AKM

It is great stuff, I'd be interested in seeing more missions in circulation, Talvisota/Continuation War/Lapinsota or more modern scenarios.

Landrovers and the M113AS4 tracks would be great to have if you do decide to release those! As to the ASLAV, well, as far as I can tell the ASLAV-25 (Type I) isn't too different from the Canadian LAV-III or USMC LAV-25 anyways; can't imagine what the problem would be with people bitching about it. Obviously it's not a Type II ASLAV-PC, but hey, why bitch about that when you have a M242 available to backstop the section attack? Weird. Great timing, much appreciated!

Excellent work; well done custom models, some lovely new features not seen elsewheres. Bang up job, matches the quality of the weapons pack superbly. My compliments to the AAW team.

I have no doubt that it has the capability to smack helicopters if the tank detects them; I suspect another very useful application for the 30mm will be smiting everything from IFVs to trucks at long range without wasting valuable 125mm ammunition. On any T-series tank, the big kicker is safe ammunition storage; you can only fit so much into the tank and reloading the automatic loader is typically a bit of a pain in the ass, so the more options you have for dealing with a variety of targets without using 125mm ammunition, the better. It'll also be useful for "suppressing" RPG teams in buildings, since it looks to be a high-angle mount. Maa: CSLA is looking good as always. I am looking forward to seeing your kit in ArmA 2 and also looking forward to ACR. My earlier offer still stands: If you need someone to help with your English naturalisations I will donate my time.

Sabre: My regards (and those of us in TF86 who've discussed the AAW team's work, for that matter) to the AaW team. It's great to see ANZACs in game and looking this good. I'm a big fan of your weapons pack and am really looking forward to getting those ANZACs into the field. Looks like great stuff, if it looks as good in game as it does in those promos I'll have to buy you a few beers if/when I'm in your neck of the woods.

Drongo: I have acquired information regarding the NATO standard protocols for directing any CAS, defined as any aircraft supporting troops at the direction of those troops on the ground - strike missions might be coordinated with the guy on the ground but can't really be influenced outside of "Abort strike: the target is no longer there" and "abort strike: we're on top of the target". I will PM these to you shortly. Edit: In no instance is a smoke marker used. It's all done by "this is my location, the target is XXX degrees and YYY distance from me" for attack helicopters, and "the target is at XXXX-YYYY grid" for CAS aircraft when they're not orbiting your position (thus have a datum on where you are and can service targets relative to your position).

Vektorboson: FM 3-50 C concerns battlefield obscuration (smoke screens) and notes only M156 (70mm Hydra WP rocket) has a primary use of signalling CAS/artillery. The M203/Mk19/M79 systems (canopy or marking) are not used for directing CAS/artillery according to FM 3-50 C. Your other reference is dated 1967, so middle-of-'Nam, and works fine for Vietnam scenarios but isn't applicable today, the protocols have changed. Good work on finding those, I'm still working my sources though. It'll be interesting to see how the protocols compare. :) Drongo69: Having tested DAC extensively in a number of MP coop scenarios, I can say that the best thing to do is carefully order the script initiations. DAC needs to come first in most cases, then everything else. It can take upwards of 15-30 seconds to get it all sorted on a locally hosted server.

These will work excellently in conjunction with the paramilitary units to add some visual variety in missions against/as irregulars. Good work on this; your colouration on the TASS pattern is very close (as I see it on my monitor, anyways) to the real thing (hanging in my closet). Well done!

Wuschel has some good suggestions on features to add to DAS if possible. Good catch on the readme, I didn't notice that - must have missed the forest for the trees again. Vektorboson: I'm still working on getting the NATO SOPs, but it seems unlikely to me that we'd mark the target area with smoke at all. Anything within range of a smoke canister throw is too close for CAS except in "We're being overrun" situations. Fortunately DAS includes an option to disable the smoke; setting it to false in options.sqs it seems. White smoke is used for obscuration. NATO uses yellow/orange/red smoke to designate landing zones regardless of how "hot" they are; it's because those colours are easily seen and not used for obscuration.

Zulu1, Anguis, work on a WGL replacement config to sub in the CodeBlue units would be much appreciated on my part as well. I'd volunteer to help but you'd just have to teach me from scratch, haven't done anything like that before, so I'll stay out of your way. :p

MRAPs would be good to see, but it's not like there's a paucity of excellent vehicles for OFP that will (presumably) work great with the Codeblue units. COMBAT! for one, has a superb set of US vehicles. MRAPs are only 'necessary' for scenarios involving forces in Iraq/Afghanistan from about 2008/09-onwards. Because of their very high centers of gravity, limited mobility, and limited armament, they'd be of debatable use in a conventional war from a realism standpoint anyways: so it's not like there's a lot of scenario limitations imposed by lacking an MRAP.

