Eviscerator

finally, the release version has been on the server since saturday...

well, if we had more of that stuff, we'd have a lot of ships but nothing to put on/in them :/

ok...i never said you didnt give credit, the only thing that was my writing (as i said i got it from opflashpoint.org) was: so...not only did you download the skins, you downloaded one that was the wrong colour :/ are the models yours too? or are they the ones that came with the skin? which are legitamate questions....

ok, for anyone still thinking we are talking about the AAV7, this is an AAV7: and this is what we are talking about, the AAAV(Advanced Amphibious Assault vehicle): everyone clear on that?

ok, for anyone still thinking we are talking about the AAV7, this is an AAV7: and this is what we are talking about, the AAAV(Advanced Amphibious Assault vehicle): everyone clear on that?

yeah, i thought i remembered being able to cross rivers in a bradley in some rts game....

yeah, i thought i remembered being able to cross rivers in a bradley in some rts game....

i just saw over at opflashpoint.org someone spotted that your SA-80, M249 and M82A1 Barret skins are all downloaded CS Skins.... (name) M82A1BarrettLight50 http://www.cs-skins.net/engine_....rows=10 (name) AOSA80Susat http://www.cs-skins.net/engine_....rows=10 M-249 eigth from the bottom. http://www.cs-skins.net/engine_....type=28 so...not only did you download the skins, you downloaded one that was the wrong colour :/ are the models yours too? or are they the ones that came with the skin?

you're telling me my personal opinion is wrong?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (fraggit @ Oct. 27 2002,05:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">More Russian planes would be great. But I really don't use any plane too much except the Tornado. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (B@ZOOkA @ Oct. 26 2002,17:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RaptorAce @ Oct. 27 2002,01:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i bet that's just a load of bull, they're just trying to intimidate the U.S., who's F-22 is superior to anything the russians could put out any time soon, plus it's cancelled and is older than the F-22<span id='postcolor'> i wouldnt say so ... its a fact that the mig-31 was the best airplane in the world before the F-22 was developed... the russians were always good ingeneurs... and btw the mig-31 and 35 just look better than that ugly f-22 Â Â <span id='postcolor'> You think this plane and this plane are better looking than this one?<span id='postcolor'> yes

er...im being serious, the textures are all wrong, have you ever seen a SA-80 in real life? if you have youll know it doesnt look like that...

er, first off i would like to yelp in horror, there are a lot of things wrong with this...having handled lots of SA-80's (albeit quite a few years ago) those textures are way off, they look like cartoons, and when was the SUSAT ever red? the front er...barrel guard(not sure what the real name is) is way too square, and the SA-80 doesnt have a fore sight like that(i dont think it actually uses any, not sure)...also your soldier is about to get very painfully injured by that brass about to come flying at him as youve got the cocking lever and the open....er 'hole' on the wrong side, theres just a lot of things wrong with it it resembles an SA-80 but its very far from the real thing....

the main problem with the SU-25 is down to ofp's engine, unfortunately it cant have more than one type of detachable missile/bomb so you can have one machinegun/grenade launcher, as many FFAR pods as you want (although they will only appear from two points), and one type of missile/bomb that detaches, i dont think you can plan on this being fixed in any patches i think it would be too much work, so for now the SU-25 is the best, once P3Dedit is released we may be able to get some different loadouts on there (ie LGB's, AT-16's, lots of rockets and some AA)

the people that are updating it are slightly changed, bibmi isnt working on it so much this time, the main people working on it are Selectthis, Ebud and me with a few other people contributing, at last count its going to be 2-3 weeks, we've finshed all the hueys, the OH-6 and the cobra's(AH-1G and AH-1J) is finished, and i think all the ground troops (or a large percentage) are finished, weapons are being worked on (all models done, probably 50% textures) most of the work left is the huge task of .cpp'ing it, there may be an Ia Trang update, as SelectThis has fixed the problem the AI with walking through forest blocks and Ebud is working on new trees/foliage, it may or may not get a full face lift, but as i said the forests will be fixed and also the runway at the SF base to allow AI to take off/land

sure, they should be done in around ten minutes, sir....

er...you posted this: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">not only are you continuing 'stating your opinion', its getting really pathetic now...<span id='postcolor'> 10-20 minutes after we spoke on irc, thats not letting go

erm, correct me if im wrong but isnt WarDog also arguing for realism? and yet im the pathetic one?

they dont need to ask permission, it wouldnt need to have any of DKM's work in the file, all it would need is a .cpp in a pbo, ive also heard claims you are emailing BIS because i have gave criticism about this and the Bronco (both unrealistic cpp issues)

no, youve clearly misunderstood, what im urging is an 'extra' to the addon, which would create a realistic version while not modifying any of your work, how is that ripping your model off?

"if you dont like it then dont download it" this phrase is used far too often, i was looking forward to a tunguska being released, now no-one else will make one as they probably wont get the model better than DKM, i cant modify the .cpp because then it would mess up any online play, unless someone makes a cpp addon for it by changing the characteristics/names and not including the p3d in the file (would make sure that people had the DKM tunguska and then both options to play with, also i dont think it would have to be made with DKM inputas you wouldnt be modifying their model/textures) which i dont have the time to do myself, i hope someone does this though...

well, we may as well stop, its pretty clear DKM only want to make the models and arent interested in making it realistic or playable against, its certainly not fun to play against at the minute, (which it should be, ie hugging the trees so the radar cant spot you and flying over while the only get a shot or two at you), instead, one shot flips any chopper/plane, ill certainly be sticking to the shilka in missions i play...

well....no, the addon is a beta, we are talking about things that we want fixed by the final version

no...the A-10 cant penetrate 60mm of steel/whatever armour it was with one shot, it was most likely firing a burst at 4000rpm, which is pretty much what the tunguska does (higher rof, less velocity), anyway there is no need for the tunguska to be this powerful it destroys aircraft in 1-2 hits, flipping the aircraft, why not make it less powerful and more playable to be against or are dkm scared to see their baby hurt?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Gen.Carnage @ Oct. 25 2002,01:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the 30 mm ammo doesnt really have much power, its in its velocity that really determines how much punch it will have<span id='postcolor'> and you know that the GAU-8 has a faster velocity and that the 30mm round it uses is depleted uranium, and the most armour its been able to go through is 68mm(?) as someone else said, and you still think it should be as powerful as youve made it?

well i was talking about ofp again, a bmp has say 250 armour, while the blackhawk has 60 or soso theres no need to have the rounds so powerful