Dynamax

i couldnt agree more. thats why this would be best as an addon, then take any much need development resouce from BIS that have so much more important and difficult tasks to accomplish. frankly i have no clue as to why this thread is still open, maybe the mods are having a ball laughing at how rediculous some of the posts on here are. i know i am.

if BIS adds gasmasks, then im going to ask that they add glowsticks (that my be more usefull then the gasmasks), working firstaid kits, working cantene/hydration pack, and why not a rolled up sleeping bag in with the rest of your gear, so you can pull it out and take a nap when you go AFK.

the helmets in arma already have some ballistic protection. i lost track of how many times i have shot someone in the helmet, only to watch as the round bounces or deflects off. same goes for weapons. i'v had many shots blocked by rifles and RPG/M136 launchers that would otherwise in any other game be an outright kill.

what version of Arma are you running?

agreed, unless your planning on playing for a few weeks on end on the same mission, building trenches and bunkers would be a waste of time that would otherwise be used playing. (im still waiting for someone to start a thread on simulating going to the toilet, with the option to pull out the crap bin and burn it all with gasoline.) if its not something that is a MUST *cough* MUST!!!have, and a "would be nice to have" then please think about what you're asking for befor posting. this is not directed at anyone, just for everyone.

shacking in weapon optics ok, but in player view while flying?... you do know that in that last video its a camera straped down on the dashbord. the human eye compensates for any slight movment or vibration. through a camera it would be shacky from the aircrafts vibrations, but the pilot sees everything nice a smooth, he only feels the vibrations. its like when your riding in a car on a bumpy road, you feel the bumps, and see the car it self shake, but everything you see out the windows looks fine.

looks to me that you may be playing the wrong game. have you tried S.T.A.L.K.E.R.? that may be the game for you. like others have posted, its a wate of time. there are other far more important things to add to ArmAII than cheesy usless gimicks that add nothing to the overall gameplay/simulation. build us the best sandbox and we'll make the castles.

this is why i love ArmA and OFP. they are the only two games the accuratly depict not only the player view over the weapon, but also the ballistic point of origin. unlike all thoes other cookie-cutter FPS games where what you see is not really what is there. a good example is any FPS using any of the many different versions on the Unreal engine, be it the RainbowSix series, COD series and many others. these games have a centered camera that is offten placed on the neck or on top of the head of the player model. when hiding behind cover, the player can shoot over that cover as long as they can see over it. that isnt how it should be at all. these game have the shot(wont say ballistics because these games dont have any) point of origin set as the exact same as the player camera view center. so even thoe the weapon may be compleatly blocked by the cover, they can still shoot over that cover like its not there. i call this the "eye level' exploit, since its hard for someone to shoot anyone hiding behind cover when the only thing that gets exposed is the tops of their heads. in Arma and OFP just like in real life, you need to make sure that the weapon has a clear line of sight to the target and is not blocked by cover. so this make the player do exactly what happens in real life, that is that he must expose his body from behind cover to be able to fire his weapon. this is why CQC is so dangerous in real life.

if you are going to bash BIS on something that you claim to be wrong, how about showing everyone one how smart you are and present something that suports your claim? how about this? if thats too difficult to understand, i can make you a diagram with little stick figures.

well, lets see. i have an M4 sitting on my lap right now. im setting with my eyes 25inches from my monitor. (i remove the barrel for more room) when i sholder the M4 without looking down the sights guess what, it almost matches exactly to what you see in ArmA. when i look down the sights, again it lines up almost perfectly with the ingame iron sights. so if you ask me, BIS did a great job with the weapon view. you guys need to remember that when viewing the 3D world through a monitor, its the same as sticking a cardboard box over you're head, and cutting out a small window to view out of it. unless you are using some sorft of VR helmet that covers the 180*view of you eyes, i see no problem what so ever with how BIS set up the weapon views.

no

arma is so realistic...no need to add proper physics right i would hardly call ragdoll "proper physics" when it comes to simulating a dead body. every game that i have played that has ragdoll physics makes the dead look just as the name implies.. they look like ragdolls, they have no mass, looks fake and take away from the immersion that a well animated character gives to the game. some of you need to stop watching all them action movies and sit down and look at real life combat footage of real poeple and how they react.

