Eviscerator

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Munger @ Oct. 24 2002,22:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Eviscerator @ Oct. 24 2002,20:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">if the tunguska was that good an anti tank vehicle then russia would get rid of all the t-80/90's and replace it with something that can do both ground and air defence<span id='postcolor'> Not really. Even if the Tunguska was that good against both tanks and aircraft, it's extremely weak armour would make it extremely vulnerable on the battlefield - even a HMG could take it out. Tanks are designed to take as well as dish out. <span id='postcolor'> well of course, i meant if in real life the tunguska was as dkm have made it that would happen

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Gen.Carnage @ Oct. 24 2002,22:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">do you think quad very high rof guns with automatic shell feeder, radar guidance plus 8 AA missiles are cheaper than a single smootbore gun? come on now!<span id='postcolor'> probably not, but with then having lots of tunguskas instead of lots of tunguskas and lots of tanks would be cheaper, and looking at the information the last post contained i think it should be a lot lower, 68mm would only do enough damage on older tanks and as was said, from the top, the 2A38M also has about a 200m/s disadvantage in muzzle velocity to the gau-8 so there would be less punch to the rounds, the 2s6m should probably be able to take say a bmp out in 6-8 seconds as it has a small amount of armour, remember aircraft have armour of under 100, you dont need all that power

comparing the A-10's gun to 2 AA guns is a bit unrealistic, the A-10 uses depleted uranium shells, if the tunguska was that good an anti tank vehicle then russia would get rid of all the t-80/90's and replace it with something that can do both ground and air defence, and the saving in money would come in handy to a cash strapped country....so it cant be that good, against aircraft you dont need to have huge powerful shells, just a large volume of fire, even the A-10 cannon would have a hard time destroying any modern battle tank....no matter how bad ofp's damage is you should make it so that it fits in, otherwise any missions with you facing this will be unplayable, you should probably use the shilka round but higher rof as a base, and work from there giving slightly more damage

if your thinking about making an AR-15-ish sniper rifle, why not make the SR-25? AR-10(basically a 7.62mm M16) Top SR-25 Bottom [edit: oops sorry ralph, didnt notice, replaced with a smaller one]

one really annoyig thing just happened to me in a mission, i saved up for a T-80 and finally could afford one, jumped in with my crew, turned on the spot and tapped the heavy vehicles building....then the t-80 flipped...and i mean totally, leaving me sat upside down in a shiny new t-80 that id wasted 4000 on, i was not a happy bunny....is this a mod problem or ofp? ive never encountered that with normal buildings before

one really annoyig thing just happened to me in a mission, i saved up for a T-80 and finally could afford one, jumped in with my crew, turned on the spot and tapped the heavy vehicles building....then the t-80 flipped...and i mean totally, leaving me sat upside down in a shiny new t-80 that id wasted 4000 on, i was not a happy bunny....is this a mod problem or ofp? ive never encountered that with normal buildings before

i think the point sefe was trying to make, was that all new addon makers arent now trapped with having wheels going forward, and offered a solution, he/she just used the hawk as an example

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Errmm... - The shilka uses a sligthly modified PT-76 chassis. You can see that from http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/zsu-23-4.htm and http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/pt-76.htm . On the other hand i see nothing suggesting that the tunguska should use the same chassis on these pages: http://www.army-technology.com/projects/tunguska/index.html <span'>http://www.fas.org/man....e><span id='postcolor'> i dont see 'slightly modified' used once there, and i was talking about pure aesthetics, not technical or its actual chassis, i was trying to point out that using the 2S6M as a base for a PT-76 would be totally unsuitable

well dont blame me i didnt paint it either way, the tunguska chassis still doesnt look like a PT-76, it looks more like a shilka chassis: [edit: *bangs his head on the desk* how can that^^^ look like this:] PT-76 EDIT::RalphWiggum :pic size > 100k

er....the 2S6M Tunguska is a completely different shape to the PT-76, it looks more like a T-55/62/64 chassis: 2S6M: PT-76: T-62:

or if you could make it so that the random bases are always 5km or so away from each other, as its really not fun when you meet the other team straight away when you have no vehicles/income etc

or if you could make it so that the random bases are always 5km or so away from each other, as its really not fun when you meet the other team straight away when you have no vehicles/income etc

actually no, its not, quote from Sefe after i asked about helicopters: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well, the animation part is not the problem. You can create those animations in helicoper models, too. But although Kegetys defenitely is the better addon editor than me I disagree with him that the gear event also works for choppers. The property in the config file that makes aircraft gear retractable is GearRetracting=1; This line has no effects on helicopters. Hence you will never have "Gear up" in your action menu which leads to the fact that you'll never have the gear event for choppers. If Kegetys can make the gear event for choppers work, I'll be the first one to congratulate him. But I wasn't able to do so. The other way I could think of is to add the gear up/down option to the pilot via the getIn event and remove it via the getOut event or (even better as you wouldn't have to provide scripts with your addon) add a custom action to a selection in the chopper. This, however, can't be done due to a bug in OFP. I've already sent a bug report in the official forums. but nobody seems to take notice of that. Maybe someone who has a better connection to BIS can make them aware of that. Without the bug, my answer would be: Retracting gear for choppers? No problem! So, retracting gear for choppers is only a bugfix away. <span id='postcolor'>

