dreday
-
Content Count
360 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Posts posted by dreday
-
-
I guess you agree with me that the t-80 is being exported afterall?
There are dumbed down export T-80s without autoloader and things like that.
The only reasons by the way, why i would like to see a T-80 would be working reactive armor and a completely different driving model then other tanks (the T-80 flies through the battlefield since it's a lot lighter then an Abrams but has an about equal horsepower gasturbine engine - atleast to my knowledge) - a T-80 is simply just fast and packs a really big punch and is cheaper then western heavy tanks. It's the most manouverable tank right now that with all the ERA and other countermeasures can withstand quite a lot.
Ofcourse it would be ridiculous for the north to have top of the line T-80s, but there are older versions for cheap export.
It would be boring to steamroll T-72s with an M1A2 tank, atleast they could slap some working ERA (I'm not saying ERA is the endall be all absolute countermeasure to make tanks invulnerable but it helps) on the T-72s for good measure.
CsonkaPityu,
You are very badly misinformed. Â Where have you read that T-80s were exported without autoloaders? Â Are you saying that the gunners of those "cheap export T-80s" had to load the rounds themselves? Â Do you realize that their rate of fire would be around 1-2 rounds per minute? Â Why would any country buy them, even if they are "cheap"? Â The fact is that those few T-80s that were exported by Russia are actually more advanced than 99% of tanks in Russian army itself.
As for a "flying tank", T-80U does have a better power-to-weight ratio than any other tank in the world. Â However, under combat conditions, the off-road speed of at T-80 and M1A1 would be roughly comparable.
Look, in terms of ArmA, an M1A1 would be superior to a T-72.  Yet, 2 T-72s would be superior to 1 M1A1.  In the end of the day, the game would be balanced because there would be more T-72s than M1A1s; hence the challenge for the American player...  This is much more realistic (think USA vs. Iraq) than fighting against some mythical third world island that has more advanced weaponry than Russian Army itself.  If that is what you like though, there is always BF2... How bout em "cheap export» T-90s, MI-28s, and BTR-90s?
Peace,
DreDay
-
I agree 100%! Weapon sway was already implemented in original OFP, but it was way too light. In real life, weapon sway is caused not only by the weight of a weapon (lighter weapons generally cause more sway); but also by the mental state of the soldier (nervous, or excited state would cause more sway). That's the main reason why even well trained soldiers often require numerous shots in order to hit their targets.
I am hopeful that ArmA would have more sway, or at least they would leave it configurable in the config.bin, as was the case in original OFP.
Peace,
DreDay
-
BTW, there is no such thing as a "cheap export t-80", they are very rare outside of FSU and relatively expensive.  I think it makes perfect sence to give a third world army  t-72s and BMPs, because that's what they are likely to have in real life...
Peace,
DreDay
Yes exactly. T-80 was probably only exported to MAYBE East Germany (i can't remember), but to no one else. It would be retarded to send top of the line tank to some small nation so that it be captured by Americans. I mean did you see USA exporting M1A1 tanks in the 80s? No.
But who knows...maybe Russians are involved in the war and will bring some of their T-80s over to help out their Northern Friends? Â
I don't want to steal the thread, but just in case anyone is wondering...
In Soviet times, 6 T-80Bs were exported to Poland for trials. After the collapse of USSR, Russians sold the T-80Us to South Korea, China, and Cypress (each country got a battalion sized batch of 30-40 tanks). Ukraine has exported T-80UDs to Pakistan (around 150 or so). That's it, as far as I know. The market price of the new T-80U is around $2-2.5 million, which is almost twice the price of a new T-72S.
Peace,
DreDay
-
Well, now that i have a rough estimate of what will be in ArmA i must say i'm a bit dissapointed unit-wise, i was hoping for AAV-7A1s. I mean it's an island, who would the USA send if not the marines? Plus i was hoping to see a cheap export t-80 with somekind of ERA and some tunguskas and more modern equipment - yes i overcompensate with huge tracked vehicles.It would be nice if the initial troop on Sarah was USArmy personnel, but the relief force sent by Uncle Sam would be a marine expeditionary force, or an entire division even.
But these are just hopes and dreams.
I agree on the Marines. It would have been nice to have some HOORAH in the ArmA.
However, I am guessing BIS does not have the resources to develop a whole new ladder of units (AAVs, LAVs, MARPAT, soldiers, etc). Still, that does not explain why they have the Super Cobra in there...
As for addtional units, it would make sence to have BTR-70/80 for the communists and M2A2 Bradley for use in order to balance the M113 and BMP-2 respectively.
