nyles

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Messiah @ Aug. 26 2002,12:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">still... why dont bis just answer us? would help solve this thread  <span id='postcolor'> Because they are probably rolling on the floor laughing at some of the suggested terms. If I were them, I would keep this going for some time, too. Â

"When it's done!" Seriously, I have no problems that the patch takes that long. I agree that it would have been nice if they would have released a quick fix for the weapon-disappearing-bug and those new cheats, but I truly hope that during the last 1 1/2 months, BIS has worked a lot on the patch and really fixed some major stuff people were complaining on for a long time. If the next patch will not include tons of tweaks but only the ghostbug fix and some vote improvements, I doubt that people will be very happy. At least I would be one of them.

bringing this whole thing back on topic... 43. In addition to point 40, I would like to see full auto modes being reworked. Back then, I suggested to have AI shoot more in random full auto bursts (3-5 shots at a time). Currently, there is no real difference for human players wether they fire in full-auto or semi-auto. Players can still place single shots while on full-auto mode. The idea I had, which might work out nicely, is to have full auto fire a minimum, random number of shots, depended on the rate of fire of the real counterpart of that weapon. That way, there would at least be an amount of 3-5 shots, even though I clicked the fire button for a brief moment only. The trick now would be, that after this random amount of initial shots, there would only be single shots following to gurantee that you can immediate stop firing any time. This random amount would indeed only affect the first rounds to leave the weapon. I think a feature like this would really help to simulate the effect of firing a weapon in full auto. Even though, a very skilled player could indeed manage to fire single shots from a machinegun, the shots mostly will follow in such a rapid succession that you have fired off quiet a number of rounds even with just short squeezing of the trigger. The machinegun atmosphere would be greatly enhanced in OFP that way and would force these weapons more into their respectiv role.

It's just speculation, but I assume that there won't be any further updates for 1.46 apart from Resistance. Instead I believe that upcomming updates will focus on the existing 1.75 platform. Anyways, buying Resistance is a thing I can suggest anyways.

Post of mine from the Constructive Criticism thread: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> 34. This is my personal view on how I would like to see the damage system in flashpoint. I'm trying to not use precise damage values but more roughly the shots needed on certain locations to kill. In my opinion, a headshot should always be fatal, no matter what weapon used. I'm excluding other hit locations than chest and legs here, because I'm not familiar with how many different locations there are in total. Its pretty obvious though, that a hit to arm should not take minimal damage only, because of them blocking the chest very often and thus creating the illusion of players surviving tons of chest shots. If possible to check wether a strong bullet would hit multiple locations (i.e. arm+chest), this should be implemented, might be complicated though or even already in the game, dunno. Furthermore, I'm limiting this to infantry weapons and co-axial mgs only. I will not mention different types of the same weapon in the 'weapons' section, as I assume it's pretty obvious that an ak74 should do the same damage like an ak74su, that an ak47 should do the same like an ak47cz and that an m16 should do the same like a xms. Anyways, here is the list, note that it is mainly to show which weapons should belong into the same damage category and not differ in-game: (calibre / chest / legs / weapons) .50cal + 12.7x109 / 1 / 1-2 / m2, m2east, m2 co-axial + nsv co-axial 7.62x51 + 7.62x54 / 1 / 2-3 / g3, fal, m60, m21, m240 co-axial + svd, pk 7.62x39 / 1-2 / 2-3 / ak47 5.56x45 / 1-3 / 2-3 / m16, steyr aug, g36 5.45x39 / 2-3 / 2-3 / ak74 7,62x25 + .45 / 2-3 / 2-4 / tt33 + (none yet) 9x19 + 7.65x17/ 2-4 / 2-4 / mp5, bizon, cz75, 92fs, glock17 + skorpion There are some other nice ideas, which i want to adress together with this list: Yesterday, I had a nice experience when i rammed a vehicle. The ai driver, disembarked the moment I did so, but he was faster and shot me in the legs. I was forced prone and shot him in the chest, killing him, with my trusty beretta. The experience of the auto prone was great and added a lot of atmosphere. My idea about this is that there should be a 70% chance for any hit and not only certain leg hits to knock you off your feet. Unlike some leg shots which won't let you stand up again, you are free to do so with those regular hits though. It just should knock you off your feet. Maybe some modifiers on how high the chance is, could be given according to the type of weapon. A 9mm pistol for example would be less likely to knock you off compared to a chest shot with a m16. Furthermore any hit, should cause a little red flickering on the screen. Very often you fall on the floor face down, only to realize a second or two later that you were shot due to the lack of hit effects. Those suggested new hit effects, combined with the above mentioned chance for any hit to knock you off your feet, would be very nice additions. Now some comments on the weapon list on top, especially in terms of balance. As stated above the exact values for the damage were avoided and instead only displayed with the average amount of hits to certain locations that will kill you. The Russian weapons might seem a little underpowered, compared to other weapons, but in reality they were a tad less effective due to calibre size. However, I still chose hit counts that are very close to each other and only noticeable that you will sometimes need one hit more with the russian weapons. Most of the time, the needed count will be the same though. To compare this, at least in terms of the standard weapons m16 and ak74, the ak offers full auto mode for human players, which should already even things out. However, AI does not benefit from this, what I would like to change. At close ranges, AI should more likely use full auto or longer random burts with aks. This alone would balance things out already. <span id='postcolor'> Comments were welcome back then and still are...

