Eviscerator

its already possible in ofp1, you just make the hill a 3d model and model the caves in it, also for a foxhole you just slowly mound the earth up around it (in like a 25mx25m area) so when you do 'dig down' it looks like its being dug, instead of being on top of the actual land, although, i hope they allow us to somehow be able to 'cut through' the wrp 'ground', but i cant see it happening to be honest...

Or, how about BIS allow us to create our own proxy types, and multiple different proxies (so not like aircraft), therefore allowing us to make things like scopes, silencers or grenade launchers, and the things you mentioned in their own p3d's and 'put them all together' using the cpp, therefore not making us duplicate the same scope over and over again just to add a silencer to the weapon, or a grenade launcher, or a shotgun, this would dramatically reduce filesize in packs similar to the BAS Weapon pack.

The 75th Ranger Regiment didnt exist in WW2.

peanuckle_00, please remember that those are both hollywood, and not real life, and therefore cant really reflect what they should or should not model their SEAL's like...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (cheeky monkey @ 05 May 2003,23:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (dave8 @ 27 April 2003,02:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What happened to this MOD: OPERATION VIETNAM Do you think BIS is working with these guys? they looked pretty damn professional<span id='postcolor'> Why does it say Seventh underneith the title??<span id='postcolor'> it says copyright seventh, seventh is the nickname of David Lagettie(sp?), the guy in charge of BIA

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Gummi @ 05 May 2003,17:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">then i hope we get the normal version, not just o2 light<span id='postcolor'> the full version just has an animation editor as extra, and extrude, which we can do manually anyway, and we have an unofficial animation editor already, so, theres not a whole lot of point to be honest...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I get the impression that they plan to release the OFP2_Oxygen into the commnity before OFP2 hits the shelves.<span id='postcolor'> There probably is no such thing as OFP2_Oxygen, it will probably just be oxygen, but using different selections...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jamesia @ 05 May 2003,14:01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">hmm<span id='postcolor'> What was the point in reviving a 7 month old thread to reply with just 'hmm'? Anyhoo, nowadays you would use config entrys coupled with geometry weight...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Czacha @ 04 May 2003,16:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">OFP CWC Polish version with Resistance 1.91 English version.. I know few other ppl using Polish OFP:CWC and Polish RESISTANCE... they got the same problem - cargo Chinook can't explode in air..  in other case game crashes  <span id='postcolor'> the polish patch/version may very well be why then, none of the BAS members are polish, or have a polish version so we have no way of making sure something works, just one question, does ofp crash when you fire a stinger/strela at the mh-47e?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Czacha @ 04 May 2003,12:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ok, there is too much to read in this thread.. so don't be angry if someone wrote this before put cargo version 'in flight' and then shoot it down with LAW or RPG... game creshes to desktop without any error you can crash cargo version by ground and nothing happens... but if it's going to explode in air - game creshes to windows desktop  <span id='postcolor'> What version of OFP are you using?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ 04 May 2003,02:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Eviscerator @ 04 May 2003,00:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (dmitri @ 04 May 2003,00:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Thick jungle, mud, rain, wading through streams, insects, VC tunnels.<span id='postcolor'> All of these are possible with the current engine (barring insects), and with a managable polygon count/texture size, the only problem not making mud/rivers easy to do is that we cant (or havent worked out yet how to) put animated textures on them, it is extremely possible for OFP to have the same, if not better visual features than the likes of Vietcong, or Line of Sight - Vietnam, even with the current engine(barring rivers like vietcong, for the reasons mentioned above), so any improvements they make will just make it even more 'pretty'. Couple this with the sheer scale and freedom of the OFP world and this is why im so keen on OFP2 being Vietnam...<span id='postcolor'> Evisc, if you guys can make dust kick up from rotorwash, can you make sloshes and splashes in water and mud? Â I don't have the programming skill for that sort of thing, but I would think both would operate along similar lines. Â Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong though.<span id='postcolor'> To be honest, im not sure, thats more of a scripting thing, not my area, what i was talking about though was the way the water is seen to move in Vietcong, if BIS implement something along the lines of that then there is nothing stopping them making some of the best looking jungle seen in any modern game...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (dmitri @ 04 May 2003,00:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Thick jungle, mud, rain, wading through streams, insects, VC tunnels.<span id='postcolor'> All of these are possible with the current engine (barring insects), and with a managable polygon count/texture size, the only problem not making mud/rivers easy to do is that we cant (or havent worked out yet how to) put animated textures on them, it is extremely possible for OFP to have the same, if not better visual features than the likes of Vietcong, or Line of Sight - Vietnam, even with the current engine(barring rivers like vietcong, for the reasons mentioned above), so any improvements they make will just make it even more 'pretty'. Couple this with the sheer scale and freedom of the OFP world and this is why im so keen on OFP2 being Vietnam...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tamme @ 03 May 2003,15:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes the americans are nice, they help sick children, BLAAH BLAAH BLAAH..... Do they really care about the people? No. They're always after their own interests. The people in Vietnam and in Iraq and even the american soldiers are worth of nothing to the US goverment. They're being used. The White House is full of people who want to make USA an empire that rules the world. The little people matter nothing. They cold bloodedly murdered millions of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Just go to Cuba and see how they treat the prisoners. That's inhumane! Terrorist or not you still got rights, I think the american constitution says something about it. <span id='postcolor'> Firstly, you are generalising about 300,000,000 people on the actions/thoughts you claim of maybe 30-40 people in the US Government, and you are going far off topic, also, while this has been brought up, how do you explain Kosovo? There was no monetary gain for the US to go in, infact, they gained nothing, apart from the satisfaction of saving countless muslim lives... Also, only 70,000 people died at Hiroshima and about the same at Nagasaki in the blast, and about 130,000 each from the effects, so only 400,000 deaths and not millions, also, if you look at Iwo Jima, there was a 35% casualty rate among the US soldiers, the plan was to send a million soldiers to invade Japan, the Japanese people would have fanatically defended Japan, probably making the casualty rate go up further, and probably more Japanese would have been killed in the process, so, it is rather cold blooded, but 400,000 casualties from Nagasaki and Hiroshima or millions from the invasion of Japan, which would you prefer? And how many lives do you think have been saved by those terrorists being imprisoned?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (haunted @ 03 May 2003,08:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We're not dealing with modern weapons, we're dealing with vietnam<span id='postcolor'> These type of things were still added to vietnam era weapons, just about everything i mentioned except the modern sights/IR pointers were used in vietnam, but then they would have had the choice between various scopes albeit obviously not on an M4 and there would not have been the modern day accomadations on the weapons for it (so it would involve a lot of tape).