BTW, there is no such thing as a "cheap export t-80", they are very rare outside of FSU and relatively expensive. I think it makes perfect sence to give a third world army t-72s and BMPs, because that's what they are likely to have in real life...
Peace,
DreDay
-
Did anybody else notice that the M1A1 tank now has the commander's AA machinegun (.50 cal) mounted on it?
Good to know that BIS is moving to implement the multi-gunner positions. I am sure that T-72 would get one as well. May be they will even add the loader's M240 on M1A1? BTW, would we even have loaders? Were they in VBS1?
Peace,
DreDay
-
Excellent suggestions so far!
I would hope that the shortcomings of AI vehicle driving behavior are also addressed in AA. I don't particularly care about the AI controlled vehicles; but when I am a tank commander and I tell my driver to go left he should go left at the exact angle that I told him. In the current versions of OFP, your driver will only take your commands as a general guidance and then start zigzagging like a drunken retard. Such behavior makes it almost impossible to implement proper tactics as a tank commander. Should be an easy fix though...
Peace,
DreDay
-
There are a few helmet types like that, most notably "Sphera" / "Sfere-a," however you want to spell it in English. Most of them can have some kind of ballistic faceplate attached.They're exclusively MVD SF issue, although Spetsnaz units could get their hands on them if they wanted them. There are a few helmet covers in camouflage patterns for these as well.
AFAIK, none of them are called "Maska." The term "Maska" denotes a "Russian Balaclava," either single, two, or three-holed. Most commonly, we see three-hole camouflaged maskas.
AKM,
"Sphera" is an older helmet that is also used by MVD. "Maska" is the newer one. If you look at the latest RHS release - SOBR grenadier is wearing Sphera, while the rest of the SOBR fighters are wearing Maskas.
Of course, since maska means "a mask" in Russian, this rerm could also be used to reffer to a balaclava, which after all is just a facial mask. This has nothing to do with a helmet though...
Peace,
DreDay
-
Do RHS guys or anyone else know something about this helmet in this OFP2 screenshot? Specifically, what units are it used by, FSB, MVD, GRU? Is it only used by Spetsnaz units or is it possible to see it with regular units? I think it is called Titan-something and it is possible to attach a faceplate to it?
It's called "Maska" and it is used by Russian Police and Interior Troops (both fall under MVD). Â It would either be used by the special police (OMON or OMSN/ex-SOBR) or by the special forces of the Interior Troops (Spetsnaz VV). Â It is not used by Russian Army at all.
Peace,
DreDay
-
Great Work ORCS,
I particularly like the SSh-68 helmets and new ammo pouches that look top notch and super realistic! Â
At the same time, there are a couple of things that you guys might want to address in your future updates:
- Your motor-rifle men are using the RD-54 rucksacks that were only issued to VDV and other elite units. Â This has already ben discussed in this thread: RD-54 Discussion
-The Splav pouches that you use on some troops are way to rare/expensive to be used by regular motor-rifle units. Â Besides, AFAIK Splav is an exclusively MVD supplier. Here is their link, in case you don't know what I'm talking about:
- Bullet-proof vests are standard issue for motor-rifle troops, you might consider adding them to your models...
- While PK/PKM can be fed by a 200 round belt box, it is way too heavy to be used in the light machine gun role. Â Normally, the light machine gunners would use the 100 round box, while 200/250 round boxes are used by static MGs (PKMS).
- RPG-16 was never issued to motor-rifle troops; it was intended for VDV, but was retired in 1980s because its rockets were under-powered compared to PG-7VL on RPG-7s. Â Nedless to say, it never had a tandem warhead like the one that you gave it. Â I know that you are working on an RPG pack, so hopefully this would be addressed as well...
Other than that, great work and I am looking forward to your next release!
Peace,
DreDay
-
TOS-1 looks very nice. And I am not too concearned about the short range, becasue these rockets can only fly out to 3km IRL (shorter range than tank cannons).
The only thing that bothers me are the stupid red stars all over this thing. Those were never painted on Soviet/Russian vehicles, just the aircaft.
Peace,
DreDay
-
Nice start for the RAM mod. I like the fact that the uniforms reflect the two main types of camo that is in use by Russian Army (SVR and Flora). I also don't see any glaring inaccuracies, unlike most of the other mods that have tried to model Russians.
The textures do look a little washed up, but I am sure that you are going to fix that. Other than that, I am looking forward to seeing the real combat units with bullet-proff vests helmets and ammo pouches.
