Aqu

Minimum safe bombing altitude for general purpose bombs  was something like: 100lb: 1500ft (c. 450m) 250lb: 2000ft (600m) 500lb: 2500ft (750) 1000-4000lb: 3000ft (900m) But I bet you can usually escape when dropping them bit lower. When bombing at lower altitude delay fuses were used. BTW. Have you put realistic amount of buildings in London? I bet you could go make a cup of coffee while waiting for the next frame to get rendered Did you just put a satellite texture there plus few building here and there?

You have to put Ark Royal half way the Channel to shorten the flight time It must be sick flying the heavy bombers like the Lancaster in Arma. In my settings at least if I fly over 1000m I lose sight to ground and down looks same as up in all that haze. So if I want to identify something I have to fly < 500m and from that altitude you bomb yourself into "St.Peter's squadron"

No, no. The map is great. It must be superb for example in aerial fights or larger 'CTI' type games. That big map certainly gives new possibilties. I was just thinking if you have other maps too, more suitable for a smaller skirmish. E.g a squad size battle for a village is bit funny to have on such a big map. In that case all those map squares could be used for more terrain detail on a 20x20km map for example. What I have looked a bit on map making it is very time consuming job. So having a map that big is an achievement alone. Â

The map is so huge that it worries me a bit that the map detail is quite low then - hills looking pyramids etc. So are you making/have made smaller maps with better detail - e.g. Normandy only, the invasion beaches, Caen surroundings, etc? It is great to hear you are expanding to other war theatres too, but I hope you make one properly at the time before moving on.

I didn't mean there were hedges all around France. Actually the hedgerow area is quite Normandy specific (to that scale) Â and further down south to...say around Falaise the area was already more suitable for tanks. But your map covers enough terrain that if you put them even to appropriate areas, that is a big job anyway. About the weapons configs... Yes, I know there is a deflection in the weapons config. That's why I said, that to get that value from the gun peneration tables, you could use that kind of a formula...just an example. For the hitpoint value another formula etc. Without using such a method you would need to think them closely every time and compare to the previously added weapons. ...that is if you want to make the conversions to config in consistent way. E.g. If I'm going to make a 20mm round, you would get deflection=50/sqrt(20)=11. Actually the deflection depends on the mass and other things too.

The bad thing is that Arma vehicles and weapons do not use armor thickness, so converting that data into Arma in a scientific way is bit hard. You coud try think some sort of conversion functions to make it easier. E.g deflecting=50/sqrt(caliber(mm)) When making a normandy map, you should remember the typical landscape, bocage. It must be bit painful to add all those hedgerows in such a big map. But it is important to generate proper feeling and those hedgerows gave a big advantage to defender and made movements harder.

True, but I have believed the idea is to make quickly something which looks something like it and later improve them with more time Like the Panther and Pz-IV rear wheels should be without teeths and bit smaller as they were "front wheel driven". I would have my old 3DS4 Panther G mesh, but I can only find the project file, not the 3ds file. As I have no more 3DS I cannot open the project. I tryed to hack the mesh out of it with hex editor, but oxygen complains that there are no objects (even there clearly are those 0x0400 objects sections). Damn shame, because even it was without tracks I think the hull might have been usable in the game. Â

Oh dear, I hope the dreaded tank arguing doesn't start in this forum too. I agree with many of the earlier posts. I hope that any vehicles planes, tanks whatever have somewhat realistic performance. At least my fun is killed if I can drop a Tiger from 3 miles with a 75mm Sherman. At least I get more fun that I have to sneak close and get those side/rear hits with a less powerful tank. Imho, one of the most important qualities of the tank is to have good optics in the gun. It doesn't help much if you have powerful gun but can't hit anything from the range where the gun should be used to get most out of it. The powerful German cannons like the 88mm Pak43 were coupled with good optics without which it would be hard to get those kills beyond 4km. Germans too had multiple AT round types. The typical being the APCBC (armour piercing composite ballistic cap) and the more powerful APCR (AP composite rigid) but available in much smaller quatities. Especially very late in the war APCR quantities must have gotten bit low. I've read APCR would have been issued more to the tank destroyers. So if a tank had e.g 50 rounds, of those maybe 30 were AP and of those 30 maybe at most 5 APCR. How much depends on the time of the war, what type of a tank and maybe other issues like SS prolly got more than wermacht and satellite countries even less. If you want to compare, I have considered these somewhat equal if comparing guns mostly: Pz-IVh/j <-> Sherman "easy eight" (76mm gun, NOT 75mm) Panther <-> firefly Kingtiger <-> Pershing

I have to say I'm really looking forward to this. It is sometimes fun to use not so high tech weapons. Â Since you already have 109 E-1, you could make E-4/B with slight changes. It would have better use from the battle of Britain to early Barbarossa (end of '41 early '42). That could be used as a fighter and a Jabo. Also E-7 wouldn't be too hard make. I don't know what you mean with "15s" in F-4 weponry. It should be 2xMG17 in the nose + MG151/20 cannon through the prop spinner.

My first model in O2. I thought ArmA needs a proper car - Bugatti Type 35B (c. 1927)Â Still very much in WIP stage. Textures missing, Shadow LOD and some other LODs. At least supension works and the steering arms/bars what ever are moving when the steering wheel is turned Next have to figure out how to make normal maps so that I can cut down the poly count Â

Any update to this one? Any idea what causes it and how to fix it? I tryed making my first add-on...a car. I ran into the same problem now. I have tryed reading online how-to-do guides, tweaking and compiling it close to 100 times...no luck What I discovered: - It stops only on the bridge deck start/end. Roughly the part where the land under the bridge is sloping downwards (the 1st section of a bridge?). It never seems to stop middle of the bridge where the ground underneath the bridge is horizontal. The exact stop point is when the middle of the car (the 'hot spot' ) goes onto the bridge. - I think it might not be that the tyres sink into the bridge, cause I moved the land contact points downwards so that the tyres don't sink into the bridge deck, but it still stops. Besides the BIS Hummers seem to sink a bit too. I tryed to move the 'stopa...' things in the memory LOD too, but didn't manage to get any change. I have tryed to copy things from the sigma-6 vehicles how they are set, but cannot see any sensible things to try anymore. (the p3d files inside the BIS pbos are binarized and no idea how to unpack p3d files) So please  (sorry to dig >4 months old thread but imho this was better than posting a new thread) EDIT - Sep 20, 2008: I think I found a partial solution. I had used an octagon (cylinder with 8 faces) as a wheel in Geo LOD. This ment that the first face which turned upwards from the ground level was in 45 degrees. I modified the wheels so that the first face turning upwards is only c. 30 degrees from horizontal. Now it doesn't stop at bridges; only if I use the slow speed when I enter it it can stop, but normal and full speed you don't notice much difference. I'm not 100% sure this is the thing which cured it because I made few other changes too, but based on other tests too I think it is related to the wheel shape/position in the geo LOD.