Drongo: Sorry about the delay. My contacts obviously prioritize me lower than their bosses (like we'd expect anything else, right? :p) and I am told they should have the requested information for me shortly. My Russian sources have prettymuch crapped out; no surprise there, when they were in the 'service of the Motherland' they weren't trained to direct aviation, that was left to dedicated FACs.

Hurby, sorry about that. Went off half-cocked and didn't read what I thought I did. Freaking math courses messing with my mind. You have a PM, by the way. Maa: I volunteered a while ago to help naturalise your English translations. If you still want my help I'm ready any time.

Master Gamawa: Make sure your friends are running the same version of the island as you are. I've had similar problems in the past, always due to someone making a mistake with the island version.

@Hurby: I promise you that neither the AK nor the SA Vz.58 are copies of the German StG 44. Both vaguely resemble it from the outside, but that's where the similarities end. The StG 44 is a long-stroke gas piston operated weapon with a vertically locking ("tipping") bolt, hammer fired. The AK is a short-stroke gas piston with a rotary-locking bolt, hammer fired. The Vz.58 (P and V variants) are short-stroke gas piston, vertically locking bolt, striker fired. Sorry to jump in like that, but that myth ("AK is like StG and everything that looks like StG is obviously exactly like an StG") is one of my pet peeves. Historically, the Soviets developed 7.62x39mm in 1943, around the same time that 7.92x33 was developed and began field trials in the form of various MKb and MP-43 weapons, and while the layout is roughly the same (just as prettymuch all assault rifles look basically the same; curved magazine forward of trigger assembly, except for bullpups...), as I said above, they're not similar weapons.

I hope you can iron out the CoC UA incompatibility; adding FAC as well as FOO capability to people would give them more power than god. It'd look very impressive in many scenarios. Vektorboson's suggestion really does improve the look of the interface! My contacts say they can get me the data I'm looking for early next week. If you can hang on a bit longer I will try to get this information to you in a timely manner + some voice clips. We'll have to discuss how best to implement it though, how much room for soundbytes do you have and how many do you want to use? And so on. I may have missed it, and I apologize if I have - I've just completed an entire unit of coursework in two days because holy shit I'm behind (such is life when your textbooks arrive three weeks late...) - but, can you assign assets in DAC a callsign? So instead of "A-10 with Mavericks", I could have "Pig 7" ?

These are known bugs and are being fixed now, Alex. They didn't turn up when the BMD-2 was being betatested; may I have the specifics of your CPU + graphics card and your detail settings for ArmA 2 so I can try to replicate the bugs? Thanks for the screenshots, helps a lot.

I concur with Vektorboson's suggestion as to the screen. It'll look less "arcadey": I don't know what a FAC console (if one exists) looks like. Something akin to the FDFmod SANLA system, I would imagine, for the LV217 and LV648 (probably got that last designation wrong) HF radios. As to target designation, the M203 smoke bombs put out a pretty small amount of smoke; they're good for indicating targets to things supporting you directly like orbiting attack helicopters (hint hint ;) - what I'm suggesting is perhaps a smoke marker only for attack helicopters. Mind, A-10s can also orbit quite nicely.) or tanks, but not so hot for calling in fast air on because you have less time to acquire a rather small smoke marker. Grid coordinates are an accurate enough means of doing it for most fast-movers. I would also suggest the option to "laser spot" for an LGB-equipped aircraft. Basically you send your comms through as you do now, there is a dialogue between you and the aircraft CoC UA style (more on this on a second) and you illuminate the target with the laser designator. It may help to make a small laser designator addon more like the BAS one than the bigass thing that requires a huge battery, as a side note. Pilot acquires the laser spot (dunno if this can be detected in-game via script, which would be a prerequisite for continued "acquired - weapon release in thirty" dialogue or "cannot acquire - trying again" dialogue) and releases the weapon. As to the protocols involved, I've got some messages waiting on response from my CF, UK, BW, and US buddies, some of whom are in a position to know/ask about the protocols and common dialogue we use to call for close air support. I'd be willing to volunteer my time and voice to this project if you intend to do up what CoC UA did with their "MTO" and "Shot" calls, for example, and I know a handful of other guys who would also be willing. Edit: An option to make this dependant on having a radio object in your inventory would also be good. snYpir's MP/SP Support Pack has this option, I believe, included with a small easily editable dialogue that lets you add new radios (set up to run by default with BAS SATCOM and the SEB Nam Pack v2.0 PRC-25 and Type 59 Manpacks, I think) via classname if needed, e.g. the LSR_R109.

