Inkompetent

Well, one can always put in several configs in the next release for different preferences when it comes to replacement (replace stock skins on soldiers and weapons / replace stock skins and replace weapons with RHS ones ). And as for carrying both a machinegun and RPG... In our Swedish elite forces it is pretty much standard that as good as everyone in a team carry an AT-4, and that includes the automatic rifleman that has his M249 Para (KSP-90 in Swedish terms). Of course these guys has top notch physique, but then again in ArmA you don't do missions that require you to be on foot for five days, which means standard infantry could carry that stuff too. What's standard now by BIS is simply a balance issue.

There was a typo bug with the AKS-74pGP30 in the replacement config that I've fixed. Please toss me a PM if you find any more bugs in this one! New download here!

Because of a bug in my replacement config that made the M4A1 unusable I've updated the config, and this far I haven't found any more bugs in it. Edit: Removed download link on request.

However, we can be pretty glad to see it like this; that the graphics engine and what parts of the game engine (the FSM?) that they'll use in ArmA2 has been heavily tested now and they've got a wide base of supporting players and bug-finders/solvers helping them. I like this community. In how many other games do you see this kind of cooperation throughout the whole process, even after the beta is over?

Well, but now ArmA is sort'a limited to 10km, and they've said, as far as I know, that ArmA2 will be capped at 15km.

Hmm... Halve the sound volume in the .wss files and double the dB-value for them, as it seems to decide the distance it is heard at? Just felt like increasing the volume to 100dB at the Ka-50, and it never went silent!

I've got a hard time to get used to the AK-version, but DANG! It looks nice!

Contrary to almost everything posted above my wish for aircraft are: scrap the fixed wing aircraft completely and focus on rotary wing aircraft instead. 40km*40km is way too small for jets, and with only 15km view distance you can't really engage anything visually unless you fly a slow-poke like the A-10 or Su-25. Then it isn't impossible. It's just awfully bad. Focus on giving us choppers with an okay flight model (what is in ArmA isn't even remotely okay), toss in FLIR, some different firing modes with guided missiles, more proper targeting system and a damage model that can damage/disable select systems (like knocking out the FCC or the tail rotor). Then give Shilkas and Tunguskas real engagement ranges, and the same with MANPADs, and give the systems with active radar (like the Shilka) the oprion to turn the radar on/off so that you can spoof the RWR on your target. Also, give us rappelling from helicopters, the ability to shoot out from them (either through weapon slits like in several Russian things, or free-handed like sitting in the door-hole), and mass-disembarking (Russian style with quick, hard touchdowns and take-off on the bounce á la Mi-7 Hip)

I've sat up half night to write replacement configs for a visual upgrade to my beloved ArmA. I thought that the rest of you might want one too (that doesn't use the configurations of the RHS weapons since it can't be used on public MP servers), so I thought I'd be kind enough to provide a link! Download here! I've replaced the AK-74 rifles with AKS-74p versions, the PK with the Pecheneg, the RHS versions of the SVD and Makarovs, and the AKS-74U is replaced with the AKMS. And of course, I've tossed in the VDV skins.

I'm taking the freedom to post a download link here to a replacement config I've made for the skins. Saves you all from having to replace .paa and .p3a files or write a config of your own! Edit: Removed download link on request.

I'll be trying to for sure, since the scenario you described is really what I thought of as a drawback. Downside with getting the M136 to not use any ammo slots is that there isn't a single weapon in ArmA not using some kind of ammo, or being the weapon itself (i.e bomb, hand grenade), but I'll be trying to get that sorted too. It has lower priority than to get the above working though.

I have tinkered with an additional feature for the next release, aside from compatibility with Solus' Extended Event Handlers. That is that you can't carry any "loose" M136 rockets. That means that if you don't carry an unused M136 Launcher you can't carry any rockets at all, and if you carry an M136 Launcher you are limited to carry one rocket. All this since I don't really think people run around with loose M136 rockets in wars since the M136 tubes aren't reloadable anyway. How does this sound to you, the audience? At the moment the code for it is pretty basic. Since there are no eventhandlers for getting items it's a crude code that simply removes all excess rockets. If I manage to I'll see if I can rewrite the gearing thingy so that when you use the Gear screen the rocket will simply jump back to the box. At the moment it disappears into the void.