enough about the ragdoll, it has been discussed to death many times. it will not work will with ArmA much less with ArmA II. both these games are far too big for ragdoll to be implimented properly and with good performance. all we need is more death animations, and a means in which the game can pick the best animation to match the last action of the soldier (no more crouched dude standing up flailing his arms around and spinning befor dropping like some overly dramatic bad actor). as for what they should do about players who are hit by explosions and large caliber projectiles, simple.. GIB. not only would it look better than the "flying manikin" we have now. it would also mean alot less polygons on screen, and better performance. what to do about the gear from a gibbed player? remove it, if the player was ripped to bits, then you can be sure most of his gear went with him.

i think this is what nephilim is refering to. just make the main barrel one smooth cylinder, then add floating geometry like in my picture. best way to reduce poly count for cylinders

im going to have to agree on the MP5 being a bit small. i have handled MP5s and i know they are a bit larger then that. im not sure if O2II has a scale or what units it uses, seems to me that everyone just scales things by eye. the MP5SD5 is 777mm(77.7cm) long, which is 1cm longer then an M4A1 with its stock fully retracted. i think the BIS MP5 is like around 10% smaller then it should be. it would be easy to scale the weapons for the soldiers, being that the average human male hight is about 180cm(5 ft 10.9 in). you just devide the BIS soldier model hight by 180, then line up the MP5A5 to 77.7. anytime i import a 1:1 scale model from 3DSmax or LightWave3D, O2 always makes the models tiny, then i have to scale up the model without any units of measurments.

SASR Sabre, you rock man, i have been waiting for some Canadian troops. that soldier looks awsome.

nephilim i want to ask you about floating geometry. i want to know if these parts need to be closed, without open areas? using floating geometry i was able to cut down the poly count on the hand guard of my HK416 almost in half from over 4,000 to just over 2,000 polys.

is anyone compilling a list of compleated signed addons and mods? i have been looking through the forums and i havent seen any. been waiting on CSM sound mod to get signed, along with many others. could the addon and mod makers please edit and update their first post in thier threads with the signed addons. im sure most of us would rather not read through 20+ pages in your threads just to find an up to date link for the signed addons&mods, if there are any.

the real SCAR's color is more uniform. also the newest version of the SCAR uses the M4 grip and not the FN style. what you have is the 1st generation modeled. you can see many differences between gen1 and gen2 SCARs. most recent is Gen3 but there isnt much info on it. Gen1 Gen2

im hard at work with finishing up the upper receiver, there are so many angle changes and contours. having a precision caliper helps alot, but its making the model efficiant and still looking right that is hard.

Uhh, doubt that. oh how so? i'd show you the technical drawings and pictures of the real thing, but that would get me into some troubles i dont feel like dealing with. the important internal components will not be modeled, at least not for ArmA.

that doesnt look bad, but i have noticed that you are using a regular M4 reciver with HK markings on it. now that i learned how to smooth my model better, i can move on to finishing it. but since im not much of a scripter, i may just give it to someone to bring it into Arma, if your intrested on my model, i'd love for you to use it. here are some boldozer screens, there are still some parts that need to be reworked and also need to make to rest of the components. all parts are accurate to 0.001mm to the real one.

dude, thank you. now i can import the other components.

thanks for the reply, but im still having problems. i know that importing .3ds saves the smoothing information, but now for reason the model gets chewed up and some points are missings. it also seems to merge random parts together. on the otherhand, if i import from .obj format, its looks fines, only that it doesnt seem to have the smoothing info. its no wonder BI takes a while to make anything. DOOM3 models are in .lwo format and a snap to modify in LightWave.

ok, i have been doing some more work on my HK416 model and i started to play around with O2II(Ozone[O4, lol]). now im have been trying to make this part have correct smoothing and sharp edges, but the way of doing it in "Ozone" is just awfull. i tried to just select a set of polys to add smoothing, and it smooths all the edges of what was selected, including the edges between the selected and unselected polys. so then i tried selecting each edge between the polys i want to smooth one by one, but sometimes it'll select a vertex on the other side of the model though other polys.. then i have to start smoothing the edges all over again because i havent found a way to unselect something that was just selected. im so frustrated with O2II... its so easy using lightwave. there has to be an easyer means to correctly smooth a model with out loosing my mind. this kinda sucks, all other programs i have make smoothing the easiest part of modeling..