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Polishdude @ 03 May 2003,01:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Listen to me, NATO can lose to any country no matter what weapons, or vechicles they have, just look at Vietnam, small country the NATO LOST!!! They may have won battles but they lost the war. NVA and VC didn't have a chance with their weapons and vechicles, yet they won  because of stragetic battles and great opprotunities on attacking the allied army. All I'm saying small country or not NATO has a still a chance of losing even now. It all depends on stragedy.<span id='postcolor'> NATO did not participate in the Vietnam War.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Polishdude @ 03 May 2003,01:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Listen to me, NATO can lose to any country no matter what weapons, or vechicles they have, just look at Vietnam, small country the NATO LOST!!! They may have won battles but they lost the war. NVA and VC didn't have a chance with their weapons and vechicles, yet they won  because of stragetic battles and great opprotunities on attacking the allied army. All I'm saying small country or not NATO has a still a chance of losing even now. It all depends on stragedy.<span id='postcolor'> NATO did not participate in the Vietnam War.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wilco @ 02 May 2003,21:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">men could be killed and possibly lean on the side of a hedgehodge<span id='postcolor'> Was this a typo or is this a campaign to rid the world of our spiny Hedgehog chums? Not exactly the most comfortable thing to lean on...

Ok, we set up a thread for exactly these kinds of comments, or any questions PLEASE use that instead of creating numerous BAS threads: http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....+thread

I think BIS really need to develop weapons and attachments to weapons a lot more, also the amount of ammo should not be always limited to 10 mag slots it should be decided upon what equipment they are wearing, which should also be chosen, as in many RPG games. So, something like this, albeit a basic, quickly made example: I'll use the example of say...a modern M4A1, so for the options there would be something along the following available: Stock Type: Solid Solid with Spare Mag strapped on Collapsible Magazine: Standard 2 Strapped together C-Mag Scope: None Carry handle Aimpoint ACOG Reflex ACOG 4x32 Underbarrel: None M203 Masterkey Overbarrel: None IR Pointer Barrel: None Silencer Flashlight And so on... Also something similar for the loadout, so you pick what type of webbing/puches your soldier wears instead of what ammo he gets, so you could chose canteens which would make your soldier be able to run for longer periods, a grenade puch, with two grenades in, and then the various ammo pouches, smoke grenades, M203 grenade pouch, making it a lot more like the real thing, although the weapon side of things is probably more for spec ops....