Peace,
DreDay
-
Wasnt this just a Novel?Its written in a intresting style but is it really written by a guy who was there?
About these Units, they look much improved over the first version, good work.
Good point Shadow NX,
V. Mironov was in fact assigned to one of the Motor-Rifle Brigades that fought in Chechnya in 1995. Â However, he was not an infantry officer like his character. Â Instead, he had served in the Special Department (counter-inteligence) and was not involved in most of the combat. Â His novel is ripe with inaccurate descriptions of weapons, actual combat engagements, and even the geography of Grozny. Â All of those have been braught out on numerous occasions and Mironov had admited to most of them.
Peace,
DreDay
-
DeadMeatXM2,
Ok so I see that you guys have done your research... Still, PBS-2 suppressors (the ones that you have on your AK-74Ms) can not be fitted on AK-74 mainly because they require a sub-sonic round to be fired. Â While some supressors can accept any round (as M|N|0N has pointed out), PBS-2 would be blown off the muzzle by a supersonic round due to its unique pressure requirements.
Unfortunately, the 5.45mm sub-sonic rounds can only be fired from the short barrel of the AKSU (even than its muzzle has to be modified to fit the PBS-2). Firing these rounds from the longer barrel of AK-74 is prohibited due to their tendency to get stuck.
As a matter of fact, the 5.45mm sub-sonics have quite awful ballistics by all accounts.  That is why Russian forces still use AKMs that fire much better 7.62mm sub-sonics.  That is also the reason why the new generation of 9mm subsonic rounds  was developed for silenced AS VAL and VSS rifles.
As to the links that you've posted... Â First one details a suppressor that reduces the noise of a 7.62mm round to a level of .22LR (which is still quite loud). Â I can only imagine that the AK-74 (which is noticeably louder than AK-47 without its standard flash suppressor) would produce an even louder noise. Â This Finish device sounds like a nice tool for protecting the hearing of reservists on a rifle range, but I don't think that I would translate to the silencing effect in OFP.
The second link does briefly mention that suppressors were designed for AK-74, however they don't produce any evidence of that. Â On the other hand, there is quite a bit of information in Russian media that shows that no such thing has ever existed.
So in the end, my point is this… Of course, someone could make their own suppressor and mount it on AK-74.  However, without proper sub-sonic munitions the result would be rather dubious.  Moreover, I don't see why anyone would go through all this trouble when both the suppressors and sub-sonics for AK-47/AKM are relatively easy to obtain and work much better!  After all, have you ever seen any pictures or footage of supressed AK-74s? I've seen dozens if not hundreds of pictures of suppressed AKMs, but not a single one of AK-74...
I realize that this is a minor point, but I also realize that your mod prides itself on realism. Â Either way this is certainly not a gripe on my part, just a way to communicate a small inconsistency that I saw in your upcoming release (which I am looking forward to regardless of this issue).
Peace,
DreDay
-
I've said it before, and I'll say it again! AK-74s can not be fiitted with a supressor, beacuse they can't fire the sub-sonic rounds. Only modified AKSUs have that feature. I am a little dissapointed that BAS, that is known for its heavy research and commitment to realism, has joined a long list of mods that have made this mistake...
That's not to say that I don't apreciate the work that BAS has put into this pack!
Peace,
DreDay
-
Personally, I prefer units with longer engagement ranges... seems more realisticEngaging individual targets with assault rifles at 700 meters is extremely urealistic.
Peace,
DreDay
-
Here are 2 pictures of soviet backpacks.Not sure if the first one is a real one or some fake sold to collectors.
http://w1.522.telia.com/~u52214146/soviet_rucksack.jpg
This second one is from Steven Zalogas Inside the Soviet Army Today. It's a R-45 rucksack carried by a motor rifle trooper on the right.
http://w1.522.telia.com/~u52214146/uniformes_2.jpg
Having the backpacks as removables in the addon is a good idea imho Shadow.
Nice pictures Jotte...
The first picture shows the "sidor" that I was talking about. Â That is precisely what Soviet/Russian motor-rifle troops are supposed to wear. Â
I haven't heard of R-45, so I can't really speak about its deployment.
As for RPG packs, Laser has included them in his VDV 2.0, hopefully you could get them from him.
Peace,
DreDay
[Please remove image tags when quoting - Fubar]
-
I have one complaint about these units; Why oh why doesnt every unit have a helmet on? I dont know how many of you have been in the army, but cirtainly, officers, medics and grenadiers do have to carry their helmets on their head as everyone else(when in combat or in the field) !!Well, as far as I recall, recon units never wear helmets, because they are an extra burden.