Post of mine from the Constructive Criticism thread: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> 34. This is my personal view on how I would like to see the damage system in flashpoint. I'm trying to not use precise damage values but more roughly the shots needed on certain locations to kill. In my opinion, a headshot should always be fatal, no matter what weapon used. I'm excluding other hit locations than chest and legs here, because I'm not familiar with how many different locations there are in total. Its pretty obvious though, that a hit to arm should not take minimal damage only, because of them blocking the chest very often and thus creating the illusion of players surviving tons of chest shots. If possible to check wether a strong bullet would hit multiple locations (i.e. arm+chest), this should be implemented, might be complicated though or even already in the game, dunno. Furthermore, I'm limiting this to infantry weapons and co-axial mgs only. I will not mention different types of the same weapon in the 'weapons' section, as I assume it's pretty obvious that an ak74 should do the same damage like an ak74su, that an ak47 should do the same like an ak47cz and that an m16 should do the same like a xms. Anyways, here is the list, note that it is mainly to show which weapons should belong into the same damage category and not differ in-game: (calibre / chest / legs / weapons) .50cal + 12.7x109 / 1 / 1-2 / m2, m2east, m2 co-axial + nsv co-axial 7.62x51 + 7.62x54 / 1 / 2-3 / g3, fal, m60, m21, m240 co-axial + svd, pk 7.62x39 / 1-2 / 2-3 / ak47 5.56x45 / 1-3 / 2-3 / m16, steyr aug, g36 5.45x39 / 2-3 / 2-3 / ak74 7,62x25 + .45 / 2-3 / 2-4 / tt33 + (none yet) 9x19 + 7.65x17/ 2-4 / 2-4 / mp5, bizon, cz75, 92fs, glock17 + skorpion There are some other nice ideas, which i want to adress together with this list: Yesterday, I had a nice experience when i rammed a vehicle. The ai driver, disembarked the moment I did so, but he was faster and shot me in the legs. I was forced prone and shot him in the chest, killing him, with my trusty beretta. The experience of the auto prone was great and added a lot of atmosphere. My idea about this is that there should be a 70% chance for any hit and not only certain leg hits to knock you off your feet. Unlike some leg shots which won't let you stand up again, you are free to do so with those regular hits though. It just should knock you off your feet. Maybe some modifiers on how high the chance is, could be given according to the type of weapon. A 9mm pistol for example would be less likely to knock you off compared to a chest shot with a m16. Furthermore any hit, should cause a little red flickering on the screen. Very often you fall on the floor face down, only to realize a second or two later that you were shot due to the lack of hit effects. Those suggested new hit effects, combined with the above mentioned chance for any hit to knock you off your feet, would be very nice additions. Now some comments on the weapon list on top, especially in terms of balance. As stated above the exact values for the damage were avoided and instead only displayed with the average amount of hits to certain locations that will kill you. The Russian weapons might seem a little underpowered, compared to other weapons, but in reality they were a tad less effective due to calibre size. However, I still chose hit counts that are very close to each other and only noticeable that you will sometimes need one hit more with the russian weapons. Most of the time, the needed count will be the same though. To compare this, at least in terms of the standard weapons m16 and ak74, the ak offers full auto mode for human players, which should already even things out. However, AI does not benefit from this, what I would like to change. At close ranges, AI should more likely use full auto or longer random burts with aks. This alone would balance things out already. <span id='postcolor'> Comments were welcome back then and still are...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (STS_SolidSnake @ Aug. 11 2002,05:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> I'd take a Tiger Tank and kick all j0r Leopard & Challenger 2 asses! Â <span id='postcolor'><span id='postcolor'> hehe, I would make fun of you and your Tiger, by driving circles around you at full speed, hill up and hill down, doesn't matter, and kill you with one well placed shot while moving as the Leo2's superior targeting system would ensure that my 120mm cannon would stay on target no matter how much I move ..then, I would do the same with that challenger! I WIN j/k, I couldn't resist..

