Homefry

My thoughts may have been mentioned before, but I don't have time to sort through 30 pages of text. First off, I just hope that the AI can land a helicopter in a decent manner. I hate flying over an area... and hovering (under fire), while the AI tries to place the helicopter down at a rate of 3m/s. Secondly, a large part of wishful thinking on my part. Some sort of scripting commands that will alter how the VoIP system is used. For example, limit the functionality of certain radio channels to certain individuals (or individuals carrying a weapon, such as a radio). In this system, everyone could talk locally (so that only those around you can hear you), but only men with radios could talk to other individuals with radios. Furthermore, it'd be nice to have some sort of large-scale command system, especially for MP play. It'd be nice to include some sort of chain of command into missions, even if it only scales up a few levels. This way, CTI missions could become much more organized.

This has what to do with Armed Assault exactly?

I don't think Baphomet is refering to the aiming system used (I could be wrong). Rather, I think he is speaking in regards to the physics used to calculate bullet trajectory. I don't recall BIS ever stating they are removing the current system. I would imagine they could improve upon it, but removing it in favor of an expanding ring system wouldn't make a whole lot of sense; if they were aiming for accurate weapon ballistics. If someone knows of articles pertaining to this in Armed Assault, a link would appriciated. EDIT: After looking at the OFP.info report, all I could find was this: Weapons have real 3D optics, the indirectHit values of the weapons’ bullets were erased. This means that your bullets either hit or they don’t, which will improve the gameplay a lot. We also asked about the new inventory system used for weapons and items, but Rastavovich wouldn’t want to give us any information about it. He stated that it should remain a surprise for the community. I don't think that really has to do with bullet physics. So I think we're still alright.

I imagine BIS will begin to update their Armed Assault pages as time goes on. They know these next three days are huge, and that the attention towards PC gaming is at its height during this time. I'm sure we'll get some updates soon, I'm just not sure how soon. I wouldn't worry about it, we all know that BIS is a smaller developer, and the companies like IGN (and TV networks like G4) only focus on the EA, Ubi, and Valve like game releases. I guess we'll just have to wait, and see what happens. Does anyone know if someone from the OFP community will be somehow attending E3?

If you need some textures for your Crown Victoria, or firetrucks... let me know.

You moved the decimal point in the wrong direction...

Absolutely amazing work.

I haven't had nearly any free time to test some addons out lately, but I got around to trying these. There are perhaps the best soldier forces that I've seen thus far... in my opinion at least. The good modelling, excellent textures, and now with the new head models everything is really starting to look lifelike. So, excellent job.. cheers.

I've never run across a game that doesn't support AA... I don't see why Armed Assault will be any different.

There're only 10 types of people in this world - those who understand binary and those who not. You're sure to get a response to that.

I've written a script that will setpos a helicopter into place... then simply run the BAS script directly from there... so it will be in the exact position.

They haven't done anything to the USA. My life is the same now as it has been since I can remember. I think it's a bit narrowminded to say the USA has changed drastically. Everyday life here hasn't.

Man... those look great... though I don't imagine they'd look to good coming at you.

Wrong! Haha.. sorry Ace.

Ok.. I've looked at this a little more. Soldier Image One The above image is of an OFP2 soldier... the helmet model seems to match. Soldier Image Two This is also a picture of an OFP2 soldier. Again.. it somewhat matches. However... the camo used in the two confirmed OFP2 shots do not match the camo in the new screen. Can anyone identify the two camos? Now Armed Assault. AA Soldier Shot One The camo used in this picture does match that used in the new picture. I can't seem to find any detailed pictures of ground vehicles other than the M1A1 for Armed Assault. I'd say it could be either game... but I am hoping for it to be ArmA.

If that is Armed Assault... then wow. If it is just OFP.. that is a one hell of a photoshop job.

BAS seems to spark a weird feeling in the OFP community. Some love them, some people don't. I joined the OFP community not to long after the initial release... and I've followed the progess of OFP pretty much non-stop since then. BAS was the one team where, when they released an addon, everyone would be stunned. From the Littlebirds, all the way to the Tonali SF addon (which, by the way, is one of my favorite addons for OFP), BAS kept doing new things that people thought were impossible. The MH-47 pack had plenty of pioneering features; the Delta/Ranger pack was the most comprehensive up until that point; and the Blackhawk/Pavehawks are still, in my opinion, the top helo addons for the west side. After you look at their addons, then you have to look at the other things they did for the community. Nearly all of BAS's members did other things for the OFP community. I remember when I was just getting into OFP scripting and mission making... quite a few of the questions I posted over at OFPEC were answered by a BAS member. The bad reputation most likely stemmed from how they responded to the repeated complaining about release dates (or the lack of them). Add to that the fact that there were plenty of people in the OFP community that said things such as "Your addons are crap", or "fix this", or "stop teasing us with pictures". Instead of respecting the fact that the members of BAS took time out of their lives to make the addons for the community, they bickered and complained about things. If I were BAS, I probably would have been a little rude too. But any news about BAS being around is good news... I think it'd be hard to argue with that.

For some time now I've been trying to figure out exactly what equations BIS used to calculate physics in OFP. The main equation I'm after is the equation for freefall objects, such as bombs released from aircraft. I've messaged Suma before, and was told: Perhaps there is someone floating around the OFP world that was a physics major in college? I took physics in high school, and understand general things, but I never learned how to equate for air resistance and the like. Any help or ideas would be great.

@deanosbeano: Thanks for the link mate, there seems to be a lot of information in there. @Doolittle: All two threads are proving very helpful, and since I've tried UA, I can attest to the accuracy of what you guys did. I'll see if I can't come up with something typing the range tables together perhaps... we'll see. @[APS]Gnat This "sidefriction" value in the config.... well that's pretty interesting. I wonder what would happen if we changed that value to 0... wouldn't that help figure something out?

I'm not sure if you quite realize the situation before 9/11 or not. The intel agencies did not work together, and the way information was gathered and analyzed was slow, inefficent, and caused more problems than it solved. To say that the Bush administration was entirely responsible for the shortcomings of the intelligence agencies that were inherited when he gained office is absurd. Especially since the administration before Bush didn't do much as far as reform for the intelligence agencies. Do you honestly think 9/11 would have happened if Clinton and his administration had gotten its shit together after the terrorist attacks during his presidency? I'm kind of missing the point your making here... was he not decisive enough for you? Just clarify a bit. If you read the article you posted, you would realize the policites in place, from administrations prior to Bush, prevented the intelligence gathered by Able Danger from being shared. AND... I'll quote the article: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">"The officer being interviewed said he saw this material only briefly, that the relevant material dated from February through April 2000, and that it showed Mohamed Atta to be a member of an al Qaeda cell located in Brooklyn," the statement said. Walker... it seems to be that sometimes your a bit hellbent on blaming the Bush Administration for everything.... perhaps thats just me though.

The newer the video drivers the worse the performance it seems.

No, combining the Y2K3 mod or the FFUR with ECP is not possible, as all of these use different config files. I recommend you wait for EECP, pretty much our in-house unit replacement modification.

And you still have the problem of setting pitch.... For as many limitations that we still have, that's nothing in comparison to what once was.

They should be enabled by default... if not open up the ECP settings file and simply uncomment the lines relating to what you want on and off. As for animations, yes you can use Sanctuary's animations. As far as I remember, they are simple .pbo files. These will not interfere with ECP.

I would try renaming _group to something else.. not sure if that is what is causing the error or not but I try to avoid commands also being variable names... even with an '_' or not. I'd try that and if you are still recieving an error I'll investigate it further.