bricks

Use the following to give the unit a loaded weapon without needing to add the magazine to the unit's inventory. https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/addSecondaryWeaponItem unit addWeapon "weaponClassName"; unit addSecondaryWeaponItem "magazineClassName"; or https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/BIS_fnc_addWeapon [unit, "weaponClassName", 1, "magazineClassName"] call BIS_fnc_addWeapon;

XMLs only show in multiplayer, not SP. Unfortunately I don't have any ideas for nametapes, making 1 uniform per name tape x each camo x kneepad/gasmask variants would be a ridiculous amount of uniforms.

A mission maker could put the following into the init box of a unit if (isServer) then {this setObjectTextureGlobal [3,"us_military_units\textures\gasmaskcarrier_co.paa"]} The only problem with using setObjectTexture is anytime you drop/pickup the uniform or use Virtual Arsenal it will reset to the uniforms original textures (no gas mask/kneepads/nametapes). I think your best bet, DeltaHawk, would be making a gasmask / kneepads / gas mask & kneepads version of each uniform. I don't know if this has been reported but the XML clan logo appears to be oversized on the uniforms

Gas mask player setObjectTexture [3,"us_military_units\textures\gasmaskcarrier_co.paa"] Knee pads player setObjectTexture [4,"us_military_units\textures\helmet_wood_co.paa"] Name tape/Rank Insignia player setObjectTexture [0,"us_military_units\nametapes\army_1sgt_name_ca.paa"] army_1sgt_name_ca.paa army_1sgt_ranger_name_ca.paa army_1stlt_name_ca.paa army_1stlt_ranger_name_ca.paa army_capt_ranger_name_ca.paa army_cpl_name_ca.paa army_cpl_ranger_name_ca.paa army_maj_ranger_name_ca.paa army_mstsgt_name_ca.paa army_mstsgt_ranger_name_ca.paa army_pfc_name_ca.paa army_pfc_ranger_name_ca.paa army_pvt_name_ca.paa army_sgt_name_ca.paa army_sgt_ranger_name_ca.paa army_sgt1stcl_name_ca.paa army_sgt1stcl_ranger_name_ca.paa army_sma_name_ca.paa army_sma_ranger_name_ca.paa army_spl_name_ca.paa army_spl_ranger_name_ca.paa army_ssgt_name_ca.paa army_ssgt_ranger_name_ca.paa marine_1stlt_ca.paa marine_1stlt_name_ca.paa marine_1stsgt_ca.paa marine_1stsgt_name_ca.paa marine_2ndlt_ca.paa marine_2ndlt_name_ca.paa marine_capt_ca.paa marine_col_ca.paa marine_col_name_ca.paa marine_cpl_ca.paa marine_cpl_name_ca.paa marine_gnysgt_ca.paa marine_gnysgt_name_ca.paa marine_lcpl_ca.paa marine_lcpl_name_ca.paa marine_ltcol_ca.paa marine_ltcol_name_ca.paa marine_maj_ca.paa marine_maj_name_ca.paa marine_mstgnysgt_ca.paa marine_mstgnysgt_name_ca.paa marine_pfc_ca.paa marine_pfc_name_ca.paa marine_sgt_ca.paa marine_sgt_name_ca.paa marine_sm_ca.paa marine_sm_name_ca.paa marine_ssgt_ca.paa marine_ssgt_name_ca.paa navy_hm2_name_ca.paa navy_hm2_ca.paaThere also appears to be unit patches but the hidden selection for them doesn't seem to work.

There was, looked like this

It appears that Armaholic & PwS haven't updated the stand alone G3 pack.

If you want something done; do it yourself.

I'd love to have a command to add to a unit's init that sets the short + long range radio frequencies. With this command mission makers could set the various radio nets and avoid having the players do that during each mission.

Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, start works for me

This is completely wrong, as the OP said a 6 figure grid is a 100m x 100m square. 8 figure being a 10m x 10m square (Refrence). Also for "infantry" a 6 figure is not adequate. A 6 figure (100m x 100m) is 10 000 square meters of real estate, because of the inherit inaccuracy it is rarely used unless indicating a very general area. 8 figure, as the OP stated, is generaly standard within militarys with 10 figure becoming more common as it's the standard readout on most GPS.

Maybe that's because in "Real Life" your in a desert. Green/Brown/Black cam paint probably wouldn't work out.

I carried 22 HE and 2 Smoke in Afghanistan. Didn't really carry starlight/flare because the 81 mm illum worked better.

This is from the closing notes on the introduction on the first page of the Ttp. I think that should answer your question

They aren't windows though. The BTR-90 (as well as the BMP-3) have periscopes. If you look at the images you will see the difference between periscopes and windows. External View of BTR-90s periscopes for Driver Internal View of Periscopes in a BTR-90 *The internal image is the rear cargo periscope because I couldn't find a picture of the drivers periscope from the interior, but its the exact same design In Arma 1 the periscope's were "faked" in certain vehicles interiors such as the BRDM-2 and the M113 Driver's seat.

Of course there is going be to be sweat in your eyes and that annoying itch under your helmet but this game is the single closest (thus most realistic) gaming experience to my time in Afghanistan I've ever had. In fact its leaps and bounds ahead of most other"Tactical Shooter" games in the simulation aspect. NHL 09 is probably the "most realistic" hockey game but it definitely not the same as playing hockey, it's a simulation. That being said I very rarely use the AI (I played the campaign in Co-op and don't use AI in mp) and I'm comparing the infantry combat with my experience because I have limited experience in vehicles and none in aircraft. Also what mods you use and most importantly who you play with will drastically affect this game. With a good mod (ACE), the right group of players and a little bit of patience will make Arma 2 simply amazing. There is a reason the engine is used in by a large portion of NATO countries' military as a training tool.

