AgentFox2

Awesome stuff, Footmunch. The Mud Hen is especially great. Keep up the great work, man. As a suggestion for the future, maybe keep the backseat cargo, but make the MFDs functional, with map displays, etc. In multiplayer, if another player occupied that seat as a gunner, I imagine it would be pretty hard to coordinate when to fire and when not to fire, especially if a 3rd person perspective was not allowed on the server. Perhaps if a BAS-esque map display were implemented, a second player in that seat could act as navigator. I think it might enhance the teamplay. Just a suggestion and some thoughts. Â

Sorry, I have not read all of the discussion in the thread, just thought I would pose a potential question. Â

So, just to toss a theoretical frag grenade into the discussion here; Should scripters and mission makers seek to encrypt their work, making it unattainable unless asked for by e-mail, etc.? Again, just something to think about. Â

Scripts and missions have always been "open source," and people learn off of each other. I've never heard about a scripter "stealing" parts from another script, because everyone understands that it is open source. It is free for the community to share, learn from, and modify. The question is, why is it acceptable for modmakers to be so very protective of their work (which is perhaps warranted), while scripters are very open with their work? Has there really been that many confirmed plagarisms? A lot of what makes addons so great today are the scripts and special features. What would have happened if scripters took a similar position as some modmakers, early on? Would there still be such an awesome array of addons with special features? Just some food for thought.

I don't mess with these "modmaker politics" threads too much, but just wanted to say, great post, General Barron. I agree 100%. Could not have said it better myself.

My first post in this thread. Nothing quite as nice as what is usually posted by the talent here, but hey, I try. Artsy tweaked version Â

How about some more variety? More African-Americans, more Hispanics, more Asians, more of the stuff that was left out at first? I mean, it's kind of hard to represent the modern US army with only 3 African-American faces in standard OFP. Â

I had been thinking of similar, I am just having a dilemna about the proximity fuse, as in real life, most weapons of this type use contact, although that could be overlooked in favor of playability  I have indeed tried out WarGames, but I didn't know it had a proximity-fuze, I thought it was contact, but with the added pinache of simulated fragmentation Perhaps interested in cooperation of some type, or no?  Or was that just a jab at me?  Just to throw another question out to ya'll, would you like to see any other types of MANPADS? It's highly likely I'll be doing some SA-7s and maybe even SA-18s. Is there any interest in even older systems, such as Redeye? I would really like the community's opinion on this, especially questions such as game balance and the like. Thanks. Â

I wish someone would make an overall face pack to fill the gaps left by regular OFP. Â You know, some more African-Americans, some more Asians, other minorities, women...Maybe some caucasian males with less than transparent complexion? Â I mean, I'm beginning to think that OFP's soldiers have been locked away in a Cold War missile silo for a decade or three. Â

Actually, the Blackhawks are pretty good with CM. They sometimes work, and sometimes don't. Which is good. Some addons are nigh on impossible to hit, though. For instance, I have never once been able to hit Footmunch's awesome MiG-27 with anything short of proximity-fused AIM-120s. Nor have I ever been hit when flying the same plane. Regarding flare launch on RPG, it may be realistic for the plane to actually launch the flares. Mainly because it is the pilot in the cockpit who activates the counter-measure system, and if I know if I saw a fireball with long smoke trail behind it heading towards me, I would definitely expect the worst. If a pilot even THINKS something looks like a SAM, they dump flares like crazy and yank and bank. However, for those flares to actually work on an RPG is a totally different matter. Â

Agreed on the original post. Regarding the CM scripts on current addons; My only gripe with those is that they are not (or cannot be, perhaps) weapon-specific. Some weapons are better at defeating countermeasures than others, but unfortunately the CM scripts included in addons are either 100% foolproof, or have a certain failure rate with ANY weapon.

No, sir, I do not. I currently own an nVidia GeForce FX video card updated to the latest ForceWare drivers from nVidia's website. DirectX is the latest build (9.0b). I'm running OFP version 1.96b. It's pretty strange. I have no idea what is causing it except that it has something to do with the retextured guerillas. Is there anything else I could tell you to help? EDIT: Just to clarify, I have tried with: the shortcuts that are installed with CSLA (CSLA shortcuts on desktop), also editing the command lines so it reads -mod=csla on both my normal 1.91 and beta 1.96 shortcuts. No effect.

Great work, CSLA team. You guys have been working pretty hard on this for a while, and finally your hard work has come through! Cheers! I have one problem, however. Upon installing the new mod, and starting any of my shortcuts (including the ones supplied with the mod), I get only a light blue screen. I can hear the menu "clicking" and the background music, but I can only see light sky blue. After removing all of the other addons, still to no avail, I reinstalled OFP, and then installed CSLA onto the fresh install. I still have the problem. After some trial and error, I've found that it might be tied to the Edge retextured guerilla units. Originally, I had them installed when I tried installing CSLA 2. After uninstalling CSLA the first time, and still having the problem, I removed the Edge units and the problem was gone. Now I can't play CSLA 2 without this menu problem. Please advise.

