malick

Too bad this is not implemented yet... This will be very interesting to toy with, searching the best balance. No more need for HD mags, like in JAM, as you can set the "shaking" value of the enemy higher, for example. I hope they get it working very quickly ! Malick

I'm glad to see that you are working on this issue ! Fast roping should have been included in the original game, anyway... The rope physics look nice, it's a good idea to have it included. Hope you'll find the right animation for roping down, waiting for a proper anim (we need tools !. As Puma said, maybe the climb ladder down may fit. Malick

Don't worry Sickboy... Even if some keep on complaining, a huge and silent majority really appreciate the work that has been done. I, for one, really like this pack. I'm not really fond of the blood idea, as I don't really feel it suits this sim, but it's my opinion. However, I haven't tried it yet, so maybe I'll find it's a must have after all. Anyway, I can just install the modules that suits my likings, and voilà ! Looking forward to any kind of improvement in the game you can bring ! Malick

Thanks Törni for the update ! Indeed, it works really better now. It engages at long distance with a good chance of hitting it's target. Glad to see you found the solution ! Waiting for 1.2 Malick

Ok, now that I've read a bit more on the subject, my question doesn't seem so relevant, now Thanks for your answer. Malick

Ok, i'll give a try. I don't know why my old tools refuse to open some pbos. Is Arma any different in the way the pbo are encoded, anyway ? Thanks ! Malick EDIT : Woot ! It works now ^^

Hi Sickboy ! Does all this "variable saving" process implies better performance ? Or is it to keep it stable ? As I haven't noticed a performance impact yet, even with up to a 100 units on screen fighting it out, I was wondering. I may as well have missed something completely (like reading the thread throughout ! Again, it's a very good addition and improves considerably the immersion factor. Malick

I haven't found a solution yet. This already happened to me for other files. What pbo program did you use or which one can you advise me to use ? Malick

Great ! With all these addons coming lately and the announce of the tools' arrival, I'm sure we'll have quite decent armies pretty quicly ! This vehicle should be a nice addition to the SLA arsenal, fits quite well in the setting. Give us some more, now ! Thanks for your work. Malick

Well, I tried with various ofp-pbo tools (unpbo, pbotool, winpbo, even armapbo). Each time I get the same result : an empty directory. I'll give it another try, but it's not that important anyway. Malick

Don't worry vilas ! I know that... The T72 is far superior to it in the real world, so I guess we are pretty clos to realism here. It was just a comment. In a recent mission I quickly created, 6 M60 wait for 4 T72. The M60s take at least 10 more seconds to engage than their enemy. Needless to say, they get squashed, knowing that they have a less powerful gun. When you add the stupid AI behaviour to this... This happens whatever their rank and skill, I believe it's a matter of config. Alas, i do not have access to config.cpp as I wanted to have a look at it. Malick

Woohoo ! Great, downloading right away ! EDIT : After a quick test on Rahmadi, I came up with these: - the tank is nice - the texture still needs some work, but fits well after all - it's hard to stand up to a pack of T72 ! - the tank has a tendency to enter a spin, either after getting a disabled track or a killed driver - it's weird to see 20 M60 spin around harmlessly, with dead crews all around ^^ - it's a very nice addition to the game ! Thanks Törni (and Sigma6 and Inquisitor, too) for this tank. Keep up the very nice work. I saw that the tools are closed to being released. Maybe you can add all those nice textures, improving shadows, shining effects, etc... Other than some value tweaking, that's still needed, it's great ! Malick

Missions are ALWAYS welcome CSL I'm going to try them and feedback. Thanks for sharing. Malick

Woot ! That's great news, Törni ! You were right to take BIS as reference and I think the balance you gave it fits what I "think" of the M60 (equal to T72, if not a bit less powerful) . Malick

Hehe, how much I know that feeling ! Good luck with the last stages of bug hunting and squashing... How is the tank balanced when compared to other armored vehicles ? Did you balance it against BIS vehicles or did you give it values that felt "right" to you ? I really look forward to playing with this new toy Malick

Regarding the "no tank interior" issue, I feel that it is not of utmost importance. I do not play with tanks directly most of the time as this part of the simulation is badly under-developed. However, I like to have missions with some armor, either as support, surprise element or objective. Your RACS' M60 will fit quite nicely in most cases, in my opinion. You can release it as v0.9 beta and then, update it at your own pace, maybe according to players feedback. BTW, it seems nearly complete from what I understand. What are the parts you are currently working on (just curious) ? The textures, some features, scripts, etc ? Thanks for your work! Malick

Hi ! I have to say that this M60 really looks nice ! I hope to see it soon, and more of your work too... Malick

Hi ! The rifle tracers are now disabled when you set it to 'disabled' in difficulty options. However, this options doesn't remove tracers for machineguns (M240, PK, mounted guns). Edit : Damn Sickboy was quick ! Malick

Great ! Adding AI behaviour through FSM should really be the most powerful thing, as you can specify a reaction for each class. Good luck with these, as I don't think it will be easy. BTW, I do believe you will need a looooooot of field testing for any new FSM/AI behaviour. Feel free to ask ! Malick

I'd like to thank you for the great work you accomplished on this. I love the tracers' effects ! Much better than the original BIS ones. I see that with CRDS some sounds and features have been added when the player is wounded. By the way, do they also apply to AI (I don't think so, but want to be sure) ? Do you plan on improving other parts of the simulation too ? I thank you for your work and the way you handle it (community input). Malick

I have a lot of lag too, when using any combination of NIM_weather game logics. I sure like the idea of having nice clouds and mist, but getting unplayable framerates is a price too high in my opinion. Does anyone have an idea on what is causing lag in this addon ? Maybe we (as a community) can find and implement a solution. Malick

I have a GeForce 7900GT with 256Mo, running on AMD4600 and WinXP. I recently updated drivers to 94.24 and also set the "Max frames to render ahead" to 0. This gave me a significant increase in FPS, going from 20 to 30, stable average. Definitely worth a try, in my opinion. Malick

Hi ! I've been away for a single week, and you chose that one to make a come back ! That's what I call a very nice surprise ! I loved your work for OFP, I guess I'll love it for ArmA. I'll give it a try and comment a bit later. Thanks ! Malick

Thanks BIS for supporting and improving the game. I particularly appreciate multi airport for AI and bullets' holes on objects Now I hope this new patch will be as stable and framerate friendly as beta 1.07 ! Malick

Hi, I've read somewhere that you can force them to disable : - unpbo the file bin.pbo - unbin the file config.bin into config.cpp - look for lines with tracercolor - change the last number to 0 - re pbo At least, that what I thought ! In fact, it doesn't work for me (playing in cadet mod right now). Do I have to save config.cpp into a .bin ? Malick