AngusHeaf
-
Content Count
222 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Posts posted by AngusHeaf
-
-
I thought I would go ahead and post a picture of the current model. Everyone likes pictures and it's gotta be more interesting than reading my ramblings.
Model is about 95% finished with just a few more things left. Now that it's mostly done I'm actually considering also doing a fixed position launcher that is basically the 4 missile launcher with a stationary base instead of the M113 body. Might be useful. I may also add some more pieces of kit to the sides of the body. Could use a big roll of camo netting. May even make version with deployed camo nets.
-
Ah excellent. Thanks for the heads-up! One of those tricky little OFP quirks that you don't know about unless you read these forums daily I guess. Sort of like the problems with missiles firing from wheeled vehicles.
-
I don't see any reasn why the rockets wouldn't actually come off and so far the people that I've talked to who know a lot more than me about this sort of thing (not hard cause I know zero) say that the missiles are quite doable. So we'll see. Anyways, yes blackdog you get to do the converting. Hehe. Don't worry I'll do all the LODS and stuff for ya.
-
Well, my search to find a suitable 1985 vintage mobile SAM addon for the west has pretty much turned up nothing. So I thought to myself that maybe I would throw my best attempt into the ring and see what happens. Here's the skinny...
I'm a decent 3d modeller/skinner with zero experience in OFP. I will completely design and build the M730A2 system in 3d Studio Max (which I understand is reasonably compatible with OFP/O2) and see if I can enlist the help of some willing partners to do the CPP and conversion from 3dsmax to OFP. I have some help already but please feel free to speak up if you're willing to give me a hand with this as I can use all the help I can get.
I modeled a good portion of the vehicle yesterday and right now I"m about ready to start skinning and texturing (later this afternoon). Check out this early screenshot straight from Max. Nothing fancy, just facet lighting and edged polys so you can get the basic idea. Triangle count is right at 2,000 (is that high, low, just right?) and I still need to remove a bunch when I glue the two halves of the body together (that's why there's a seam in the middle).
http://www.mphasemedia.com/extranet/flashpoint/m730_01.jpg
I posted the pic inline before but it's just too big and makes the forum get all nasty and wide. So just click on that link up there. Thanks!
-
Fantastic job. At first I loaded up my game and dropped it into Everon, started up the preview and *GACK* wow was it ugly. I thought, "omg bait and switch!" Then I realized that I had my textures turned down to 128, haha. Anyways, backed them up to 1024 and the thing is amazing looking, truly top shelf. I can count the amount of add-ons that are up to even BIS caliber on one hand and this is one of the even fewer that go beyond it. Bravo!
VTOL is actually quite nice. I don't know what's to gripe about. I guess it's a drag that we can't use W and Z to increase/descrease thrust when in VTOL mode but eh, it's cool. Also, I read the directions and promptly threw them out. Hehe. VTOL goes like so...
1. Engine on
2. VTOL on
3. Increase thrust til you're about 40 high
4. Hit E and start to pull up. Bingo you're flying
5. DO NOT set STOL to on otherwise VTOL disappears never to come back (bug I think). Instead just turn VTOL off and start flying.
I noticed the landing gear takes 2 clicks to raise. Bug? Like I said about, STOL set to on makes VTOL On disappear and never come back. Bug? Pilot error? The landing gear has a nasty habit of automatically coming down when I fly low. Annoying quirk. If you bank left/right when in VTOL above 110kph then slow below 100kph in VTOL and still banking the plane gets stuck in the bank. Weirdness that's easily corrected (line up straight when landing so you don't need to adjust).
Landing in VTOL is actually pretty easy... slow to stall speed (110) at about 40m and line up straight at your landing point cause you can't adjust after you go into VTOL. Turn on VTOL and start decreasing thrust til you eventually go nose-first into the ground (don't worry it won't hurt...bad) and cut the engine. Takes practice but it's definitely doable.
Now all it needs it to be painted like the USMC and given a bunch of ground-pounding weapons like LGBs and AT rockets and it will probably make it into the CTI tournament I'm working on. Whoo!
P.S. Get those rapiers released so I can replace the Vulcan in CTI with your missile system. Hehe. Prod prod.
-
I'm really tempted at this point to just make the M730 Chaparal model and skin. I'm quite capable of doing it in 3DS but I don't have the time to learn how to use that bungled Oxygen program. I have enough on my plate with trying to get this CTI tournament up and running (and putting food on the table for my 34 illegitimate kids). What's a man to do?!