On the issue of weight and loadouts... If any of you have played the old action game Hidden and Dangerous, they did that sort of thing remarkably well. When you started a campaign, you had a finite amount you could bring with you for the WHOLE campaign. This space was measured as you added things in by a progress bar in the lower right. Prior to every mission, you would select your team, then select their gear loadouts. As you added more equipment to a given man, a progress bar (again in the lower right) would show the amount of gear he could carry, as well as how much he currently had by use of a percentage meter. This was all based on weight. So, you wouldn't really worry about whether something was a secondary weapon or not. The thing was, weapons took up a large chunk of that weight space, and you could potentially add a whole bunch of weapons to yourself, but you would end up with no ammo. Also, how much one soldier could carry was based on an admittedly RPG-ish attribute of Strength. Each man had a value denoting how strong he was and according to this, how much he could carry. So, you could have a sniper who is a whiz shot, but he might not be able to carry more than his rifle, ammo, and a pistol. Then again you might have a guy who's super strong and can carry huge amounts of ammo, but is not a great shot. So you give him a big machine gun and let 'im go to town. Anyway, it was a great system, and I think mentioning it is relevant.

Why not just keep track of the people using the backpack? At the beginning of the mission, you could check the weapons of all units on the map and see if any of them have the backpack. The mission designer would designate the weapons to be put in the backpacks of certain units, referencing the unit itself. Instead of using an invisible model and such, you would constantly check to see if the unit has dropped his backpack (like in the new Chain of Command Unified Artillery used in conjunction with addon radios) You would then get the position of the unit and put your weapon holder there. (whether it be crate, invisible model with cargo capacity, whatever) Instead of keeping track of the weapon itself, you could keep track of the unit using it. You also might want to take a look into the way CoC UA checks for radio objects and see what you can gather from that. Walker, could you explain how this is done?

First of all, I'd like to say... Great job on JAM. I'm having a lot of fun with it and have a feeling it will soon become a requisite addon in everyone's missions. Despite the fact that I like this addon so much, I did find somethings that were buggy about it, and some other things that just rubbed me the wrong way. So, let me share the minor pet peeves that I found in this great addon. In the bug category, I noticed that the M-21 fires several degrees above the crosshair when zoomed in any decent amount. I'm assuming this has something to do with alignment of optics, etc. Also something I myself would put in the bug category, but may not be as such... The Remington 700 fires very, very fast for a bolt-action rifle. So fast, in fact, you cannot hear the "bolt cycle". It nearly reminds me of the M-21 in its rate of fire. I also noticed this problem with the M24 included in the US Army Special Forces pack. This bug, if infact a bug, is the one I am most concerned about. A minor pet peeve: You can hear the MP5SD from a pretty far distance. Again, not sure if this was planned or not. Weapon names: The MP5 in OFP is actually an MP5SD3, not an SD6. That is why in the game, it only had Semi-Auto and Full-Automatic. I'm sure you all knew this, but I just thought I'd make sure. I think it would be better to use the SD3 variant, as if you look at the model closely in first person, you will notice that the fire selector has the SAFE-SEMI-AUTO trigger grouping, and would look strange if it also had a "hidden" fire selection. Also, the XM-177E2 within the game is actually not an XM-177E2, but a Colt "Commando" with its muzzle cut down to size. Infact, the only national military that I know of that uses such a weapon is the Israeli Defense Forces. Also to note is that before the M4, the M16 carbines were considered "submachineguns" due to poor accuracy at range. I don't know if, due to the purpose of this project, it would be feasible to create different attributes for the carbine magazines, but I thought I'd throw that out. And my last whine for the day is some of the classes. In JAM's current state, if someone were to make a JAM-compatible M14, and someone else made a JAM-compatible L1A1 (FN FAL), they would both sound and act the same. Now, I understand they might be able to share ammunition...But also note that you created separate definitions for both the G-36 and the Steyr AUG, which both use 5.56 30 rounds magazines and can obviously share ammunition with the M16 or M4 rifles. I'm guessing you created these separate definitions because these two guns act different from each other, etc. I believe that this should be done to a certain extent for other weapons, including said example of M-14/L1A1. Anyway, the preceding is just some pet peeves and minor discrepancies. Overall, I'm enjoying the new addon, and am hopeful for the cool things that will arrive in the future. Thank you Ballistic Addons Studios, Digital Grenade, and all addon makers who strive for perfection and work so diligently simply for the betterment of the game.