Same goes for paratroops, because they are supposed to be able to move around quickly. Sure they have the option to wear helmets, but they normally don't.
Umm... no.
All airborne troops wear helmets when they jump. They're all supposed to wear helmets in combat too. Look at pics of Iraq and Afghanistan right now - all troops, airborne/marine/whatever are wearing helmets in combat. Even SF guys wear helmets in combat. Nobody particularly likes wearing them until they get shot at. I know I hated wearing mine.
Hellfish,
You can not do a para jump in a standard helmet, because there is too much of a risk for your neck to be broken in the process. US paratroopers deploy helmets that are specially designed for safe landings.
Russians currently don't use such a helment, that's why they jump in tanker's soft hats.
Peace,
DreDay
-
Thx everyone ÂBtw, it may seem like all soldiers wear this beige flak vest bu thats because pics only show a few of the types from the final pack, most soldiers will have a more modern flak vest with cammo pattern like the Officers on the pics have it.
Feel free to post suggestions or critic, so we can discuss
These units look great, however I feel obligated to take you up on the critique offer...
Please take the RD-54 backpacks away from them. These packs are only available to VDV paratroopers and GRU Spetsnaz (and maybe some scout units); but the regular Motor-Rifle troops (and that's what your pack is) have to do with good old "sidor" packs (circa WWII). That's a mute point though, because the motor-rifle units keep their belongings in the vehicles and don't carry anything on their backs except for RPG/AGS assistants and such who have special packs. If you were to model those, I would have been most impressed.
Other than that, it looks like another outstanding production from RHS!
Peace,
DreDay
-
Has the deployment of RPO changed since the 90's? Â I was going by the 1996 U.S. Army OPFOR field manual (FM 100-63). Â We use published data first, unless we get good first-hand info (like yours). Â Were there such RPO specialists in 1991-95?FM 100-63 Â is an excellent collection of data, but it is made just for general refference and is far from 100% accurate. Â Many of the things there are generalised for your average OPFOR (as opposed to specific Soviet OOB). Â They also carry quite a few mistakes with weapon names and designations (i.e. BG-15 vs GP-25). Â Yet it is one of the best refferences on OPFOR OOB in English (although I think that FM 100-60 is more relevant to the Soviets). Â Luckily, I am fairly fluid in Russian, so I can read up their publications as well... Â Yet, as you will see, I am wrong at least as often as am right...
Now to the RPO deployment, I have taken another look at my sources and here is what I came up with:
1970s-mid 80s  original RPO Rys(Lynx) is deployed with chemical troops.  Individual RPO gunners or full "flamethrouwer platoons" can be used to reinforce infantry formations
Mid 80s  New and improved RPO-A is deployed with chemical  troops and special forces in Afghanistan. Â
Late 80s It is decided to make RPOs available to regular infrantry units based on the Afghan experience where spetsnaz soldiers had used them to great effect
Mid 90s RPOs are actively used in Chechen fighting (particularly in and around Grozny) Â - experience shows that RPOs should be deployed within their organic formation (RPO platoons) in order to maximize their combat effectiveness - past practice of spreading them too thin is discouraged from that point on
So there you have it... Â It would seem that per WGLs timeline (late 80s) RPOs could have been deployed by designated chemical troop specialists or regular infrantrymen...
I know for a fact that there was no designated flamethrower position within Soviet MRP OOB at that time; so it would seem that RPOs were distributed based on need and availability (like RPG-18/22) Although I still doubt that RPOs were readily available to all (or even most infantry units).
But enought about RPOs, any chance I could convince you guys to replace supressed AK-74s(no such thing IRL) with supressed AKMs?
Peace,
DreDay
-
What I'd like to do is make the RPO dual tube proxy then work it similar to a the rucksacks in some way so that it can be carried correctly to real life. However foresee obvious AI issues so all that will have to be looked at as well. Either way, it still needs a little work around the edges and in one of the next releases or patches we'll enable it on a preconfigured soldier. I love Tact's fx on the thing and it works nicely in the game. I hadn't actually used it until just the other night.EDIT: Thanks for the info Dre. It's often pretty difficult finding decent detailed info like that online. Or at least remembering it once you find it one random night, lol.