I might play around with 3DS and see what I can crank out. The model would be little more than some rockets and some boxes. can't be THAT hard to model and skin. Maybe if I post some screens eventually someone will take interest and help with the CPP and all that other crap i don't know about. Or maybe Marfy will be my great czech hero and release a M730 tomorrow afternoon.
A guy can have dreams can't he?!
-
All of that would indeed be a beautiful thing. Then for multiplayer all we would need is someone to do many of the same things to the SU25 and the major servers might actually consider using the two of them as replacements in multiplayer. It's a real shame when add-ons aren't used in adversarial multiplayer because there's no russian balanced item.
-
I gotta tell ya, even 1800m view distance is pretty awesome. Especially when you're sitting on the ground next to a battery of AAA or SAMs that start firing at incoming jets at 4:30am with all the pretty red sky. Mmmmmm.
-
Thanks for the info guys!
I just went and downloaded the M109 ADTS and boy oh boy did I chew up some planes. A bit too much chewing though. I jumped into a frogfoot and tried my luck against 2 of them on a hill and it was just horrible. I'm no slouch pilot but for the life of me I had no chance and could only take out the two of them about 25% of the time. The other 75% of the time the damn things shot their huge missiles at me at what looked like mach 5. No chance of escape. I also noticed that the vehicle had the resistance muzzleflash bug. Oof. So basically the M109 isn't gonna cut it.
The chaparal looks really sweet actually. Now all I have to do is talk someone into building one for the CTI project and we're set. Hah! The rapier missiles look neat but so far I'm not thrilled with the one that is out there. It requires a few different addons, has a weird installer that I don't want to deal with, and isn't exactly mobile which would mean scripting it so it can be deployed from a truck then moved later. I'm looking forward to the Falklands mod version but I don't know if they will release it in time for WarGames CTI Tournament.
Btw, does someone sit between the rockets in the Chaparal? What a strange looking critter. Hard to tell if it's coming or going. Haha. I did read that it's basically a M113 chasis which is perfect. Now to find a willing addon maker...
-
Ah, yes relative to the other add-on planes you are correct. I didn't quite understand that you were coming from that angle. Then again, no one uses those planes in multiplayer missions on the popular servers so I haven't really tried them. It would indeed suck if the hornet and tornado turned out to be better at bustin' tanks than the A10. That's just silliness! God I hate not being able to lock on a target with the A10 cannon. And engaging from a distance of 1000m is indeed crappy. However I think a big issue there is because OFP runs at 600m visibility so you're engaging from even closer. Sadly, a year or three from now when systems get powerful and everyone has the horsepower we'll finally be able to all turn up the view distance to 3000m and be happy.
On a side note. It would be really nice to see someone do a proper LGB A10 loadout. I'm tired of looking at those goofy incorrect bombs on there. Heh!
-
I used to solidly reside in the "A10 Cannon is Gimpy" camp. Every since the beginning I wondered what the hell was wrong with the A10 in OFP and why they made it so whimpy in that respect. Lately, with my pilot skills be tested though, I have come to a new decission about the current (1.90 for me) A10.
The cannon is sufficiently powerful. Yes, that's right...a once staunch supporter of making the A10 far better at chewing through armor has come around as of late. And I'll tell you why....
I started practicing!
Shocking, I know. It took me a solid week of a couple hours of flight time per day but at this point I would say that the I with a little bit of thought to my attack vector and angle, I can chew a T80 and spit it out in one single pass 80% of the time on a fixed target. All it requires is an accurate 2-3 second burst from the gun. Here's the trick...
Start out small. Go into the mission editor and put BMPs on the ground and practicing starting your attack dives (obviously a dive is necessary) from about 800m altitude. The important thing, and the thing that takes practice, is judging your speed and distance from the target. I have my figures all worked out but I'm not giving them out for competitive reasons of course. Hehe. Needless to say, I find that the slower the better because OFP's shakey-ass flight dynamics makes corrections with the rudder IMPOSSIBLE above a speed of 200. Oh, another trick to practicing is to turn up your view distance to 1400 which makes a huge difference because radar isn't accurate enough for firing the cannon at unseen tanks. Work your way up from BMPs. If you guys think that I'm totally BSing you guys I'll get off my lazy ass and record a video of me doing it. Did I mention I fly with keyboard and mouse? My technique is not easy and I often find myself using 3 fingers on the keyboard hand and 2 on the mouse.
