    visibleFire=25;

    audibleFire=25;

    visibleFireTime=5;

    cost=2.0999999;

    };

    class BulletFullAuto:BulletBurst

    {

    cost=2.5;

    };

    class BulletSilencedSingle:BulletSingle

    {

    hit=8;

    indirectHit=1;

    indirectHitRange=0.1;

    visibleFire=0.035;

    audibleFire=0.035;

    visibleFireTime=2;

    tracerColor[]={0,0,0,0.005};

    tracerColorR[]={0,0,0,0.005};

    };

    class BulletSilencedBurst:BulletBurst

    {

    hit=8;

    indirectHit=1;

    indirectHitRange=0.1;

    visibleFire=0.05;

    audibleFire=0.05;

    visibleFireTime=2;

    tracerColor[]={0,0,0,0.005};

    tracerColorR[]={0,0,0,0.005};

    };

    class BulletSniper:BulletSingle

    {

    hit=10;

    indirectHit=2;

    indirectHitRange=0.1;

    minRange=1;

    minRangeProbab=0.1;

    midRange=200;

    midRangeProbab=0.8;

    maxRange=900;

    maxRangeProbab=0.05;

    cost=2;

    tracerColor[]={0,0,0,0.005};

    tracerColorR[]={0,0,0,0.005};

    };

    class Bullet7_6:BulletSingle

    {

    airLock=1;

    hit=8;

    indirectHit=2;

    indirectHitRange=0.1;

    minRange=1;

    minRangeProbab=0.9;

    midRange=100;

    midRangeProbab=0.5;

    maxRange=450;

    maxRangeProbab=0.05;

    cost=4;

    };

    class Bullet12_7:Bullet7_6

    {

    hit=13;

    indirectHit=4;

    indirectHitRange=0.2;

    minRange=4;

    minRangeProbab=0.9;

    midRange=200;

    midRangeProbab=0.5;

    maxRange=500;

    maxRangeProbab=0.05;

    cost=6;

    };

    I'm guessing minRange is the minimum range with which the AI will engage an enemy using that bullet type and maxRange being the max range at which the AI will engane an enemy. What does Probab mean?

    I want to increase the engagement ranges like so:

    Rifle - 500 metres

    Machinegun - 800 metres

    M2 - 1200 metres

    I have highlighted (bold and italics) two other sections that I am unsure of but would they relate to machineguns?

  16. Posted

    I was looking for a high dispersion script from way back by GeneralCoder but all the links I found were dead.

    I did, however, find this post on ofpec (you need to scroll to the last post).

    I have the first piece of code in my init. I have the .sqf file itself in my mission folder and I run the eventHandler in the init of the enemy group leader (how can I execute it for the whole group?). The problem is I get an error at the top of the screen each time he fires.

    The init.sqs

    myTAG_dispersion = preprocessFile "dispersion.sqf"

    The eventHandler:

    this addEventHandler ["fired",{_bul = (nearestObject [(vehicle this), _this select 4)]; [_this select 0,_bul,(velocity _bul),(speed _bul)] call myTAG_dispersion}]

    The dispersion.sqf:

    private ["_sht","_prj","_vel","_spd","_dispA","_dispB"];

_sht = _this select 0; 
_prj = _this select 1;
_vel = _this select 2;
_spd = _this select 3;

_dispA = (_spd*(0.03-(skill _sht)/100));
_dispB = _dispA*2;

_prj setVelocity [(_vel select 0) - _disp + random(_dispB),(_vel select 1) - _disp + random(_dispB),(_vel select 2) - _disp + random(_dispB)];

  18. Posted

    Hello,Aldo.

    You can change the reload animation.But once you do,it is used for every weapon of that type.Because you are animating the character.And the animations are shared for all character models.Much like 3rd person view in counterstrike.

    What you have in the image is first person view.As far as I know,those animations are packaged with the model for the weapon and hands.Which is why they can be different.

    :)

    Wasn't there some sort of scripted anim pack done by ORCS back in the day where there were anims for rifle, mg, RPG and so on? I didn't try it but I do remember reading it was quite buggy.

  24. Posted · Edited by Snafu

    And then you like to ignore them and insult people when your arguments don't hiold up to examination.

    You haven't produced any sources at all.

    The South Koreans did not acquit themselves well in the Korean War. They got instantly over run and had to be rescued.

    You are focusing one the initial part of the war where the ROK was surprised and not ready for such a fight what with being a new nation and that the US declared it outside of its core interests, hence not much aid in the way of development. The North had a head start considering that's where most of the industry was located.

    Just as you can expect them to again if it ever comes to it.

    Highly unlikely. They will never repeat 1950. Why? South Korea has a good military, industry and is much more prepared for such an eventuality.

