colonel_klink

I voted Yes. However, I'd liked to have seen an option that said 'Yes, as long as it is compatible with current OFP addons'.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 11 2003,09:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Colonel_Klink @ April 11 2003,10:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There has been debate in th past that some OFPers won't download addons that have their own installer. Personally having an installer that searches the registry for the addon folder and proceeds to install directly, in my mind is better than having to navigate to the addons folder manually.<span id='postcolor'> The difference is that now we're talking about a global installer standard. That's a bit more comforting than the dozens of home-brewed methods used until now. Standardization is indeed consolation.<span id='postcolor'> That's true. With the new initiative standardisation may become a reality. The trouble is there are some people who will repackage the addons to add to their own installation. Here is where problems could arise.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 11 2003,09:57)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Colonel_Klink @ April 11 2003,10:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There has been debate in th past that some OFPers won't download addons that have their own installer. Personally having an installer that searches the registry for the addon folder and proceeds to install directly, in my mind is better than having to navigate to the addons folder manually.<span id='postcolor'> The difference is that now we're talking about a global installer standard. That's a bit more comforting than the dozens of home-brewed methods used until now. Standardization is indeed consolation.<span id='postcolor'> That's true. With the new initiative standardisation may become a reality. The trouble is there are some people who will repackage the addons to add to their own installation. Here is where problems could arise.

I think the idea of standardising addon installation is a good idea. Auran, the makers of Trainz issued a Despatcher program which allowed the easy installation of addon content. This I felt was good for their community, just as I see this initiative from BIS as a step ahead. I support the idea of adding a demo mission that shows off the new addons features. Perhaps in the installation the user could have the option to install the demo mission. As for required addons, I personally don't create addons that are dependant upon non BIS addons, however I can see that bundling the required ones with the new ones would have its pros and cons. Nothing worse than trying to use a new addon if you don't have the others the new addon needs. On the other hand some addons are fairly hefty to download as it is for 56k'ers. Standardising through OFPEC addon suffix naming is a good idea which works very well in 99% cases. A means of uninstalling addons is a good idea and one that most OFPers would appreciate. I do concur that any installer would add to the user's registry.. very little programs don't. Clickteam's installer works well, and any MSI installer could do the same job. There has been debate in th past that some OFPers won't download addons that have their own installer. Personally having an installer that searches the registry for the addon folder and proceeds to install directly, in my mind is better than having to navigate to the addons folder manually. This installer could be used for mission installations too, for both PBOed and user demo missions. Great initiative guys from BIS.

I think the idea of standardising addon installation is a good idea. Auran, the makers of Trainz issued a Despatcher program which allowed the easy installation of addon content. This I felt was good for their community, just as I see this initiative from BIS as a step ahead. I support the idea of adding a demo mission that shows off the new addons features. Perhaps in the installation the user could have the option to install the demo mission. As for required addons, I personally don't create addons that are dependant upon non BIS addons, however I can see that bundling the required ones with the new ones would have its pros and cons. Nothing worse than trying to use a new addon if you don't have the others the new addon needs. On the other hand some addons are fairly hefty to download as it is for 56k'ers. Standardising through OFPEC addon suffix naming is a good idea which works very well in 99% cases. A means of uninstalling addons is a good idea and one that most OFPers would appreciate. I do concur that any installer would add to the user's registry.. very little programs don't. Clickteam's installer works well, and any MSI installer could do the same job. There has been debate in th past that some OFPers won't download addons that have their own installer. Personally having an installer that searches the registry for the addon folder and proceeds to install directly, in my mind is better than having to navigate to the addons folder manually. This installer could be used for mission installations too, for both PBOed and user demo missions. Great initiative guys from BIS.

Check the canopy animation tutorial at: http://www.dc3d.co.nz/Tutorials/canopies.htm It has everything you need to get you started on animating any door etc. Cheers

Hmmm. To release or not to release.. that is the question. Whether it is nobler to release as a separate addon or with the mod... I'll talk with our mod leader. As far as I know the mod only needs the two barrell version. But we will see... Still some work to do on it.