I think what the A10 really needs is to be more maneuverable. The thing has no power half the time and I've seen A10 videos of them powering away from targets and pulling sick rolls and turns that just aren't possible in OFP. At times it seems that the A10 is falling out of the sky but it is far improved from the early days when it was basically unflyable. I think a lot of you just want to fly around and not practice. it's not an easy task to learn but I urge you guys to try it out for a week.
I agree about the Maverick issues. They're way too easy to use. You can tab-lock through a half dozen targets in one pass and kill EVERYTHING in your path. Surely they aren't that fast acquiring/firing in real life.
Oh and yeah, shilkas are crappy against A10s. In multiplayer a human-manned shilka has ZERO chance of hitting the target. AI seem to be 1000% better in shilkas, but even a full skill shilka can be defeated by simply flying higher than 1000 and using mavs. And just in case you guys want to complain about not being able to use the cannon to engage targets when under heavy ground fire... that's right actually. They don't use the gun unless their's little chance of AA or AAA fire. Duh!
-
Here's the skinny....
I need a mobile SAM replacement for the Vulcan. I'm looking into this for an upcoming WarGames CTI Tournament and I would like to replace the Vulcan and Shilka with rocket equivalents to cut down on the fierocious server lag created by a battery of AAA guns firing at incoming aircrafts.
So far I've found a good (perfect really) replacement for the Shilka with the SA-13 Gopher from the Maarfy stuff. But I just can't find anything that is actually 1985 Cold War vintage for the US side to use. Did the americans have something similar even? I have been combing fas.org but can't find anything in particular beyond the M3 Linebacker which is too new (and a last ditch choice IMO). I was expecting to find something like a M113 with rocket boxes but can't find info on anything to see if they even exist.
So I need two things... I would appreciate anyone with info on real life cold war era mobile SAMs (US). A name even. Something that is roughly equal to a SA-13. If by chance you know of a particularlly well-suited OFP addon that's already out there, let me know about that too!
Thanks a bunch. Usually I can find this stuff but lately I've been losing my edge! Too much CTI, clearly.
-
Looks nice. Though I would suggest making the rifle a good bit longer even if the hand placement isn't exactly right on a properly sized rifle. Check out this video from Iraq. At the 1 minute mark of the video someone fires a barrett light 50 and you can see just how enormous the rifle is compared to an average joe.
mms://bskybwm.fplive.net/bskyb/news2/p2_20030401cnbb.asf
-
Let it be known first off that I happen to have recently fallen in love with the Bradley within the past week. That story in a second... Anyways, I would be happier than hell to just see the ability to still rotate the turrets of many vehicles while turned out. God I find that so unbelievably annoying. It would also be nice to see those guys from the Desert OFP project remodel everything in OFP since they seem to do a really spot-on job (need to release more things though!!
. I'm curious though about the HE/AP rounds. I know that AP rounds in recent Brads are DU and don't necessarily explode into a little ball of fire like AP rounds hitting the ground in OFP. But do the HE rounds do that in real life?Oh and my recent story about the OFP Brads involves me playing a 3 hour game of CTI wherein I got the jump (from about a 10 o'clock angle no less) on 2 travelling T80s. The groups consisted of 1 full AI control T80 and 1 with a human gunner commanding the pair with an AI drive, my 3 Brads, 2 full AI control, me gunning lead Brad with AI driver. I chewed them both up right horribly. After roasting both and taking only a glancing shot to the rear Brad we proceeded to down a Mi17 which FFARed me to death but my goonsquad in the leftover Brads cleaned up. I'm now thoroughly convinced that OFP Brads, in multiplayer, if used in a pack can chew up things to great effect ONLY if they get the first shot off and keep moving. And that's my little story that I'm so proud of I've told a dozen times now... I'm so pathetic.
-
So I guess the big question in my mind is the following... Can we expect a replacement of all the standard BIS units and vehicles with these realworld numbers? I love add-ons as much as the next guy but having them standardized on some system isn't much good if the rest of the vehicles and weapons in the game aren't on the same standard. Is it even possible to replace all these values in the existing vehicles, weapons, ammo?
-
Count me in for anything with laser guided bombs. Multiplayer needs more LGBs in adversarial play, but sadly that means that people on east team will whine about not having any. So what's the solution? What sort of LGBs and LGB capable things do those wiley commies have floating around the market? I understand there's at least one LGB for the Su25 but I'm unsure what sort of laser targetting it uses (plane vs. handheld). Any ideas?
