Praet

Bartini DB-240 (Or Yermolaev Er-2, alternatively)

There won't be any EH101 as Presidential transport helicopters. The selected model to replace the VH-3D is the US101, a variant of the EH101 re-designed by Lockheed to comply with the required safety standards (most deal with crashworthyness) and designated VH-71A. 23 VH-71A have been ordered for delivery from 2009 to 2014.

CVNs are?

No, unfortunately not.

We posted this news at 2359a on our website, that's what counts

Ever thought about doing a Worms mod for OFP?

How about just calling it by its name, Talwar class or Project 17? That aside, it would be a "Krivak type", Krivak has never been a ship's name, just a code designation. Do what you like, just wanted to pop in and tell

Bharak-Rakshak is wrong in this case. The Talwar FFG are a further evolution of the basic Krivak design dating back to the 60s, but are of course undoubtedly largely based on the Krivak III. Referring to them as Krivak III is wrong, though. Sorry for bitching about this one The model itself looks very promising, it's a shame many other naval addons are not up to higher standards.

You are aware that this is not a Krivak III, but an Indian Talwar type FFG?

No Starfighter in the works, not even planned.

How does a Dutch AIFV match the requirement for a German vehicle as an M113 replacement?

Indeed. Reading the readme, for example... We are aware that it's more difficult that just the average "just-place-it-on-the-map-and-have-fun" addons, but there is a description for a purpose.

Unlikely, as that would require model changes, and that's not gonna take place with our current "placeholder" infantry.

Has the Tgb11/BILL fix again fallen out of the patch? I reported the bug via your bug tracking system, it was marked as resolved (comment: crew-served weapons will fixed in the next patch) but the problems still exist.

MK20 (20 mm x 139) HE-T is 20|15|2 (direct|indirect|indirect range) at the moment. AP-T is 75|0|0 While the HE values are not that different from the examples you posted, the AP values are. I haven't heard complaints about the AP ammunition, yet, though. Interestingly enough, the original values we wanted to use für the AP round were noticeably lower, much closer to your example values. These made the MK20 virtually useless even against lightly armored vehicles such as the BIS standard BMP-1. My main concern about CAVS is that, while a bunch of variables are used to determine the final values, it does not take the case length into account. Might have missed that one, just had a quick look on the CAVS page, but if I haven't, this is a major flaw in the system.

There is no use for it, simple as that So much more is out there which would serve a purpose in OFP, so all that would be a better investment of our short resources. Sometimes there are exceptions to this rule, but neither the Lynx nor the Starfighter are currently planned to be such an exception. I have tried to make up values based on both the capabilities of the used rounds (not only RHA penetration, but area effects of the DM12A1/DM22 rounds as well), the used gun (L/44, L/55) as well as the protection levels (RHA vs. KE, RHA vs. CE) of BIS reference targets. The main problems with those results are the extremely limited weapon/damage system that OFP uses and the absence of standardized values for vehicles and aircraft like JAM does for infantry weapons. Especially the latter leads to mod specific values ranging from "uber-tanks" like RHS or Sigma to vehicles that are way too weak due to game balancing like the BIS units. If there was such a realistic JAM standard for armored vehicles based on real-life data and effects, we'd be among the first to adopt it - provided it serves its purpose. That would be a config glitch then. A5 was intended to have the same armor protection as the A6 offers. We'll have a look into that as well. Again, the weird OFP weapon/damage system prevents decently balanced values. Just judging from the config values, the MK20 should not have this anti-armor capability. The results in OFP are somewhat different, though.

No, most probably not.

Rest assured, the whole story about "shock deaths" due to minor injuries caused by high-speed projectiles and/or fragments is just an urban legend, nothing else.

My favorite bug is still in there i am so sorry to say, but this bug has been killed today. What a shame. It was so entertaining

I have had found that site previously, but was missing the login details. Thanks for that.

My favorite bug is still in there

Oh yes, the infamous EMP proof Tiger Helicopter, does anyone know if its can withstand the emp of a nearby nuclear weapon? We should have included the escape capsule as a special feature

Interesting new addon category but Don't you guys think trying to make a 45 nm range, 2.300 kg missile carrying a 450 kg warhead playable in OFP is a bit...overly enthusiastic?

It looks like the Ejército de Tierra uses a different kind of side skirts, thanks for the correction. Though, it still bears closer resemblance to the ones of the Marder, and the roadwheel and external fuel tanks issue remain unsolved. But then, I also stumbled across the turret which apparently isn't the ASCOD turret as well. To be precise, this turret looks more like the one of the UK Warrior IFV. What a suprise - I have been told that the turret they are using for their "Pizarro" has apparently been taken from the UK pack by DKMM, though again slightly modified. Look at this screenshot: Of course I can't say if DKMM was contacted and if they granted their permission, but even if they did - what would we have here? A modified Marder hull, a modified Warrior turret, put together and announced as a Pizarro IFV