Bofors AA in action. Both player and AI controlled

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If Col. Klink changed his radar building slightly, then that would do great. <span id='postcolor'> Such as?

Ok my foray into combat photography. From  the intro cutscene of a mission I am building

Hey Avon ya missed. 'What the f**** an Xbox'. And yes i do know what one is, and I voted no 'cos like was said before.. whats the point in buying OFP again

LOL And I thought the A4 pilots were the only ones. Perhaps the targeting values need to be increased. Looks kinda cool tho to see the plane hurtle down and take out a sub. *Plays "Last Post" - wingman dips his wings in tribute - and sacrifices his life into the side of the second sub*

*Rapier Update* Textures finished on the launcher unit. And start on the command post for the rapier started. This is a basic camo netting that will also be released in desert colours.

Ok, so I should be finishing other stuff, but I needed a break from aircraft, so looking back at my first addon the Sub Target, I decided that it needed something else. And with the new islands such as Jelalhabat I thought a submarine base would be a good idea. Still under construction: No release date yet as it has a transparency clipping problem between the two section. It will be released with a newer version of the sub, and a pier pack. For further pics :http://dc3d.tw-gateway.net/subpen.htm

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Oberon3d @ Mar. 24 2003,12:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hi. I'll send you the wessex so you can mess with it when it's finished and do your version....I told you long time ago I would make the wessex for your MOD but that I couldn't join you. I'm afraid I can't fully join any MOD because I can't dedicate enough time. And I still have some own projects in the queu Any way....count with this wessex as a Falklands Mod Addon ....when it's done of course<span id='postcolor'> That's a roger on that Oberon3d. Thanks buddy. Looking forward to seeing it. If you want help with it. Please let me know. Cheers Colonel Klink

Hi Oberon3d The wessex is looking really nice. Ever thought of joining the Falklands mod team. We were going to make a wessex, seems a shame to have two of the same addon Cheers Colonel Klink Falklands Mod Team Lead designer

Okay situation is at follows. I'm looking fo a solution to the alpha cannel clipping problem on the upper walkway, and getting the sound effects working when waliking on the deck and .. er.. above mentioned walkways. AS soon as those two problems are solved the OFP world can have them.

I would presume the roadway would have to be named in the properties window as metal, gravel or whatever. I haven't found a solution to this yet, but would like to know how it is done also.

Love this Island. Has some great possibilities (See pic below). Add some AA support and there are some good mission ideas here. Only flaw I can spot so far is the lack of support for fixed wing air craft with ai and auto pilot. Apart from that keep up the good work

Just love this island. Just one niggle tho (which has already be pointed out) Auto pilot landing seems to be set up incorrectly. Apart from that, the autor has made a tremendous job on this creation. Keep up the good work.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tales_From_Topographic_Oceans @ Mar. 13 2003,20:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">where can I get O2? I see something called Oxygen Light.<span id='postcolor'> Oxygen Light = O2 which is the BIS modelling tool. Hey BRSSEB Good work as usual. Cheers Klink

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (LaPoieto @ Mar. 11 2003,21:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">is there anyway to make the missiles out runable (flyable)<span id='postcolor'> Not sure what you mean mate.

An update on the rapier

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Fantastic! I suppose this method could also be used to have a varied loadout on planes instead of just one detachable proxy type and rockets<span id='postcolor'> I don't see why not as the drop tanks use a weapon and ammo config to work. But instead of using a weapon fired routine I used a UserAction, was less messier. *Update* Untextured Rapier in game and working

Evis. With a bit of perservering I have managed to use setObjectTexture to create the illusion of missiles being fired from turrets. and: edit: BTW no proxies used, and the turret (upper missile carrier rotates and tracks aircraft.) I have also managed to have drop tanks on aircraft that detach, as well as the planes normal loadout of bombs. The Next A4 release has working drop tanks. The rapier is now under construction for the Falklands mod and should  have some screenshots of it working in a few days.. or so.