Apollo

Well ,if it's possible to balance to workload of the server by using multiple server's in an aray with a mainframe ,then that would provide for the posibilety to play with maybe hundred's of people.That ,although maybe hard to implement ,would mean one of the best addon abilety's of OFP ever and make Ofp definitly the best Multiplayer game at the moment. I find that OFP really needs this possibilety to support so many people.Eventually ,the OFP map's can be pretty big ,but the server can't really support enough players to give that map the feeling of being pretty filled.The size of the maps rather fits to play with a number of about a few hundred players rather than a few dozen's. It's what's making a game like WWII online somewhat popular ,since it's about the only MP game over the net that can be played by hundred's of people ,but at a high prize. I think if BIS would add the posibilety to do this ,and maybe provide a first 300+ player server array for the community ,this game could get very popular early on. So i wan't to put forward a motion to support me in demanding BIS to try to achieve this. Please second and support me people in this motion so BIS knows that many people want this.

This is the beta version of my first Mp Ctf map. (made with inv1944 addon's) Basicly beta becasue im still searching for a script to get unlimited mortar ammo.I may also include  map borders in a later version ,when i figure out how to do it. So although it's about finished ,it's should be tested first. Any comments are welcome ,cconstructive criticism is good. the link: http://a4.grp.yahoofs.com/v1....bel.pbo

Or maybe if thy figure out a way to use multiple computer's in a server array ,like five computer's forming 1 128 players server. I have absolutly no idea whatsoever if this would be possible.

Well ,if some armor is not included one can always build mission's with the inv1944 infantry unit's and some armor downloaded from Ww2Ec ,some of the armor models there are good quality and well balanced.

the map is available at http://www.flashpoint.ru/ It's a russian site ,you can find it by scrolling somewhat down on the news screen (main of site) to where the picture's are posted and click the the words below of that news message for there are the links in.

It's just an idea i had recently.What if ,in place of creating whole island's ,mapmakers would create a number of smaller city maps.The sort of maps you have reguraly in he close combat series for ex. . One could create a number of for ex. ardennes style building's and use them to create a number of town or small city maps the size of about 1 square kilometer or less ,thus representing one town for ex. like Houfalize or Bastogne ,etc.Advantage's would be that it would take much less time to create such maps ,so you could create much more of them.Combat would be more concentrated and static artilery would have more use.Disatvantage's is that it would be quite useless for human players to get in plane pilot role ,these maps could only be used for that one battle. (although it would be highly replayable ,and you could use a number of such maps to form a campaign) If i would have been a map maker i would start right away.It would be much more interresting for ex. to build a smal 1 square kilometer map for a beach landing for ex. than building a whole Normandy map.Like i said ,making these small maps probably wouldn't take all that much time.It would still be the size of let's say 10 DOD or Mohaa maps. Or am i just thinkg of a OFP CC mod? Just another question.if you play on such smaller maps ,does that mean less lag thus more people can play toghether?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> I'm actually amazed that we haven't lost more Bradleys during the incursions into the center of Baghdad.  The Iraqi anti-tank teams must be really inept at staging tank ambushes as even the M1 tank can have it's tracks blown off and RPG shots from upper floors of buildings should be able to penetrate areas around the hatches and other areas of the M1.  The Chechnyans were masters at tank killing during the various Russian assaults on the city of  Grozny.  Apparently the Iraqis really did not prepare very much for urban warfare in the same way that the Chechnyans did. <span id='postcolor'> Actually ,the Chechens use an other tactic to take out tanks.They lay an big amount of explosives near a road where they suspect armor or supply's to come by, and they strap an ignition with a GSM to activate it.They wait in a building not far from the ambush place overlooking it ,and when they see armor come by they just give the bomb a phonecall.

As long as people arn't going to change the game so that one can see infantry on radar screen's in multiplayer ,i have nothing against this.

Flare's would be could IMHO ,but i'm wondering if it could work ,if you would shoot an AA heat seeking rocket to a jet with flares if the rocket would actually be distracted from the flare. That said ,AFAIK flares only work for heat seeking missile's (not laser guided one's) so they should be usseless against thing's like Strela launcher's ,and i surely never seen a heat seeking missile in ofp before ,only laser guided one's.

this Chechen's site video section is really amazing.You can download a shitload of long video clip's showing Chechen rebels ambushing russian troop's ,destroying apc's and such with rpg launcher's and explosive's ,and even see them take down helicopter's.It's absolutly the most amazing footage i ever seen of guerilla warfare in a war torn country.