Also, I'd give up having 90% of the plane mods people release for an A10 with a properly powerful cannon that is worth a damn against armor. I won't get into this since I know it's been talked to death, but I don't see a need for anymore things that fly and fire missiles from 2km away and don't add anything to adversarial multiplayer (2 team). Call me old fashioned I guess. Â
A working VTOL Harrier would be the one thing I could see as a really nice addition to OFP though. That way Everon games could take place with both teams having jet power since there's only one airfield. Again, ground attack weapons, LGBs, dumb bombs, AT rockets... It's already well within the ability of many pilots I play with to shoot each other down with the 30mm cannons in dogfights, so there's no need for AA missiles unless you want people to end fights based on who can tab-lock on radar targets first and fire.
But of course all my comments come from a 2-team multiplayer standpoint...
-
Having read through the posts and concepts here I can say that I think this idea is 100% A+. I totally agree with Sigma about the idea of reality yielding better gameplay. In my seasoned opinion the best missions are those that adhere closer to real life than to teams with exactly equal ammo, exactly balanced vehicles, and a couple of random flags spaced evenly apart from the teams (multiplayer adversarial of course). Suffice it to say it's far more strategic if you're playing in a tournament on a mission where you have plan both sides, not just plan for one side and then use the same plan on the other side.
This concept of reality yielding better gameplay can be directly applied to vehicles, weapons, and all that good stuff that you guys are working on and I think that's great. OFP needs more thinking (and less G36s, hehe). That's not to say OFP is brainless, farbeit from the truth. OFP already requires quite a bit of thought but it would be nice to take it to that next level. I just hope you guys get things together before OFP dries up and becomes just a bunch of nostalgic oldtimers waiting for OFP2 and holding themselves over with mods. Â
Anyhow... One final thing I want to add about the Abrams that comes out of the current war with Iraq. A shining example that wholely underpowered weapons can be effective is illustrated in one of the recently lost (first ever) Abrams which was hit from behind with an RPG that started a cook-off of ammo and left it disabled. I know right now in OFP that the rear of the tanks is quite a vulnerable spot (in all tanks actually), but clearly not like it is in real life. Check out this link for the full story...
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1717992.php
Good luck with the project. I really REALLY hope you guys get this thing in gear and out to the folks. I for one would love to see it available and possibly included in some of the more sanctioned add-on packs!
-
So I'm working on a mortar deployment script to go along with Upminder's russian mortar. For those you know how mortars work in real life with aiming stakes you will get the idea. But I'll go into that later. Anyways, I need help with a script that's beyond my mathematical abilities.
Basically, I want to take an object and get the direction it is aiming [not a problem]. Now the mortar I'm using as a 90 degree cone of fire [not a problem]. In front of the mortar I want to place 4 pole objects. Each pole should be 5m away from the mortar and evenly spaced 30 degrees apart within the 90 degree cone of fire [problem]. Look at diagram below...
If the red square at the bottom of my diagram is the mortar (or gun or whatever) object I'm getting the direction on, then the blue squares are the 4 different objects I want to position in front of it. Notice how the dashed line formed a 90 degree cone. If you divide that cone into 3 sections (with 4 total poles) then each slice of the pie so to speak is 30 degrees. Get the idea? Obviously the problem is that the direction of the first object isn't always going to be a nice number like 0, 90, 180, 360.
Basically, I don't know how to do the trig required to calculate the correct values so that I can then setPos my poles. I'm rusty with my Pythagorean Theorum when it comes to calculating triangles when you know 2 angles and the hypotenuse. Any help on how I would calculate where these poles go?
-
Crapola. Damn variable names. That'll teach me to change my variable names after coding things. ABS should be "sealeveltrig". However, fixing that error does not clear up the scalar bool array error. So that's not it.
By the way, that error came when I was cutting my script out of the mission I'm working on so I could upload a map with just the height script.In working form (script form not function form) the script doesn't seem to set the trigger at sea-bed Z value like you suggest. At least I don't think it is considering if I stand right on the shore my sealevel height is 0. But even if it did, ultimately I'm only writing this script so that I can calculate the difference between two sealevel heights. So it's not a big deal.
Any idea why it's still not working?
-
Ok well, for those of you who don't want to download, unzip, and run the files I included I'll include the important stuff below... I realized a lot of you might have A.D.D. Â
MISSION.SQM
3 objects on map. 1 soldier (man), 1 jeep (jeep), 1 trigger (sealeveltrig). Man has "[man,jeep] exec "logic_getheightdif.sqs"" as INIT. This starts the script going.