AngusHeaf,
In case you decide to model a proxy, here are a couple of the pictures of the dual tube pack:
Here's also a good description of an RPO with a nice picture from Jane's:
Peace,
DreDay
-
The "Flame Thrower" is an RPO-A Schmel, an incendiary rocket weapon deployed by ze Russians. Â IRL one member of each infantry platoon gets one. Â They're great for clearing buildings/bunkers. Â I commented out the "Flame Thrower" troop because the weapon wasn't quite done yet (hadn't been tested, didn't have a WGL gear pic yet). Â But it should work in 4.1.Weapon: WGL_RPOLauncher (disposable)
Magazine: WGL_RPOMag (takes up 3 slots)
No ruck mags. Â It's a large device, as you can see from the proxy (I don't know if the proxy is scaled correctly, we'll see).
Tactitian,
I really like how RPO effects are implemented in the game, but your information about this weapon's deployment is a little off.
Frist of all, it is not distributed dirrectly to the infantry platoon members. Instead, "RPO Gunner" is a designated specialist position that requires special training and qualifications. In fact, these soldiers are organizationally subordinate to the chemical troops (no one knows why...), so they are used to reinforce the infantry platoons and scout/spetsnaz groups as needed.
More importantly though, RPO-A/D/Z tubes are never carried alone. Their manufacturer packeges them in a carying pack with two tubes and they are not likely to be seperated before the battle. This is particularly true, since one shot would often miss the target at ranges over 200m and aim would have to be adjusted for the second one.
So how could this apply to OFP? Here's what I think:
Make RPO team (three RPO gunners) one of the attachement groups for infantry/VDV, and give spetsnaz groups an RPO gunner.
Now, the RPO ammo would take two pistol slots (that way you can carry two of them). Once the first one is fired and you run a script to remove the used RPO launcher, check to see if this soldier has more RPO ammo. Drop the used tube and give him a new one if there is another ammo item remaining.
Hope you'll find this usefull.
Peace,
Dre
-
Hey guys,
Are you planning to change the <b>aimPrecision</b> values in the config.bin? These variables are responsible for the hand shacking/breathing effect that you barely see right now. In my experience, increasing these variables can make aiming a lot more realistic (read hard) for both humans and AI.
Holla at me if you need more details...
Peace,
DreDay
-
I'm writing this message with OFP running in the background. Seems the AT4 does indeed wobble up and down a bit but it generally pretty accurate. In a future (very small) patch I think I'll turn down the manueverability just a tad to see if I can smooth it out a bit more. Strangely it also seems affected by the missile used. Some are more stable than others and the AT4 model used tends to wobble a tad. Will look into that.It's been a while since I've played with the confings for ATGMs, but my limited knowledge of physics leads me to believe that they are missing the wheight in there. Â Could they be using the weight variable from Oxygen for that particular model?
Also, I was trying to hint in my original post that the BMP-2 is most likely to be equipped with AT-5, just like the BMD-3 (they pretty much share the same turret). Â Although I am aware of a fact that AT-4 and AT-5 are interchangeable...
-
I have been a huge fan of your mod for a while, so congrats on another great release. Â However I have a couple of questions/complaints:
- The ATGM on BMP-1/2 still has a faulty control problem. Â Interestingly, this is not a problem on a BMD-3, which IRL fires the same ATGM as BMP-2 (hint, hint...)
- Most Russian IFVs are deprived of smoke launchers; this was not the case circa 1980s Central Europe
- Smoke fired from IFVs does not seem to block the visibility for AI, as it was promised in the read-me.
- I have mentioned this in a couple of other threads, but no one seems to believe me... Â Still for the records - there is no such thing as a suppressed AK-74, just AK-74SU.
- As long as you are changing the config.bin, please consider changing the aimPrecision variable in order to make realistic aiming for infantry weapons.
- Finally, I can't seem to figure out how to make the AI players use their backpacks. Â This was promised in the read-me, yet I don't see any options for that.
On the overall though, thanks for doing this extensive work!!!
Adjustable iron sights?
in ARMA - GENERAL
Posted
I have to agree with Dslyecxi on this...
Shooting while moving is a valid technique that is utilized by numerous infantry organizations all around the world. It does not work too well in OFP, because the suppression is not modeled. Hopefully we will see that change in Game2. Still, even in the current version of OFP, it is very useful when fighting in built-up areas.
I also prefer 3d sight to fixed sprites for all the reasons that were stated above. BTW, Brothers In Arms series are another example realistic 3d sights (although they made them less accurate in order to balance the game play).
Finally, I find it impossible to believe that someone actually thinks that the handling of CQB in OFP is better than SWAT3 and 4. Did I read that correctly, Heatseaker? Is that what you were really trying to say?
Peace,
DreDay