There is also something called "winace" to extract ace archive's.Although winrar works fine to. www.winace.com/

Anybody know where i can find the addon used for this picture? Looks freaking awesome.

Let's not forget those great siege artillery piece's the german's had on their track's during WW2 ,although i don't know their names anymore ,i think "Big Bertha" was one of them ,would be nice to see them modeled in Ofp.Could be cool for sabotage or siege mission's.

Hi all.I play ofp a lot in multiplayer ,and i like it very much.One thing it lack's though is various server's that could run various mods. There are lot's of addon's comming out for resistance ,but a problem is that server's will only run mods if they come in complete package's ,like the vietnam mod. (seb nam pack) You see a lot of nice ww2 addon's for ex. ,like the converted Mohaa weapon's and the WWIIEC vehicle's ,though they are never used online as they are not part of a complete package.That is because most people wouldn't have all addon's ,so few would be able to connect to a server that uses different wwII addon's. So the logical thought is to talk with various wwII addon makers (or other adoon's from specific period's) to make a compilation package with all the best WWII addon's in there ,so that people only should get that one package if they want to play a online WWII game.That would make it more interesting for server's to run that mod package. Can it be done ,has it been tried before?

I just wished upminder didn't put all these weapon's under East side ,even the allied weapons.

Is there uberhaupt then a good nuke addon still available for download?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Absolute monarchs puppets? What makes them puppets? Just because they are freinds and allies of America doesn't make them puppets. Britain isn't a puppet, nor is Saudi Arabia. Better co-operation than hostility.<span id='postcolor'> Having 25% of world's oil and not an adequate army to defend it would make any country dependant on a superpower anyhow.The strategecal importance of that oil,on a global scale ,is to important to not be defended. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Most of the world lives in poverty. I think the Monarchy beats the viable alternatives, democracy not being one of them.<span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I was talking about how democracy is not likley to provide an alternative to monarchy in Saudi Arabia. Radical elements would de-rail democratic endevour, so in the mean time I was saying the House of Saud is best for Saudi Arabia.<span id='postcolor'> A govermental system is defacto not a determinal factor for economical strenth ,a govermental system of any kind ,like democracy for ex. may differ in it's effective form due to the situation of the Country it govern's.Indeed most country's live in poverty ,but not all country's have the economical wealth and potential that Saudi Arabia has.I am not against monarchy at all ,i am from the oppinion that changing any govermental system in any country can be quite dangerous ,as it can lead to civil war or destabilize the country greatly. I only make the point on the level of leadership ,the saudi arabian monarchy has done a very bad job.Instead of using the massive oil supply revenue's to build an economy for it's citizin and further strentghening the stabilety in their country ,they have used that wealth to hold party's and buy luxury ship's and more useless squandering of that kind.The social gap in saudi Arabia is just so big ,and with the potential of t's soil Saudi arabia could have been a modernized economy providing the majority of it's citizin with job's ,social benifit's ,education and the likes. But even today ,most high qualified industrial position's in Saudi Arabia are filled in by Foureigner's. I wouldn't critizise any leader for the govermental system he function's in ,but i tend to respect more those leader's that show compasion for it's citizin's ,give's them hope and direction's ,help's them to his full potential ,simple leader's that show leadership. See ,i'm from Belgium ,a constituate monarchy.And from all the monarch's Belgium has had i can show the better one's and the worser one's.Good old WWI hero King AlbertI being the best one ,Money squandering Zaire Colony exploiting king LeopoldII the most worse one.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Saudi Arabia is one of the more prosperous in the Middle East.<span id='postcolor'> Well the member's of the upper class and the monarchy are stinking rich ,but that's only a very small part of the population.Most of the Saudi Arabian coman people live in poverty. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The house of Saud is infinatley preferable than Bin Laden's theocracy he wants in the country.<span id='postcolor'> I agree in the sense that the house of Saud are good puppet's of the American's ,and that Nato influence over this region is very important for economicel reason's.But on the personal level i have no symphaty whatsoever for the Saudi Arabian monarchy.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hurray! Our position as the worlds premier arms exporter is un-assailed!<span id='postcolor'> Hmm that's something to be proud on.