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ruff @ 02 May 2003,16<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i just really wish ofp 2 would be the present u got  afghanistan war u got the 2 gulfwars somalia conflict just hope they use these wars instead of vietnam coz vietnams too old too much politics and there are no real good guys if it was based in the gulf 1 or 2 at least other countries can be used instead of just america<span id='postcolor'> The Wars/Campaigns you suggest dont really suit OFP, both Gulf Wars were relatively easy to win, there wasnt a whole lot of resistance, and were remarkably short, a 100 hour land war in the first Gulf War and a 4 week land war in the second, Somalia is also a pretty bad scenario to put in ofp, there would be too many polygons, and with the scale of ofp you wouldnt be able to hide the fact that the whole city (when talking about Mogadishu) is not modelled as in DF:BHD, also not a whole lot happened, it was mainly peace keeping, and the Deltas/Rangers/SOAR were only there for 8(?) weeks, so not really enough to fill a campaign and several single player missions with...also if you only want it for the 'Irene' mission, then maybe you should be playing DF:BHD instead... Also, if you mean the modern Afghanistan war, there was also not much resistance, it would be mainly a special forces oriented game, and still, not much action. Vietnam is one of the only conflicts in the last century (barring both world wars) that was actually hard fought, the Americans, Australians, the ARVN and several other nations were in a relentless battle for over a decade, there were also numerous different styles of warfare, and numerous times they were used allowing many different options for both a campaign and missions, and as i mentioned before there are many nationalities other than american that fought, also whats to say BIS wont do a Red Hammer style mission from the VC/NVA perspective? </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If its going to be a NAM thingy   I would like to know if the side of Resistance is reserved for the VC? and the NVA for East(logical). If BiS is planning to place South Vietnam as Resistance well then I think that`s *&^%$@#*# if you know what I mean <span id='postcolor'> I'm not too sure what the difference would be, both the NVA and the VC were on one side, and the Americans and the ARVN (and others) were on the other side, what would be logical to have as resistance is Vietnamese villagers, as some worked with the VC and yet some tried to expel them...Also, whats to say the 'sides' will be the same as OFP:CWC? Oh, and im not american, just incase people think thats why im taking this viewpoint...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (haunted @ 02 May 2003,13:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would like to see how the enact the brutality the american forces had at the time, will be like they are portrayed in the movies, or as kind considerate troops??<span id='postcolor'> I think it would be wrong for BIS to stereotype all the US soldiers as cruel, brutal, monsters. There was probably a large mix of different personalities and views on how the enemy should be treated, a lot of the troops sent out there were scared young teenagers after all...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ 30 April 2003,20:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Damn, I don't remember where I read that, but Evisc is right. Â IL is a project of Bohemia's Australian studio. Â Supposedly it's due out this July.<span id='postcolor'> In the same interview he mentioned they had no plans to release IL this year, so it would seem unlikely that they would release it in July, you would also expect the BIS PR machine to be at work if it was going to be released so soon... And Leone there is no evidence linking IL to OFP2, firstly from screenshots released about IL its going to be about Australian peace keepers in East Timor, in a modern-ish setting (i think they were there 3-4 years ago or something). OFP2 has been billed as a Modern-Historical scenario, and has had several pictures of Vietnam era soldiers carrying vietnam era weaponry, so the chances of them being the same game are very slim...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Leone @ 30 April 2003,19:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Got a link.....and a date? Â <span id='postcolor'> Nope and nope...it was on flashpoint.ru i believe

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Leone @ 30 April 2003,18:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why do you assume that IL and OFP2 are separate projects? Â <span id='postcolor'> Because Marek said so in an interview, and IL is being developed by BIA, while OFP2 is being developed by BIS.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wardog @ 30 April 2003,18:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Eviscerator @ 29 April 2003,21:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also, theres something slightly suspect about those latter models, the first 3 undoubtedly look amazing, however the OH-58 with the floating skids, the 214 and the 412 look vastly different in quality where they dont use parts from the original 3 models, if they were all made by the same person you would expect the quality to be consistent in all of the models, im not sure if this is an indication of something, but it does seem rather suspect...<span id='postcolor'> If he's not got as far as skinning them yet, it's possible. Besides, all the later Hueys should be in Marine colours. Just using existing while he builds? My thought is that they're too good. I will be very impressed if these aircraft are produced. Notice; they're on an O2 background, but not ingame, even with an object Config file? I smell a rat. <span id='postcolor'> Well, it seems strange that he would spend so much time finishing the OH-58, OH-6 and UH-1D in secrecy and then as he shows them he shows 4-5 more versions that look as though theyve been knocked up very quickly...