I second Pellejones' report and suggestions. Realism suggestion: Most Personal Role Radios (PRRs) have an open-ground range of ~1000 meters. Things like hills, buildings, and so on decrease range for line of sight transmission reasons; they're after all not very powerful systems. For the short-range radio, given the reduced space in ArmA 2 compared to the real world, a 700-750 meter short-range radio range is recommended. Edit: I hear your concerns (posted earlier) with regards to making the long range radios useful in-game, but those will be useful for people who want to use them, operating widely separated teams. Those who don't really care or are running a tightly tied together operation will just use the short range radios anyways. "Scaling static" (further away you are/closer you are to maximum range, the more static) would be very useful. Alternatively - or even in addition to this - you can reduce the volume of the transmission at maximum ranges and/or implement a 1/2 second "cut out" in the transmission. This would mesh with my experience with the radios I've used. I would recommend the "cut outs" and volume reduction and/or loud static be used only *at* or *past* the 750 meter mark for the Short Range Radio. Improving the range of presets will be handy. Perhaps something defineable via a UserConfig? This would accomodate players who play as riflemen, subunit leaders, unit leaders, pilots, et cetera. I don't need a dozen presets if I'm only playing as a section leader, but if I'm commanding a platoon + air I need a fair few. That said, five presets accomodates a Command, Section 1, Section 2, Section 3, and Supporting Assets frequency - but it's always good to provide more options, if it can be done reliably. I love the potential for electronic warfare. Very good! In terms of realism, typically unit commanders only talk to each other. It's up to the subunit commander to talk to the guys subordinate to him. The structure therefore looks like, using simple three digit frequency sets for the purpose of the example: 350: Company level comms. (Company commander + Platoon commanders) 351: 1 Platoon inter-com. (1 Platoon Leader + Section leaders. Typically the short range radios, with the long range linking to 350) 351.1 (example): Short range radio frequency for 1 Section 1 Platoon's PRRs. 352: 2 Platoon inter-com 352.3 (as 351.1, but for 2 Platoon's 3 Section) 353: 3 Platoon inter-com 354: 4 Platoon inter-com Question do you plan support for non-ACE manpack radios, should such addons be made in the future?

Alright. The texture improvement would have to be the priority, list the little oddity in the hem there as a known bug and leave it, I suppose - some uniforms do carry a shine, like the Russian Noch 91M, but that wears out with use. Best way to make the uniforms look dirty is to apply a good bit of dust and/or mud to the lower legs, knees and elbows especially.

> 100kb Edit: Link to the image here. [bollocks: Uploaded the 500+kb version, not the 100kb edited version by mistake. Sorry about that, Rellikki.] That'd be the issue as demonstrated on a SLA (Desert) Squad Leader model. It's visible to a varying degree on all models. Your textures look slightly "plasticky" lately, I'm not sure what's causing that / if I just didn't notice earlier.

Heh, yes, Phase II of the SLA Supersoldier Program is clearly to attach an auto-polishing belt buckle to them. By the way, loving the ROMAK series and PSL being used here. It's also good to note that when you made your PSL you moved the fire selector from Safe to Fire. The BI SVD is stuck on "Safe." I am constantly amazed by Russian, CDF, and ChDKZ snipers who can fire with a safed rifle. I will get that screenshot in a few hours when I'm back at the house. I will also see if I can replicate that texture error I had with the "SLN" Marines earlier: their jackets were VERY blurry, beyond what the shitty ArmA 2 LoD system normally blurs things out. But now they're crisp textures of a pattern I don't recognize: something you made up or something rare?

Good work here, as we discussed earlier. I've noted some bugs: - Hem of all models where a jacket skirt is visible at the rear has a sharp ninety degree bend in it sticking down from the hem. This distorts textures and looks quite odd. I can get a screenshot of it if you'd like. - Especas Saboteur units have their canvas AK magazine pouches pushed too far into the model. Bring them out two centimeters or so and they'll look as if they're attached to the belts rather than surgically implanted in the trooper. - Texture distortions - which you've noted as a bug and probably already have fixed for the v1.0, for all I know. I'll see what else crops up when I have more time.