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Except ketegys <span id='postcolor'> Never heared of him...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HellToupee @ Aug. 11 2002,09:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">good points, i would like to see ai run and hide from this more instead of going prone, i think if they take fre from sumthing they cant see or attack(hele) they should run for cover, and more automation of ai in yr squad. As for graphics my comp cant take another beating as it is now im ust copeing ive got 850mhz gf4 390 ram etc, gona get better cpu soon but u got to think of the ppl with worse comps who r alot more than the high enders, look at cs crap game but every man and his dogs got a comp that can handle it.<span id='postcolor'> Maybe if you could toggle the Ai behaviour in your own squad between a freestyle mode, where they of course follow your orders and stuff but do more things on their own, and a mode which basically works like the current one where the units strictly obey your orders. Of course this should come with a number of tweaks like that the ai really looks at the direction where you want them to look, etc..

hehe and I would take a german leopard2 in the latest configuration over an abrams any day

A little off-topic: Anyone happen to know the book "Armored Cavalry" by Tom Clancy? It's a somewhat scientific book about the US cavalry regiments, their equipment and their mission in the gulf for example. At one part of the book, there is this report about an Abrams who disabled himself in some soft ground during Desert Storm. While the tank was disabled, 3 iraqi T72 attacked suddenly. Even though, the tanks fired several times at the Abrams, the crew managed to destroy all three tanks. The last one was taken out through a sand dune, the tank hid behind when it wanted to retreat. The Abrams survived almost 100%. Those hits didn't manage to penetrate the thick armour and damage vital mechanisms. When help arrived they wanted to pull the tank out of that soft ground as it couldn't free itself, however they didn't manage to and wanted to destroy it before it falls into the enemies hands. They shot at the tank from another Abrams, but even though the shot penetrated the tank and got the ammo to explode, the tank was still intact. The ammo has a special system which ensures that the blast is direct away from the tank and not towards the crew compartment. After another tank arrived, they managed to pull out the stranded Abrams and after the fighting, it only got his turret replaced and was declared combat ready as no vital system had been damaged.

mhh, yay, the optical glichtes are gone and the scoped aks seem perfect now compared to the other aks. however, there is one thing though which I really dislike about this pack: the rpg-7 launch sound. In flashpoint, every missile launcher, regardless of being east or west, anti-air or anti-tank, always uses the same launching sound. I would really like to see (hear actually) the standard sound for that like in 1.0. This new sound does not really blend in with the rest of the game, and for me at least, makes the weapon less appealing. It's like with all those M16 based addons which use different firing sounds than the original m16/xms/etc.. making them hard to accept as proper addons as well. Please, for the next version just use the default launch sound.