INIT.SQS
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">sealeveltrig setPos [0,0,0];
GetHeight = preProcessFile "func_getheight.sqf"<span id='postcolor'>
LOGIC_GETHEIGHTDIF.SQS
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">; *************************************************************************************
; Initialize input variables
_obj1 = _this select 0;
_obj2 = _this select 1;
sealeveltrig setPos [0,0,0];
; *************************************************************************************
; Find height of each of the two objects above sea level and then calc the difference
_obj1h = [_obj1] call GetHeight
_obj2h = [_obj2] call GetHeight
_dif = _obj1h - _obj2h
hint format ["Debug Info...\nObj1h: %1 \nObj2h: %2 \nDif: %3", _obj1h, _obj2h, _dif]<span id='postcolor'>
FUNC_GETHEIGHT.SQF
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">// *************************************************************************************
// Initialize variables
_obj = _this select 0;
// *************************************************************************************
// Find the height of the object
sealeveltrig setPos [0,0,0];
_3ddist = _obj distance ABS;
_a = (getpos _obj select 0)^2;
_b = (getpos _obj select 1)^2;
_2ddist = sqrt (_a + _b);
objh = sqrt ((_3ddist ^ 2) - (_2ddist ^ 2))<span id='postcolor'>
Somewhere along the way the function is not passing any values back to the script Logic_GetHeightDif.sqs. Or perhaps the function isn't running at all, it's damn hard to tell.
-
I wrote an absolute sealevel function that, in my opinion, is more accurate than those that have come before. I know the scripting works but I'm trying to compartmentalize the code by making the sea level height script into a function.
To make a long story short, I'm at the end of my rope. I've looked at this function for hours and for some reason it refuses to work. I'm using OFP 1.90 and I've read all the coding references but still I get this bizarre bool array error when I try to output the height value to a hint (for debugging purposes). I'm calling the function from a script file that calls the function twice (to get the height of two objects) then calculate the difference in height between them.
Check out my files and PLEASE see if there's something I just missed in the way of syntax! Many thanks to anyone who helps.
-
Guess I'll toss in my 2 cents and see if I can come up with some original gripes that haven't already been mentioned. These are actually in no particular order but they're numbered for reference...
1) Â Missions with 99 of every weapon in every crate
2) Â Retarded people who hate snipers because they play missions that fit into #1 where there's more than 2 sniper rifles per side. Snipers don't suck, but that mission sure does! Pick a new map!
3) Â People who say they hate that horde of 2082350823 OFP cheaters out there. Hey guys, I've been playing for more than a year and I just saw my first confirmed cheat a month ago. You just need to play better or accept that maybe you're not Rambo.
4) People who come to the bigger FAST squad servers and have absolutely no idea how much they pay for those servers per month. Better still is when those people treat the squad guys like trash. We pay for it folks, so learn to live with some ocassional rules (I'm not saying TKing or giving you menial boring crap is acceptable though).
5) Â Seeing "XYZ is Recruiting the Best" yet I never see any of these squads in tournament play. Please come play, because even if you get last place in a tournament you WILL get better.
6) Â Squads who drop from tournaments because they were last place. Better still, squads who drop from a tournament before the season is over. See #5.
And last but not least...
7) Â If I hear "shock and awe" on CNN, MSNBC, Fox 'News', ABC, NBC, CBS, one more goddamn time I'm going to kill a kitten...or three!!
-
I always laugh when I see people griping about OFP multiplayer and how they just can't get into it because of all the impatient nattering noobs on public servers. Yet then they want to rejoice at how the game excels if you have patience and a head for strategy and so on. Somehow the fact that you need to have patience with any online community of gamers is lost of these folks. Heh.
So which came first... did the lack of interest of BIS to make MP all it could be stop any interest by players in their tracks, or did the lack of interest in MP by people who bought OFP:CWC cause BIS to think there was no interest in MP in the first place? It's like each side (players and company) point the finger and say "you cared less about multiplayer!!" Bizarre. Heh.
Either way aversarial multiplayer could be a lot better. Co-op in my mind is just an extension of single player (and I don't care about coop). Adversarily multiplayer could be many MANY times better in a lot of respects, and many of the ways are not directly fixed by BIS...
