mechastalin

Well I'll work on getting a BMD-2 done and then pack it with the BMD-1. After that I'll finish up the model I've started.

Quick question, if I gave the BMD-1 and possibly a BMD-2 if I model the turret to you guys would you be reskinning them to match Russian federation camo or whatever you need? I'm not nearly good enough with textures myself to reskin them. Edit: Also, if you do reskin them I'd be more than happy to regenerate the normal maps etc with the new textures.

I hardly think it can "generate" normal maps, although it would be very cool. If you want a tool to generate normal maps, I believe NVidia released one a while ago, but I can't remember the name. Yeah I have the plugin for Photoshop but I was hoping texview could do both.

Can this generate normal maps as well as specular maps?

The T-72 in ArmA appears to be an early B model which would probably give it an NSV.

Hopefully this program can export a heightmap which we can import into Visitor.

Excellent, now all we need is a way for the gun to auto-elevate or the scalable optics so we can have the gunner do it manually. Also I'm going to experiment with custom armor selections in a bit. If they work we'll be good for tank armor on the front/rear etc and maybe even ERA. If it doesn't I'll have to propose something to BIS.

Soviet/Russian.

Sorry I am right in the middle of learning basic addon editing so my knowledge is very elementary, there is however a thread somewhere on these forums where someone posted some scripts where he was trying to make a LRF. My idea for the gunner would be to modify a aircraft HUD, increase the speed of the zoom drastically somehow so that when pressing -/+ you would only be able to view normal and max zoom, this would also keep the reticule scale at a correct level relative to the magnification since you're also zooming in on the HUD, leaving all intervals on the reticules's range indicators at the same value when zooming. Also, (this I belive would be unique to the Abrams) to simulate automatic lead when lasing a target, the moddified HUD reticle could lag behind at the appropriate distance needed to compansate for the projectiles time of flight, but the projectile would still fire from the center and catch up with the target. I think most Russian tanks since the T-72 can automatically lead but im not sure how it displays it on the gunners sight if at all.

New version of BMD-1, New camo skin and proper material and normal maps. http://www.sendspace.com/file/hbevdk

Updated with proper normal and material maps for each texture.

Working normal and material maps now. Screenshot doesn't capture how mice it looks in action though.

I had a similar problem while working on the Nona. I fixed it by reverting to the versions of the configs I had before editing and making the changes again.

Yeah, data is very hard to find and then even then its usually slanted in some form. Although some info on older equipment does exist. When the early M-48 and T-54s went head to head they found that neither tank could penetrate the other front armor. So M48 and T-54/55 series should be pretty ineffective against each other except for the side and rear hits. Here is an interesting armor chart, I dont think they're exact real world values but they are based on them I imagine and keep the tanks pretty balanced realistic to each other. Make sure to read the notes at the bottom though. http://members.tripod.com/collinsj/protect.htm It also includes info for Export models of the T-72 and the like which I would imagine being useful if you're going to model other countries than just Russia/Soviets. In terms of newer tanks, The T-80 and Abrams from around the same era should pretty much be able to penetrate each other quite well, Only the newest western models can survive a shot even through the front armor from the T-80s gun with good ammo. Older models of Leopard and Abrams should go down fairly easily and same goes for the T-80. Although the old 105mm mounted on the very first Abrams and Pattons had trouble penetrating a tank like the T-80 through its toughest armor. Since the T-64, T-72, T-80, and T-90 share the same basic gun they can all use very late design ammo, so older tanks like the T-64 and T-72 loaded with modern ammo are a threat to most western models but have inferior fire control and the like. But for ArmAs sake they should have similar punch when using the same ammo, but newer tanks have better quality barrels etc. And the last thing I would like to mention is ERA packages, the ERA initially applied to the T-72 could complete stop the current SABOT rounds fired by the Leopard 1 and M1 Abrams. So generally a Russian tank with ERA is pretty well protected from anything but ammo that came after that ERA package was designed. So an early Abrams like the M1 or M1A1 would have trouble penetrating most if not all Russian tanks with ERA unless it had the newest ammo available loaded for SABOT, although HEATs are pretty much useless against ERA. I'm not too good with tank ammo but the best way to do it would to look at the time an ERA package came into service and basically make all ammo types that were in service before it not very effective except against the tracks, gun, engine, etc. Hope that wasnt too much to swallow. :P If you need me to go iinto more detail about anything just ask. Also just a quick thing about that armor value site. "Protection levels for US MBT's are larger than usually quoted because the US standard is for a 30 degrees oblique shot. To return to US Army style measurements divide all figures on chart by 1.15. NII Stali estimate M1A1HA turret at 700mm versus KE, 850mm versus CE for a 30 degrees oblique shot. GSPO/BTVT estimates M1A1 at 480-500 versus KE and 790-840 versus CE, M1A1HA at 530-550 versus KE and 750-780 versus CE, M1A2 at 770 versus KE and 1000-1200 versus CE."

Very nice work so far, battles between this and the T-72 are a lot of fun.

Will armor be more balanced than in the OFP WGL? I remember that the Abrams was ridiculously overpowered compared to similar Soviet/Russian designs. It took something like 4-5 T-90 shells just to kill an M1A2 but the M1A2 could kill it a single shot. Shacktactical tried a few armor missions with T-80s vs earlier Abrams and the like and the missiles and SABOT rounds from the T-80s barely scratched the Abrams.

It wil cause a conflict and neither addon will probably work. Thats why most people use prefixes on their addons, like Mech_BMD for my BMD.

Check out the combatace forums for lots of WoE stuff.

Just did a small test, first small chevron seems to be zeroed at around 200m. On the VSS at least.

they are zeroed for a much further range than 30m, try around 150ish and the reticle is dead on. No scope is perfect at all ranges as bullets rise and drop as they fly.

I think the marks are zeroed for pretty decent range. Edit:Just tried out the updated guns, it seems the OSV-96s sound got messed up and it now plays the reloading sound when I fire.

They are very fun and the lite style sim works very well for 50s-70s aircraft. Just dont bother with the default US aircraft, they're horribly overmodelled.

ok will update the Credits, the basis of as val is vss and vss is of Sniper Skull? @Ti0n3r I have problems with to provide and with the together play Textures (smdi, nohq) and the config. If you're not sure how to define the maps in the config file check out either my BMD or the Mi-24. Both have configs that show how to apply both normal and material maps.

Excellent work, nice to finally have a well done Bizon which is one of my favorite guns.

I once shot at a squad of stationary soldiers with a Mk12 SPR from 300m in the dark. I hit their squad leader dead on in the head and within a second I had an SVD bullet come back and kill me. Mind you, this was on a custom mission that may have had the AI skill very high.