I think "tank interiors" is more correct than "cockpits". First off there aren't windows in the BTR-90, those are periscopes and they are "blurred out" because there is no picture in picture rendering thus they can't effectively create periscopes, the same goes for the gunner sights in the BTR-90/BMP-3 The AAV crew positions do have windows and they are fully functional in-game. I think having the tank interior adds a great amount immersion with the feeling your actually looking through a persicope rather than the pasted on square box around the drivers view or locked into the gunner sight. Another problem is the reference material (images/diagrams) for interiors of AFV isnt exactly easy to aquire. Most countries OPSEC covers images of AFV interiors to some extent. If you notice the new vehicles (new to Arma 2): BTR-90/BMP3/AAV have interiors in 1 form or another which leads me to think BI wanted to add them but didn't have the time or engine capability to do it. The BMP-3 even has a functional nice little turret orientation display with danger zones for the back ramp and the driver hatch (bottom left from the gunner's primary sight) I agree I would like to see functional tank interiors at some point in the future it would require alot of work and there is more pressing issues at this time. Who knows maybe Operation Arrowhead?

Just for reference the standard USMC rifleman in A2 has the following kit MTV = 30 lbs Lightwieght Helmet = 4 lbs M16A4 + Aimpoint = 8 lbs 6 x 30 Rnd Mags (1 lbs ea.) = 6 lbs 4 x M67 (.87 lbs ea.)= 3.5 lbs AN/PVS-14 NVGs = 1.1 lbs AN/PRC-148 Radio = 1.9 lbs Water (3 Litres) + 1 MRE = 7.7 lbs Boots/Misc = 5 lbs ------------------------------------- 67.2 lbs Thats for the basic rifleman, it only gets heavier when you add SMAW's, M240s etc.

Ummm, where do I start? First, what range are you referring to when you say "33 Clicks"? You're probably saying 33 clicks (33 MOA which equals roughly 9.78 mils) from bottomed out. In-game the rifle is zeroed to 250 m so you can't compare the mils from bottomed out to X range with to the hold off (in mils) from 250m zero to 800 m (which I'm assuming is where you got 7 mils from). Second, the Marines use the M40 not the M24. The M40 can only use 7.62x51mm, the M24 can be adapted to other calibers but typically and in-game uses the same 7.62x51mm. Third, there is a ton of other concerns aside from bullet's ballistics that will affect the trajectory and thus affect the correction/hold off. Factors like wind, tgt/shooters elevation, hot/cold barrel, eye relief, shooter's hold will all have an effect. Again you can't compare an in-game weapons zero and hold off to a real weapons range correction and assume BI screwed up the ballistics. I'm not saying the in-game ballistics are correct I'm saying your method of comparing them is completely wrong. ;)

The M1A2 Tusk in game is accurate to the real life equivalent, it has a stabilized independent RWS turret with commander's sight and a .50 cal. The M1A1 (realistically speaking) has a CITV, Commander's Independent Thermal Viewer. The CITV is fully stabilized and has the ability to cue targets to the gunner. However the CITV is separate from the commander's pintle mounted .50 cal, which is not stabilized and is only power assisted on 1 axis (manual on the second axis). In arma2, it seems like the M1A1 commander has some hacked together combination of the pintle mount .50 and the CITV. I can't comment on the Russian tanks (T-72/T-90) but I suspect it is un-stabilized commander position on the T-72. The LAV 25 does not have a stabilized commander sight, in fact it shouldn't even have a independent commander sight. Aside from the periscopes a LAV commander is looking at the same sights (day, image intensified and thermal) as the gunner. Without knowing the capabilities of Warsaw pact vehicles Arma 2 does an ample job simulating the stabilization or lack thereof in the vehicle commander's sights.

The BRDM-2 in Arma 2 has a Driver, Gunner and 3 Cargo seats (5 total). The BRDM 2 ATGM and HQ variant only has capacity for 2 (Driver and Gunner). Realistically speaking the driver sits front left with the commander sitting to his right riding shotgun. The 2 seats at the back are for the co-driver (until he switches with the driver on long road moves) and the gunner (when he is not sitting in the gunner seat).

If your going to complain about "Non-realistic" features of the game at least pretend to know what your talking about. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/23-10/index.html Look at Chapter 3, section V - Hold off. "Holdoff is shifting the point of aim to achieve a desired point of impact". Hold off is a trained sniper concept that is exactly what you use in Arma 2. I agree that an adjustment feature would be nice but stating real known sniper techniques (hold off) to be "100% UNREALISTIC" is ignorant and shows that you really have no basis for your argument. This point is far from the mark . Firstly it's Mils (Shortened from Milli-radians) not milles, but that's forgivable. There are trained methods soldiers use to call out contacts/targets. Using Mils or Degrees is extremely rare, compass' are not always issued to every soldier, so without one the use of Mils/Degrees isn't useful Unlike Arma (no fault of the game) It takes several seconds to shoot a bearing with a compass and after the bearing has been read out it will take several seconds to put in the bearing and find the target. This simply doesn't happen in regular squads. Specialized teams such as sniper/spotters or FOOs are an exception To hear reference points, cardinal directions and terms like "right side" or "half left" is extremely common. These are very human and everyone will be able to understand them easily. Arma 2 does a good job with this and yes may not be the easiest system to interpret but that doesn't mean its not commonly used. Again please don't act or insinuate that you have or your job has provided you with real experience when it evidently has not and you have little to no idea about "realism" or "realistic features". It's embarrassing for people who have extensive knowledge or real life experience in any military.

So let me get this straight, your a Master Corporal C9 gunner? Who did you piss off? Also C9 gunner's don't carry sidearms.