Uh, the USMC aren't the only force in the game wearing body armour. The Russians are also wearing body armour. Many of them are also equipped with chest rigs ("lifchik" type, which is to say, "bra", and that's the term many Russians use for a chest rig, dates from Afghanistan). I don't recognize the body armour the Russians are wearing, but most issue vests since Afghanistan stop 7.62x39mm M43 ammunition reliably. Chest-mounted ammunition pouches have also been reported (extensively) to stop 5.56x45mm ammunition, both SS109, the American M855, and so on so forth. It'll certainly pose problems to "enhanced lethality" ammunition such as Mk.262 and Mk.318 Mod 0, which are new cartridges for SOCOM use - the latter has been injected into the USMC supply system and is seeing service in the ongoing Operation MOSHTARAK, the "Battle of Marjah" in RC South, Afghanistan. AK magazines are pretty good body armour by themselves; since the NVA (PAVN) and VC started wearing them in Vietnam 5.56x45mm has had issues with it. The problem was made worse when the US Army went to the M4 over the M16; the shorter barrel decreases the v0 (muzzle velocity) leading to more and more problems downrange: especially in Afghanistan, where the guys our lads are shooting at are typically quite some distance away and are often drugged out of their minds. Speaking of, perhaps one could enable an "Opposition jacked up on epinephrine and/or hash/opium/cocaine" sub-set. This was extensively reported in Iraq and has happened in Afghanistan too. A book which covers it that is available to the general public is Staff Sergeant D. Bellavia's "House to House", an account of an 11M NCO in the Fallujah fight in Iraq. 5.56x45mm has also been reported to have extensive problems in Iraq/Afghanistan on unarmoured, un-hopped-up targets at close range, simply because it is a fairly weak cartridge that does not produce good soft tissue effects. Hence the adoption of ammunition like Mk.262 by US SOCOM (and presumably other NATO SF) and the injection of Mk.318 Mod 0 into the USMC. By comparison the Soviets never had these problems with the 5N7 ammunition (5.45x39mm) used in AK-74; this was rather effective on Afghanis, Chechens, Dagestanis, Chechens, Georgians, and so on (the list is rather extensive), both hopped up on smack and stone-cold sober. That's all soft-target data, though. On body armour the ammunition typically penetrates and then fragments inside the target but rarely destabilizes and fragments in the process of creating that J-shaped wound tract. The older 5.56x45mm ammunition such as M855 and SS109 have better penetration characteristics (against armour) than the new rounds like Mk.318. M43 7.62x39mm lethality is hotly debated, but the fact remains that it still kills people rather nicely. Most discussion centers on "Well, it can't defeat X, Y, and Z armours". This may or may not be true: recognize that right now we use monolithic ceramic trauma plates which have poor multiple-impact-resistance by nature of being a single solid plate. M43 is also "the cartridge to beat", it's probably the most widespread small arms ammo in the world. Against unarmoured targets 7.62x39mm always does the job. With regards to concealment, the snipers in ArmA 2 are too heavily ghillied - the front of the model has a lot of scrim on it, that doesn't happen in the real world because snipers need to be able to crawl. You see it on ghillie suits mass-manufactured for "look cool" factor. However, we can say that they're wearing well scrimmed ghillie suits and it has been my experience that one can step on a guy wearing a ghillie and only know it when he swears at you/shoots you. Of course, that was in terrain ideal for him and I was distracted - in the middle of a bounding overwatch/leapfrog, wasn't looking for a ghillied guy at that point. The guys who have full ghillie in game are USMC Scout Snipers and Russian Army snipers. There's also a half-ghillied NAPA sniper. Scout Snipers and RA snipers are very, very good, very well trained. I'd say you'd only know about one after he shot at you. As Darkhorse says, if given a choice, snipers never fire two rounds from the same position. A Russian saying I'm fond of that I've heard from some veterans who served as snipers and platoon marksmen is "I would rather you be excellent at hiding and very good at shooting than excellent at shooting and very good at hiding: Missing a shot at five hundred meters will never get you killed if the enemy can't find you." As to 7.62x51mm NATO and 7.62x54R, those'll kill you outright, body armour or no, for all practical purposes in this game given the limitations of the system you've devised and the engine itself.

It is good to see a sniper who's finally wearing a ghillie suit that would work - snipers spend most of their time on their bellies, so there's never much "scrim" on the chest and front of the ghillie suits used by military snipers. Usually, canvas reinforcements. And the pockets tend to get moved to the sides, so you can access them while prone, without laying on gear. Beautiful work. I'm going to go find some of the old missions and polish them up, get them ready to convert to these addons when they're released.