1) Mission editting is too difficult (BIS's fault). The biggest obsticle standing between more MP 2-team play is a lack of quality missions. I also think people WANT to make more interesting missions but quite frankly, it's too damn hard. Editors have the damnest time creating all but C&H and CTF missions. And even then those most basic missions are buggy half the time. Too much scripting, too little support (none) for multiplayer specific things, unbalanced weapons.
2) Computer requirements too high (BIS). This game has been out for how long? Almost 2 years I guess? Either way it's amazing how just NOW computers and framerates are catching up to acceptable levels. Server performance is horrible and it's no wonder no one hosts OFP servers. Server can't just be fast and get away with slower connections, or be hosted on fast connections and get away with slower servers... no, they need fast servers AND fast connections. I feel sorry for those soldiers I see playing OFP over at VBS1 website. Those notebooks can't possibly be any good for OFP.
3) Not enough teams compete (our fault). Tournament play brings up the skill of any squad, even if you're in last place. Tournament play keeps people interested in the game and keeps them playing weekly (if not daily). Lack of tournament/inter-squad play is made worse by the fact that the best teams in north america can't really play the best from europe and elsewhere because of lag (see #2). BIS could do a lot to support those teams that DO compete like online ranking, host a tournament or two, care about weapon balance instead of things like bicycles and biplanes, throw a bone to those who are spending their money to host tournaments and keep the community alive, etc. Those are just ideas off the top my head of course...
A side note: A lot of the "regulars" and "heavy hitters" on this actual forum aren't the guys in the trenches keeping this community alive by hosting servers and tournaments, yet they're the most vocal about how things effect the community. Stop rambling about OFP and come to games online. I've seen maybe 10% of you guys playing in the last year, and I play almost every night for a couple hours.
4) The community would be wise to stop shutting their eyes and pretending everything is ok. Everyone who rambles about how great OFP is because we only have 1000 players and fewer noobs/wankers is just keeping the community from growing because of their elitism. Gaming communities only have two modes... growing or shrinking. If people aren't coming into the community and being welcomed then those who get bored with OFP and leave (in part because of lack of community) and are not replaced. It's a downward spiral from there.
EDIT: I'm not directing my more pointed criticism at any of you guys in this thread in particular. So don't go jumping into my sh!t when I'm not here calling anyone out in particular.
-
I'm using the following gear setup...
GeForce 4 Ti4200 videocard w/s-video output
Canon GL1 miniDV digital camcorder
stereo splitter (mini headphone plug to 2 mini headphone jacks)
Attach the digital videocamera to the s-video output on the videocard. Set the video to clone mode. Connect the Y cable to my sound card and connect a sound cable to my videocamera and also connect my headphones to the other portion of the Y cable. Start up OFP, drop in a miniDV cassette, and hit record. When I'm finished recording I send the footage back into my computer by connecting my videocamera's firewire port to the computer's firewire port and editting inside of Adobe Premiere.
When I get some more time I will look into making more stylized videos that are more enjoyable to watch. Definitely need to work out a better way to use spectator mode. If I could only get rid of those cinema black bars at the top and bottom and still change views. Oof.
Aircraft addons
in ADDONS & MODS: DISCUSSION
Posted
I love a good fighter or bomber as much as the next guy but if it doesn't bring anything new to the table for multiplayer then I'm not interested. Impressed, yes. Filled with respect for the creator, yes. Going to make aversarial multiplayer (2 team) missions with them, no. Multiplayer is well served by the two planes that are included in OFP. They have faults that I think should be fixed through the skillful hands of some of these badass addon people but overall they do the job reasonably well.
Most people don't think of multiplayer (2 team) when doing mods and that's fine. But for the last few of us active squads out there still playing online every night I see little need for things like jets with AA missiles that are just lock-n-fire, or yet another bomber that drops the same types of bombs. Lasering targets is great and I'd like to see that included far more. But ultimately planes in OFP are restricted by the engine, the island size, huge killing potential against a rather small ground force, inability to get hit by more than one AA missile and live, and they are best suited in my mind in a very limited capacity for CAS and long CTI games.
Keep up the great work on the addons though. Some of them are really killer looking. And when you're done with that fancy new jet, make something smaller for OFP multiplayer like realistic bunkers, earthen hangers (for those new jets) that need heavier bombs to blow up, bridges, roads, new islands, craters, berms, camo nets, more buildings, a decent bradley, a fixed A10, giant electric poles, and all that little stuff that makes missions more realistic!!