Wow! I will have to use these as defaults!

Happy birthday! Not that you are a summer-born kid, but I bet the birthday can be happy anyway!

Good remark, Robalo! I'll work in it asap, since when I come to think of it, I need it myself too!

I definitely think it'll be worth to make ACE. Many still have OFP on their computers solely thanks to WGL, me and a whole gang of buddies are some of them. And I don't think BIS intend to ditch the old syntaxes and the SQF code. I trust them on that they say it'll be easily ported on that part. And, if you don't want to do a super-heavy job, release some stuff at a time. I can promise people will dance naked in the streets in delight even if we only get the bleeding and damage system from WGL ported to ArmA. Keep it up boys, because I can promise you've got loads of support!

Well, to ease the workload - sure. But I'm fairly new to all this, so I probably can't do any advanced stuff like the coding for animations and so. But if you think still I can help, feel free to PM details.

I don't think it is possible to have ammunition take no room, but one could possibly put it in the secondary ammo slots. But well... since the weapon can't be loaded anyway one might be so lucky as to have it take no ammo slots. Would be a nice balancing against the RPG-7. I can agree on that.

Javelins are "reloadable". Each tube is one shot only, but you use the same targeting and guidance system. You remove it from the used tube and attaches it to a new, and voila! Another Javelin. That's how it is IRL at least

My favourite skinpack by far already, and with the new additions... wow! I can't wait until I get my new computer and can kick my resolution up on those lovely textures!

Ahh! Someone on the same track as myself! 40x40km is waaaay too small for use of airplanes, I totally agree on that. Just as a reference, at cruising altitude and speed (let's say 25'000ft and 300kts) I will in one minutes flight time (about enough time to aquire ground targets on radar and sort them out from the ground clutter) cover a distance of 9km. If we think it's silly to fly at 25'000ft at a 40km map we'll get down below the obvious air radar coverage and down to the "hard to hit" zone: 400ft. If you don't want to get shot down by MANPADs or machinegun fire (assuming you don't fly an A-10 or Su-25 that are built to withstand normal machineguns) you'll probably have to fly 450kts, meaning you'll cover 13,5km a minute, and at that altitude you more or less can't target anything at all by radar. Possibly with Mavericks or visually, but more likely you'll need spotters on the ground or JSTARS high up to point you in the right direction to drop your bombs. As a reference we can take the SA-6 radar guided surface to air missile. It is a 40 years old design and not unlikely to find in the hands of whatever rebels are in ArmA2. It has a horizontal range of 3-24km and vertical range between 150 and 40'000ft, having a speed of mach 2,8 (about 1700kts). This reduces the aircraft to have 16km to operate at, assuming the SA-6 is stuck in a far away corner of the map. And don't even get me started on the Patriots since they'd cover the entire map. From the above it is easy (at least in my eyes) to see that fixed wing aircraft (aside from possibly a Cessna or alike) has no place in ArmA2. not until we get a map that is 500x500km or so. As funnyguy1 wrote I think it is more important to focus on tanks, AFVs and rotary wing aircraft that do have a real place on a battlefield of this size and give them more real controls and use. Reactive armour, laser ranging and thermal imaging on tanks, buddy-lasing and -marking with helicopters for CAS missions, infra-sensors, rappeling, firing hand held weapons as a passenger and so on.

Ahhh... Thank you. I read either "M136", "AT-4" or "M136 AT-4", so it is a bit tricky to know what to believe about the naming.

It already is. The default weapon is called "M136 Launcher" and the used up one is called "M136 Launcher (Used)". I pondered renaming it to AT-4 to give it its real name, but decided to stay with the M136. If someone can prove that the weapon is referred to as "AT-4" with the US Army and/or USMC I might rename it though.

Hmm... One could always tinker with the targeting range for missiles... There is a problem, as far as I know, with that the flight time can't be too long, or the missile will just dissappear. One can try to max out the distance one can target at though, to get out as much as possible from the VHKRs, Hellfires and Mavericks.

And I am kind'a crappy at modelling, but I think I'll try to make a tube which is see-through after firing. Would be kind'a neat. On the other hand a burden for the already pressed graphics engine... =/