America comming in millitary conflict again with Iraq is pretty probable ,even for still this year.Multiple reason's come in mind why America (or just Bush) would start a war on Iraq: 1: Oil ,wich is (like for every other country) and super-important strategical resource ,and as thus also maintaining the security of America's oil supply's.Iraq being ,along Iran one of those country's that can seriously hamper that supply.Wich would be a more longterm conflict ,as it is almost now.(e.g has there really been peace between the u.s and Iraq the last five year) 2: War on Terrorism & Propaganda ,as thing's arn't going overly well in America at this moment in economic terms ,the war on terror is a good way to distract the attention of the general American poppulace on a matter that is almost the revenge of a nation (for 11sept) ,a "greatly justified" action that let's Bush popularity rise per square kilometer that is carpet bombed. 3: Destabilizing a "roughe country". (Country's that trying to produce nuke's and hate America) And then i would say that it's all three of these reason's ,Oil being the long term goal ,roughe country killing the middle term goal and propaganda and war on terror the short term goal.Oil eventually being the most important one ,and almost the eventual source of all problem's in the Middle East. If the middle East had never contained oil All the above probably never had to happen anyway ,and the face of the middle east would be tottaly different. Now has the U.S the right to do all this for Oil? That's really a hard debate.As European i would say the following thing's: I do not perfectly agree with all American Action's in time's of war's ,nor do i think that all the war's America engage's in are justified.But eventually it serve's the European need for these strategic resource's to ,low energy price's are always good for economy's ,and America's oil baring Satelite states in the Middle East. (Saoudi Arabia ,Koewait ,Qatar,...) Furthermore ,if the "Civilized world" would lose the supply of these recource's their economy would be severly hurt.And eventually Nato isn't the only block that is using millitary power to secure these recource's ,if it hadn't secured them other country's ,like Russia or China would be keen to secure those region's themself's. Conclusion: A country/regoin with plenty of oil in it's soil is bound to have Very good friend's and/or big enemy's ,and probably lot's of conflict.No wonder why the middle east is a time bomb. And then there's also religion and culture ,wich vague out the true reason's of those conflict's. No wonder America want's to get Osama Bin laden.He's is a Saudi Arabian ultimatly planning to overtrow the pro-American  monarchy in his mother country. (that bring's about 25% of the oils supply in the world (opec world i presume) and hold's about 40% of the oil in the middle east) See Osama might be trying to let this conflict look like a religous war ,he's eventuall goal is to make Saudi Arabia a more fundamentalist ,anti American Nation. Both America and Osama are striving goal's in that region that are very worldly.Justifying them can be tricky if you take in to consideration humankind's history ,and taking them into comparison to the conflict's happening now.Does for ex. the Colonization of the world by Europe defer much from the imperialistic Foureign policy America is using now? Isn't Osama bin laden not more than a sort of "freedom fighter" using Terrorism and Religion to maximize his eventual power ,all pretty frighting as it is? How justifiable or un-justifiable are these thing's in a worldly contex. Eventually i think that in the future people will look at these conflict's in these way's. The real historical stupidecy lies in the Monarchy of Saudi Arabia.If only they wouldn't have Saodi Arabia the social mess it is now.If only they wouldn't have been 1000 fat prince's with each 50 bankaccount's ,50 luxury Car's ad 50 woman.If only they would have made Saudi Arabia a nation.

Hello I'm in the making of a COOP mission ,and i wan't all the playable soldiers to only have a sidearm and some grenades.Now i made a little script with in there all commands. (removeweapon ,addweapon ,addmagazine's and removemagazine's for previous weapon, etc...) Now i let this script run from the command line with the command [] exec "myscript.sqs". This script run's fine if i only use it in the comand line of One unit (e.g the player soldier) ,but it only run's once if i put the exec line in the command line of Multiple unit's ,so only 1 soldiers gear is changed. How can i make all unit's run that same script?