Banderas

It'll be used for at least 4-5 years, maybe for even more if other complications merge about the MV-22, also it would be nice for operations set ranging from the 1960s to the 2000s. So I'm positive for the SeaKnight. And for CH-53E. And an EFV :)

I thought my question would be on topic here. I've been studying for sometime about the organization of a typical Marine Expeditionary Unit, but I'm still confused about one thing; I know MEUs have at least one platoon of Force Recon Marines, but many times I saw that (Division) Recon Marines are also present with at least a platoon. It seems a bit strange to me, as far as I know, Div. Recon's most capabilities are overlapping with FR's, and I thought Div. Rec. is usually not deployed in smaller units than a company. Can someone sort of brief me why is it necessary to have both FR and Div. Recon assets within the MEU? What is the main difference in their employments within the unit? Sorry to sound stupid, but I couldn't really concluded this topic. Thanks in advance.

At first I didn't know what do you mean, but now I get it, you mean that there's only optics view and 3rd person view. So you would imply a true first person view with the targeting display visible as the actual part of the interior? Like in the video with the MRAP's robotic arm, am I right?

Erm not really, it was a bad example maybe, I just linked it to show that there are more problems with the program than with ArmA. Really I concluded it from the statings of Bardosy, one of our country's online game journalists, who you might now for his campaigns (Perpetua, Chesty Puller and Pirog). He has experience with the VBS series too, he told to people praising it because of the videos that it has far more problems, bugs and glitches than what we had in ArmA/ArmA 2. @stk2008 We already have remote controlled turrets, since ArmA, Strykers in that already had it. In OA there are also Strykers and HMMWVs with remote weaponry.

Before you start throwing up how much better VBS 2 is, I'd consider you to read this article from SimHQ forums http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3126027/Re_New_VBS2_1_40_features.html So it looks like that the features are far from perfect in their recent form, it might be a big factor that these aren't implemented into the ArmA series, also governments/armies can pay up to an almost infinite amount of greed for what they wish to have. I know from a forum from Bardosy that VBS series is not that good as they seem from the outside, they have way more bugs/problems than ArmA 2 1.01. @stk2008 You remember, you didn't see any LOD switch or lagged gameplay from BI's promo videos about ArmA 2 before it came out, right? We can assume that a software development company has waaay better computer capabilities than us, everyday users. Edit: also keep in mind that VBS 2 uses ArmA 1's version of Virtual Reality, just look at the animations of the Marines disembarking from the MV-22. And Arma 1's engine has been pretty well optimized with the latest patch (1.18)

Definitely not too soon, at least not until they could implement everything without major problems, at least I've read on HQSim forums that there are many problems with 1.40 now... In the most positive case I think we might see them as part of a theoretical new DVD (standalone) expansion, assuming BI will ever make one for A2 and if there's enough community pressure from the community, and a bit of competition (like OA seems to me as an answer to OFP:DR) edit: I say a Thank you to Spark50 to help me correcting with the video embedding code.

We're agreeing in that, but unluckily "dumbing down" is a common practice nowadays, so more people can buy and play the "products", see what have been done to the Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six (recently even to Il-2 Sturmovik :()series, opposed to these franchises I see (vanilla) CWC/ArmA series is getting more and more realistic with each newer installation, at least looking at the basic games...But... ...this is something which is rather can be called a "serious game", made specifically for training/teaching purposes, what is not really the purpose of ArmA 2. Once again I would be happy to have an even more sophisticated injury handling/MEDEVAC system like we saw in the VBS 2 1.30 video, but as we are not governmental organizations having an almost infinite budget to pay for everything, I feel that implementation of such things will be on the shoulders of modders for at least the upcoming few years, in the best case only until the next standalone DVD expansion... On the other hand, I remember there was a nice feature in Full Spectrum Warrior Ten Hammers, where if a team member gets shot, then the team has to bring him to an evacuate point, put him into a vehicle and after a random replacement soldier will take his position. I think that is something similar to what you would like to have in the game?