ok this should explain the whole bas littlebirds/drakken littlebird situation, a quote from tigershark from the site: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Been getting a few emails talking about how Drakkhen may have "stolen" our addon. I think some explanation is required. Let me state is clearly....Drakkhen DID NOT steal our Littlebird. In fact, our Littlebird is based off a model Drakkhen gave us almost 6 months ago. When O2 first came out and BIS only issued a few licenses Drakkhen was both busy and also had no copy of O2. He generously offered his 3D Studio model to us to develop into a Littlebird using O2. We have heavily modified his original work but the base was always his model and he gets full credit for this throughout our release documentation. Since that time O2 has been released and I guess Drakkhen has decided to release his own model by himself. I hope this clears up any confusion. We wish Drakkhen well on his Littlebird project. He is an excellent modeller and has plans for some great addons. <span id='postcolor'>

well both drakkens and our littlebirds are based onthe same base model (drakken sent the model to tigershark to work on and said he didnt have time to work on it), so stt and tigershark have been working on it since then, and ive got to say, theyve done a brilliant, job, if you liked this guys youll be blown away by ballistics, as well as the MH-6 there are 3 attack littlebird versions and the MH-6 has been improved a lot, same interior but very good textures on the outside, anyway im a bit biased, youll probably find out for yourselves later this week

i may be wrong but from my experience of retexturing p3d's you need to include them in the pbo with the textures as it will need hex editing/texture swapping, so all the tree models would need to be included, im not sure if the same goes for the actual nogova island but im guessing so

er, im guessing those models have a copyright....so wouldnt what youre doing be illegal?

er, im guessing those models have a copyright....so wouldnt what youre doing be illegal?

well, VIT has downloaded the model, and is probably trying to pass it off as his own

class Cobra: Helicopter { //-- picture=icobra; crew = SoldierWPilot; scope=public; side=TWest; displayName=$STR_DN_AH1; nameSound="cobra"; accuracy=0.30; driverAction = ManActAH1Pilot; gunnerAction = ManActAH1Gunner; maxSpeed = 270; //soundEngine[]={Vehicles\ah1cobra,db+10,1}; armor=50; cost=10000000; model=ah1_cobra; rotorBig = vrtule_velka; rotorBigBlend = vrtule_velka_bl_; rotorSmall = vrtule_mala; rotorSmallBlend = vrtule_mala_bl; weapons[]={MachineGun30W, HellfireLauncherCobra,ZuniLauncher38}; magazines[]={MachineGun30W, HellfireLauncherCobra,ZuniLauncher38}; type=VAir; //threat[] VSoft, VArmor, VAir threat[]={0.3, 1, 0.8}; class IndicatorAltRadar { // max for this indicator is 1000 feet (i.e. 304m) // note: this is actualy Baro altitude (name is wrong) selection = "alt"; axis = "osa_alt"; angle = -360; min = 0; max = 304; }; class IndicatorAltBaro { // max for this indicator is 200 feet (i.e. 61m) // note: this is actualy Radar altitude (name is wrong) selection = "nm_alt"; axis = "osa_nm_alt"; angle = -180; min = 0; max = 61; }; class IndicatorSpeed { selection = "mph"; axis = "osa_mph"; angle = -320; min = 0; max = 125; }; class IndicatorVertSpeed { selection = "vert_speed"; axis = "osa_vert_speed"; angle = -300; min = -30; max = 30; }; class IndicatorRPM { selection = "rpm"; axis = "osa_rpm"; angle = -320; min = 0; max = 12; }; laserScanner = true; class ReloadAnimations { class MachineGun30W { weapon = MachineGun30W; angle0 = 0; angle1 = -2 * 3.141592654; multiplier = 500; type = rotation; animPeriod = 1; selection = gatling; begin = "usti hlavne"; end = "konec hlavne"; }; }; };

yep some of his ww2 planes used components of the p51 addon i made, also he made an F-16 using the G8 F-16 without permission....so yes he does this a lot

you cant mix detachable weapon loads, you can have ffar pods and missiles/bombs but not two kinds of missiles/bombs on one plane

not out yet, will be out very soon though, the sea cobra is finished, we are just gathering the whole pack together and coding it all now

well, there are limitations in the whole game-realism problem, we arent holding real guns, we arent even the person in the game so we can look around and 'feel' where the gun is pointing, we cant easily put our eyes to the iron sights, so i think cross hairs are needed as there is no way a game can be completely real

Nam pack: AH-1G Huey Cobra AH-1J Sea Cobra UH-1C UH-1D UH-1H Ballistics: UH-1N AH-1W Super Cobra that enough cobras/hueys for you?