I know what you mean, Blake. And I also know it makes perfect sense, but I still think it's somehow wrong compared to the other weapons in the game. I really would love to see a bipod option where mgs, snipers or whichever weapon has one, can deploy this bipod, gets an limited turning angle during that time and an effect similar to Keg's clumsy sway plus improved accuracy. However, until such a feature will be properly implemented I would still prefer to have the RPK without that sway (even with undeployed bipod, so it makes sense ). A working bipod feature kinda like with Day of Defeat or Americas Army would be great already, however I still would prefer it the way that the player plus the weapon turns around the screw thread where the bipod is attached to the weapon instead of the whole player model turning on the spot like usual. This prone M2 addon on the tripod from fortress ofp is one example how I would like to see it work. I fear though, That this would not be possible to achieve. Maybe I'm fighting windmills here though, it's up to Kegetys anyways. Still, the above mentioned is how 'I' would like to see it work.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kegetys @ Aug. 06 2002,17:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Aug. 06 2002,17:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kegetys @ Aug. 06 2002,16:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hmm, im pretty happy with both recoils... the AK103 now has quite much same recoil as the AK47/74, and the AK107 has very little recoil because of the "balanced" system it has... The AK-107 also has burst mode in real life, while the AK-103 does not... But as the OFP AK's shouldnt have burst mode either in real life, I added it to the AK-103 too....<span id='postcolor'> The AK47 and 74 recoils are an old BIS mistake. The AK47 is chambered for 7,62 while the 74 is 5,45. The Ak74 also has a muzzle-break. There is a big difference in recoil between those two.<span id='postcolor'> Well, thats not for me to fix My OFP AK103 has same recoil as BIS OFP AK47, as real-life AK103 would propably have same recoil as real-life AK47. Making AK103 have "realistic" recoil and leaving the AK-47 intact would make it not fit the game... But I increased the AK-107 recoil a little bit, its rather hard to get any very good effect of the balanced system with the ofp recoils, but it isnt that accurate anymore.<span id='postcolor'> Mhhhh, I think this is kinda strange to understand Keg; You add an effect to the RPK, making it (understandably) cumbersome even though heavier weapons like the 7.62 chambered machineguns are no way cumbersome. However on the other hand you say that giving the AK103 more recoil would not blend in with the rest of the game. I would really like to you to be consistant on this one. Don't get me wrong, this is no offense, and I truly know that these are Your addons and yours alone. But, please, either make it so that they blend in with the wargear we have in the game at the moment (same recoil as aks in game, no cumbersome sway for the rpk, aks making same sound as aks in game, etc...) or make them all realistically behaving (including cumbersome effect, higher recoil, no burst for the weapons that don't support burst, more realistical damage level especially inbetween the calibre differences, etc.. etc..). My oppionion on this one is that currently, as long as BIS does not adjust the weapons in-game like suggested in various threads including the 'constructive criticism' thread, you should try to make this addon blend in with the rest of the weapons as good as possible. Only when BIS changes their policy on weapon representation should you do so, too. I think this pack has high potential to become offical, this is no joke, however these small difference in behaviour might already be enough for certain people to think it's wrong to have them officially added to the game. The way I would like to have things changed would be that BIS would add this clumsiness to their MG's as well in the first place as it is a really good feature, but as long as this isn't the case, the RPK for example would simply not really feel like a realy flashpoint weapon. Maybe I'm talking bullshit here and maybe I'm simply way too serious about all this, heh, you might even not really care if this packs gets official or not, dunno, but for me this is serious, as I see huge potential in this. I think, everyone would profitate from this weapons (or BIS weapons..) being tweaked a bit and added to the game along with a small number of other high quality user made addons. Call it a gift to the community or whatever else. I'm convinced it would be a healthy thing. Â

Oh, hehe, and of course I have my own wishlist of this above mentioned us addons. -m249 -m249 (pip) -m240 -m24 -at4 launcher -colt1911 It's a small list, but NATO has already enough weapons compared to Russians. I just think that those here would add a lot to the game. Namely, an alternative for the Carl Gustav, which wasn't really in use until the 90's and then only in Ranger units; the addition of a squad lmg opposing the rpk; a new machinegun beside the m60, for which I would suggest the exact values and sound as for the co-axial mg of the bradley; and lastly a proper bolt-action sniper rifle. Of course it's just a wishlist. Nothing more and nothing less.

Nice work, Keg! These truly are the most polished weapon addons ever released for ofp so far. I think the fact they not only use already used sounds instead of adding yet another sound for basically the same weapon already in game, and the fact that they blend perfectly with the rest of the game makes them appeal so damn right. However, I have to agree that the clumsiness of some of the weapons feels not good. If all weapons in the game would react that way according to their weight and stuff, I would have liked this, but currently, I think it was a mistake to implement such a feature. (note: see? I'm still saying it's a feature ) Maybe if BIS will add a true bipod effect someday to the mg's, you could rework the weapons again and simulate it that way, but until then I can only urge you to reconsider this clumsiness. It somehow distracts from the feeling for those weapons and how they blend in with the rest of the game. If BIS will one day release a patch including a number of user-made addons, and thus declaring them offical, I would really like to see this addon included. Once again, nice work!

**spoiler** the apaches seen in resistance maybe could be some sort of prototype apache like the Russians have with that Hokum prototype (v80). Dunno, might be a good explanation though, to ease the pain caused by historical inaccuracies. Regarding the Steyr, it was available at that time, but not the G36E. I think that there wasn't even a prototype around at that time, and if there was, it for sure wouldn't have looked like the final version. The only time where I had mixed feelings in one of the original campaigns was, when you had to assassinate those NATO officers in that one town on Malden somewhere in Red Hammer. When you approached the town, there were several patrols with g36e, steyr and some other new weapons, which even if they would have been available at that time, were not found in US hands. Anyways, it's just a game and I think that BIS has already learned about wargear a lot by now, considering that they help in creating simulators for the Army.