I just rob the thread with a little offtopic, sorry :) render to texture is available in VBS 2 1.40 Maybe something that'll be available in time - maybe for a next stand-alone Arma 2 expansion? But please, if any more discussion is needed then I'll make a new topic for it in the OFFTOPIC section. To stay on topic, NodUnit, I've lost the number of modifications that are planned to be made, so far I saw A model, D Apache (without LB radar), D Apache Longbow, Israeli Peten or Sharap, with external fuel tank...just hope you won't strain yourself too much with too many variants, it never gets happy end when people starting to overwhelm an addonmaker with request to make every possible sub-model of any hardware. But if you can handle it, then please ignore my worries. :)

@CAS I know you didn't mean to force everyone to have such a module, and I think I didn't express anything like that, you misunderstood me or I didn't express myself correctly. My main concern about that is, that I believe the vast majority of players aren't really interested in that kind of feature, most of us would still like to only "play" for a certain level of "relaxation" and "entertainment" (even if it's a bit morbid :D) for ourselves. Until there's no major interest for such a MEDEVAC/POW module, then we can assume BI won't be concerned to move further into the topic, and it'll be left for community modders to enhance that feature further. Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy to see battlefields where there are more injured and POWs than actually dead people, but until there are more people wanting more clever AI, more sophisticated MOUT/CQB and crapload of new units, then I fear your request won't make it into a vanilla game feature - but who knows maybe I'll be wrong. Anyway, did you try out Norrin's revive script - I don't use that mod, but I've read that you can load heavily injured/unconscious/dead characters into vehicles?

Why not? As far as I know, all community maps were made with those tools, and it took them more than one year to develop Chernarus/Sahrani/Takistan/ect... Well the fact is that the mapmaker (IceBreaker) is still developing at least one map (Lingor), and after his statement he released one or two. Second, that tool you mention is probably part of VBS 2, which is -as far as I know- not mainly for terrain editing, but one can place objects on the map (road, trees were I saw, maybe others) considerably faster. Plus that is made by BI Australia, which is not the same company, they running their own agenda. Also, yet, we don't know too much about the usability and reliability of the tool and the products of it. Maybe the roads put on the map with that editor aren't usable for the AI? Maybe the tool itself is a bit half-cooked in its current form? And besides that, BI (if a bit later, but better later than never, right) brought VBS features to Arma 2 (TI, IR lasers, ect...) maybe in time, with a next DVD expansion, might release it for the community in some form

On the topic of CASEVAC, I agree with CarlGustaffa, I think it's a little bit "camped up" (or what is the correct English expression) by people. I see the reason why people want to have it, and that VBS2 has it, but still they have to remember that VBS is used to train soldiers for situations they could be in the current (low intensity) conflicts. I think the current FA system implemented -I know it has its own problems- is a satisfying addition to the current game right now. @CAS I think, except for the proposed module, you can do almost all of it in the game right now, some scripting would be needed though. I'm not sure but I think there's at least one mod out there that uses only stabilization, and not healing ("HP reloading"). I remember that in Arma 1, in the squad commanding training mission you had to mark a place for a chopper to land at a spot marked with smoke for extraction, so that's available for us for a long time. As for the collection of casualties, if we want to be absolutely realistic, then if somebody gets injured, then he/she has to be bringed to the CASEVAC point by his fellow squad members, and have to be embarked on it by them. I don't think it looks like that fighting units "dump" wounded in a pile and leave them there with a smoke grenade next to them, then the choppers come and sweeps the area from them. In real life, a whole squad or platoon will be out of action, because they have to secure the evac of the casualty(ies). Most people (players) couldn't give a damn about wounded -they would immediately switch to a non-hurt character-, for those who would like to set up this kind of feature, with the help of a little scripting, mission makers already have the possibility to realize it. I don't think that it even needs a separate module to work, but it's only my opinion. About SF; it seems that so-called Tier One operators are starting to be todays' legendary knights in shiny armor who f*ck up dragons, the topic is getting over-abused. Growing up on action films and video games like MW2 R6 Vegas and recently MoH they seem to be the absolute ultramega killing machines who mow down battalions of enemies with the raising of their little finger, and it's understandable why a crapload of people want to jump into their boots, but don't you think ArmA 2 has a fine amount of SF already? Let's count how much are in Combined Operations: USMC Force Recon, Russian Army Spetznaz, MVD, US Army SF, German KSK, Czech SF, Takistani SF. That counts six different special forces group with real-life counterparts and one fictional. OK, I find it a bit sorry that BAF didn't include some SAS, but I can get over it very easily. Why should BI make an SF DLC, containing units that are already covered? The only thing I agree with SF-worshippers that the texture problems on the vanilla US SF models should be fixed, but if it stays like that, I wont throw my A2 DVDs into the trash bin :)