    There is no point whatsoever in reading multiple or accredited sources, if you simply dismiss out of hand those that do not re-inforce your own personnal bias. You might as wekll not read anything at all if you already know everything before you turn the first page.

    As I said before you haven't produced anything.

    Suing the internet as your preferred source does not invalidate the information you recieve in anyway, but it does demonstrate your age.

    The internet is not my source. Reputable reports, articles, books and the like are my sources. It doesn't matter if they come from the internet or not. As long as what is produced is reputable. As I said earlier ones on the internet means that others can quite easily check them out.

    It also allows you to fall into those lazy habits of being able to produce quotes to reinforce your argument...and this being the internet... that could mean any argument you could imagine. When you only seek internet sources that reinforce your opinion, and not others, you are failing to read around the subject.

    You must be on a different planet from everybody else as producing quotes and sources is definitely not regarded as lazy. Quite the opposite in fact and is actively encouraged.

    I encourage you to use other forms of media in quest for knowledge. Ones which you cannot so readily manipulate to provide you with the answers you are most comfortable with hearing.

    I use you plenty, thank you very much, I have to. I am well aware of what's out there.

  25. Posted · Edited by Snafu

    I like to read a variety of sources instead of making stuff up like Cliff from Cheers. I also read reputable internet articles too and most of these are from Academic Journals since you can't get easily hard copies of them. Reputable internet sources are also good since other people can check them out easily.

    The South Koreans are not well famed for their military skills.

    The South Koreans acquitted themselves well in the Korean War. The initial advances less to do with their fighting ability and more to do with the fact that they simply weren't prepared. The South Koreans gained an excellent reputation during the Vietnam War (65-73). Furthermore, South Korean troops were deployed to Iraq. The South Korean military has actual recent operational experience unlike North Korea.

    More on the ROK in Vietnam. They were well respected for their tenacity.

    From 1965 the Republic of Korea deployed tens of thousands of ground troops to Vietnam. The Korean force level in Vietnam reached a high of 50,000 men in 1968, and the Koreans remained in Vietnam until the final US withdrawal in 1973. The Korean troops were respected for their tenacity, and US servicemen nicknamed them 'the RoKs'. As Army medical technician James Calbreath remembers, the Korean troops were believed to be ready to take on any military task, and to do so with enthusiasm:

    ...during Tet [1968] the VC had gotten into town, like they did into all towns, and had taken over the radio station and the TV station. And so they were broadcasting from the TV station and the ARVNs went in and they tried to get them out but they couldn't get them out. The US troops I don't think really ever tried to get them out. So they called in the Koreans, and the Koreans just drove a tank up in front of the building and just started firing and just literally blew the building to smithereens, went in, drug out the dead VC and hung them from a telephone pole. These were the people who were protecting us, "It sounds good to me." The Koreans were tough and crazy.

    From: Voices from Vietnam Eye-witness accounts of the war, 1954-1975 by Richard Burks Verrone and Laura M. Calkins (2005). p. 107.

    Even though South Vietnam was defeated it is irrelevant because victory in that war hinged upon the US. The ROK did not deploy enough troops to have a decisive effect. Quite clearly, they performed well.

    P.S., if you want basis in reality, just check the scores for this year.

    North Korea... 1 warship with a full crew, 2-4 marines and a mashed up military base.

    South Korea...nothing.

    These two small incidents do not provide enough information to analyse the performance of South Korea in a conventional war against the North.

    And why stop there. If you wish to read about about things before you dare give us your opinion... Why not explore all their track record in living history. Beaten by the Japs. Beaten by the Yanks. Beaten by the North Koreans. Beaten by the Vietnamese...

    South Koreans have a useless army. You don't see the North Koreans having to wait for the Chinese army to show up before they feel strong enough to start posturing.

    When one of the worlds richest most developed nations cannot defend itself against one of the worlds poorest... it is not because their army is so amazing.

    Another highly dubious sweeping statement.

    As far as I am aware the ROK still exists so I am not sure how they were defeated by the DPRK. Also, you do realise your list goes beyond partition so you're lumping North and South Koreans as one and then separating them post-partition? So, what are you saying, all Korean are all bad fighters and all ways will be because of history? Honestly, your point makes little sense.

    What matters:

    a) Training

    b) Doctrine

    b) Equipment

    c) Planning

    d) Morale

    e) Competent leadership

    f) Logistics

    etc.

    Not historical track record. It may factor in some way (morale) but it is hardly decisive. Furthermore, you can't use events from the past, where warfare and Korea was completely different, and state that the modern ROK military is 'useless'.

    The North Korean posturing has little to do with belief in some sort of military superiority over the ROK. It's posturing for primarily for political reasons.The DPRK obviously does not share your assessment of the South Korean military, otherwise, they would have tried to invade again. You also ignore the position of modern China on the DPRK.

×