It is fixed, but all old weapons have to be recompiled with some specific lines added in the config to have that bug disappear. Search around in the addon forum to find out how exactly to fix it if you are a mod-maker.

I always wanted to play 'Papa Bear'

I always wanted to play 'Papa Bear'

42. Another radio improvement: When AI exit transports, every single member yells when he is out. This kinda slows down any actions/orders you want to give your squad like attacking enemies or moving in a nearby wood. I would suggest to only have the last AI orderd to exit, give a response, not all. Maybe something like "All waiting" or another combination of already existing radio commands would be okay. There is simply no need that all members spam the radio channel.

Hi, I have a small request: Is there any site which has the original faces from in-game available as .jpg files? I would like to make some custom faces based on already existing ones. Anyone?

yeah, some sort of awareness on when to use which weapon would indeed be nice. Let AI soldiers check if there are any other wepons in the squad or even alive in a certain radius who could do the job as well. For example, if there are any LAWs alive, the AA soldiers won't use their weapons against armored targets. or if there are LAW soldiers present, AT soldiers won't use their weapons against minor armoured units like BMPs. Maybe this awareness could switch with the average skill of the units, making higher skilled units use their eqiipment more efficient. AI Officers should also know better which soldiers to order to engage certain targets.

41. If you (accidentally) dismount as Tank Commander, the AI keeps going round in circles, and won't stop, meaning you get run over trying to remount. This is due to them trying to maintain formation. IMHO the option to order the AI to 'STOP' is not the best way to solve this, as they still move around a bit until this happens. I think, it Would be smarter to have to order AI again to "keep formation" instead of them automatically continuing once you disembark? I mean, if there is a reason for you as the unit leader to disembark, you most likely don't want your men to spread out in formation immediatly. Another thing is that if you order all of your men to stop before you disembark, your very own tank does not automatically accepts this order. you have to order your tank driver seperatly to stop, causing an even longer delay. Furthermore it is simply way easier to radio 1-1 instead of 1-6. Another problem apart from the danger that your own driver kills you while moving over you due to formationing is the following: Imagine a situation where you as the leader of a 5-ton truck convoy are moving in colomn formation along a road and suddenly want to stop because you though you'd see some infantry ahead who try to ambush your convoy. In this case you disembark to check the situation with binoculars or even by shooting at the enemy. However, once you have disembarked, the second truck in line will try to maintain formation and moves beside your truck which is now empty. The other trucks themselves, will try to maintaing formation as well and all of a sudden the nice looking convoy line is scattered. If you due to whatever reason want to quickly enter your truck again, it would be a pain in the ass to get all your trucks back in formation. Not seldom this will take several minutes until the convoy is back in formation and ready to move on. So, to summarize, that's why I request that units moving in formation should automatically stop and wait for further orders once the leader they try to maintain formation to, disembarks, instead of staying in formation. Related changes should also affect AI responding properly to this feature. Lastly, I want to note that if you as a commander (or any other crew member), but not as squad leader eject/disembark from a vehicle, the AI automatically orders you to enter again. However the remaining squad except for your vehicle will continue with their movement. The problem with this is kinda similar to the above mentioned request and should be changed so that the AI automatically waits for you to enter again (of course still with accompanied orders) and does only continue to move once you have entered.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (medvidek @ July 24 2002,14:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Poet @ July 23 2002,19:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">2. If you accidentally dismount as Tank Commander, the AI keeps going round in circles, and won't stop, meaning you get run over trying to remount.<span id='postcolor'> The AI still keeping formation, just tell them to "STOP".<span id='postcolor'> Wouldn't it be smarter to have to order AI again to "keep formation" instead of them automatically continuing? I mean, if there is a reason for you as the unit leader to disembark, you most likely don't want your men to spread out in formation immediatly. Another thing is that if you order all of your men to stop before you disembark, your very own tank does not automatically accepts this order. you have to order your tank driver seperatly to stop, causing an even longer delay. Furthermore it is simply way easier to radio 1-1 instead of 1-6. EDIT: Anyways, this isn't a real bug and thus doesn't belong in here, so I will repost the problem in the CC-Thread.