,Hell yeah, even the sound is the same, I remember I used that skin for a short time, but switched soon to some BHD-style M249 skin with that cool camo woodland ammo drum :D

Jaw felled, lost somewhere....:459:

Can they love us long time?

I cannot switch to the BAF hand grenade (classname "BAF_L109A1_HE"), I guess it needs to be defined in OAC core config as a throwable weapon? Also I get a popup every time I start the game (Combined Operations): "Picture \ca\ui\data\splah1_co.paa not found"

Well aside from some popup messages I get, it works flawlessly.

Let me explain my view on DLCs to you: BI doesn't split the community to those who have and those who don't. They've eliminated this problem with the introduction of BAF Lite, so people who didn't buy it -thus presumably do not wish to play with (THEIR) British Army- don't have compatibility problems with servers. DLCs are available for many games developed by many type of companies -ranging from such moneymongering a***holes as EA to more creative ones like Bethesda. Latter's Fallout 3 also has four or five DLCs, yet I didn't hear any thoughts like that in their community. You're not serious, right? Of course BI have the copyright for the game and it's their decision how accessible will they make its code for the public - with the many addons how strict would that be? And why would they want to hold community addons? Did you hear any objection from BI regarding Project Reality, P:UKF or RKSL (related to British stuff)? Would you please explain what is the basis of this statement? Is it about ArmA 2's own (and yet very half-baked) or the community made editor? Because the latter I highly doubt BI tried to "kick out". Maybe, but with the multiplied price you get muliplied content, don't you? ---------- Post added at 11:34 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:33 AM ---------- Also agree with that

@ArmAriffic Not necessarily, personally I've moved the necessary components I use into a @caa1 folder, the others I've deleted.

For those who want some tacticool AK variants, let we hear the other side's opinion Edit: just joking, before you'll throw me with some tacticool fleshlights :D

Nice, thank you the-f! Had some nostalgic feeling these days & wanted to go back for a picnic around Lipany...:)

I have a little issue when using the mod together with ACE 2, it has something to do with Inko's disposable launcher script; whenever I fire a one-shot launcher, the character drops two empty tubes, one of them might start bouncing around the map like crazy. It seems one is dropped by Inko's system and the other by ACE's own disposable system. I remember there was an ACE config for previous releases (for A2), is there a possibility of a compatibility config for the OA version?

For me, it's a fine trade, the more landmass will be available, the better.

How about to show middle finger for a certain British company and make a Chinese Army themed DLC, with a (few) South-east Asia themed map?

Sorry for being off in offtopic :D It's not Red River, but I found this comment for a Arma II-DR comparison video, which I just...well I just can't find the adequate words.... FPDR I think we should re-think our conceptions concerning the realism level of Arma II video's link

-Go to your x:\Arma 2\userconfig\ACE dir -search for the file "ace_clientside_config.hpp" -open it with a text editor, search for this line: #define ACE_NOVOICE -put two slashes before it, so it'll look like this: //#define ACE_NOVOICE -enjoy the returned radio sounds!